NC and reconciliation

[jwi71]

Here's where I'm confused.... if at any time you are inclined to re-start the affair it means that any type of NC/reconciliation wasn't helpful or wasn't effective, so what is the point?

 

NC is often a component of reconciliation but in and of itself, NC isn't reconciliation.

 

Reigniting the A, to me, simply means the the WS isn't willing to chose. He/she isn't choosing the M nor is he choosing the AP - he/she is choosing both.

 

And you are making another huge assumption. You are assuming the WS chooses BS over AP - it is not necessarily true. The WS may not give a whit about the BS per se. However, the WS may be acutely aware that the BS may file for D and colloquially take half the $$ and assets. The WS may be staying simply out of greed. Or a desire to "look good" to others (friends and family). Or maybe the BS provides "something" that will be lost if the WS chooses to D (or gets D by the BS) - say unofficial access to government or political favor.

 

Again, its a choice. The WS reignites the A for love/sex et al but chooses to keep it hidden because material needs outweigh those emotional/sexual ones.

 

I'm tying this directly to your "Pro-love" thread...the AP sees the A as a choice born of love. But its equally true that the BS "sees" the M (read lack of D papers filed by WS) as proof of their love (presuming the BS is in the dark). The only one who knows is the WS...and the answer the WS gives is VERY dependent upon who is asking.

 

It is truly a moot point and question.

 

I would be VERY wary of reading ANYTHING into a WS's re-ignition of an A outside of the fact that he/she wants to remain M AND have an A. If a WS truly favored one over another...he would choose the one favored. They don't, they choose both.

[beenburned]

jwi,

 

Your post about the greed of the MM made me laugh.

 

There is an OW here that posted that was exactly the reason her MM said he would never get divorced. He didn't want to half any money or other assets with anybody!

 

The majority of all women now hold careers and jointly pay for all expenses incurred in the marriage. The above mentioned MM needs a reality check, along with an attitude adjustment!

[wellwhynot]

 

 

I would be VERY wary of reading ANYTHING into a WS's re-ignition of an A outside of the fact that he/she wants to remain M AND have an A. If a WS truly favored one over another...he would choose the one favored. They don't, they choose both.

 

 

Aha. Maybe THIS is why I don't understand. Of course that's what it means? I get that there is no "favoring" and I never expect there to be, so the competition thing always throws me for a loop.

[pureinheart]

As an AP, I don't understand the concept of BS's who are claiming the importance of NC. I'd really like to understand this because I am unable to see where this changes anything for the AP or even the WS other than the need to be more careful.

 

I get NC when you are trying to move on from someone, I can see where that has benefit and could help ease pain and the like, if you no longer wanted to be with someone it make sense to stay far away from them..but I guess I don't see why it's a requirement for so many BS's to reconcile when I think it might in fact build in a false sense of security.

 

FACT:

If he/she wants to continue the affair they are going to do so, they are just going to get better at hiding things.

FACT:

If feelings of the affair partner continue, then guess what the feelings were REAL and not some random fluffy nonsense.

FACT:

If it's still a risk for the WS to see this person, nothing has been resolved.

FACT:

Quitting a job/club/activity isn't going to keep you from seeing a person if you want to

 

So I just don't get it?

 

What is gained by that other than more potential lying? I know that if I had a WS who worked with his AP and wasn't able to see her on a regular basis without resuming the affair, that tells me a lot and that I wouldn't want the role of "guardian of our relationship" instead of partner.

 

Checking phones, cell phone records, tracking devices, voice recorders, random "check ins," not allowing them to go places with friends, feeling dread every day that they might bump into their AP and rekindle. That just sounds... awful. That doesn't sound like reconciliation to me. It sounds like a life setence.

 

From my perspective, I can and would find ways around anything that would be a NC requirement, and I'm sure others have or can as well, so what is really the point?

 

From the OM/OW/WS perspective, what do you think about this? Do you think that a spouse requiring NC forces the APs apart? Drives them even more secretly together? Or is it really irrelevant, if they want to be together then they will be. Have you had any experience with this? How did it turn out?

 

It also sounds to me that the BS in the case you are describing views their S as "property".

 

There was a thread several years back (on LS) that touched on this very issue. I think it was a BS asking for tips and opinions on surveillance. I was surprised to see that most condone this type of behavior. Most felt that monitoring was completely acceptable. I think it is a game.

 

That thread went indepth on exactly how keylogging works, everything.

 

The only experience I had was that both DM and exW did this to each other. IMO if you don't trust a person, walk. There usually is a good reason why there is no trust...after this it just turns into a power trip to use later to gain an upper hand and to be used beat either S into submission in a passive/aggressive way. Not healthy.

[bentnotbroken]

It also sounds to me that the BS in the case you are describing views their S as "property".

 

There was a thread several years back (on LS) that touched on this very issue. I think it was a BS asking for tips and opinions on surveillance. I was surprised to see that most condone this type of behavior. Most felt that monitoring was completely acceptable. I think it is a game.

 

That thread went indepth on exactly how keylogging works, everything.

 

The only experience I had was that both DM and exW did this to each other. IMO if you don't trust a person, walk. There usually is a good reason why there is no trust...after this it just turns into a power trip to use later to gain an upper hand and to be used beat either S into submission in a passive/aggressive way. Not healthy.

 

Affairs are a pretty good reason. Typically NC is one of the ways to re-establish boundaries and slowly rebuild the trust that has been destroyed. As for investigative tips, if a WS choices not to be honest, then finding out anyway you can is a way to protect oneself from exposure to all the ills that go along with betrayal.

[seren]

Often NC isn't insisted upon, it can, however be that the BS states that if the WS wants to continue contact with the OW/OM, and they aren't comforttable with that, then they are just drawing their line in the sand. Within marriages there are often many compromises made from either side, to balance the status quo. It is the WS who has the option of being honest about NC, as in, the BS being aware of the OW/OM's exisitence makes an informed choice about what they want from their relationship and marriage.

 

Imagine that the marriage ends and the OW/OM has to deal with the WS meeting the BS on a regular basis, how would they deal with that? As for the constant checking, phone access etc etc, I don't relate to this as it isn't something I have ever done and have trusted my H from the day he came home and told me about the A.

 

My D Day saw me saying to H, if the OW is who you want, fine, go get her, but I obviously won't be here when you get back. That is not a direction or order, rather me, deciding what I find acceptable and what is not. The choice then lie with my H. TBH I don't see why a BS should feel she has to compromise on what makes them feel safe after having their world blown apart by the A.

[skywriter]

I hope I'm staying on subject here, but NC for me is all about me moving on with my life. Putting the A behind me, means NC is a necessary means.

 

If I were a BS, I'd need NC from my WS with his AP, for well, just obvious reasons, anything else would be stirring the pot for all the unecessary things it would create.

 

But that's just me , to each his own. .

[pureinheart]

Often NC isn't insisted upon, it can, however be that the BS states that if the WS wants to continue contact with the OW/OM, and they aren't comforttable with that, then they are just drawing their line in the sand. Within marriages there are often many compromises made from either side, to balance the status quo. It is the WS who has the option of being honest about NC, as in, the BS being aware of the OW/OM's exisitence makes an informed choice about what they want from their relationship and marriage.

 

Imagine that the marriage ends and the OW/OM has to deal with the WS meeting the BS on a regular basis, how would they deal with that? As for the constant checking, phone access etc etc, I don't relate to this as it isn't something I have ever done and have trusted my H from the day he came home and told me about the A.

 

My D Day saw me saying to H, if the OW is who you want, fine, go get her, but I obviously won't be here when you get back. That is not a direction or order, rather me, deciding what I find acceptable and what is not. The choice then lie with my H. TBH I don't see why a BS should feel she has to compromise on what makes them feel safe after having their world blown apart by the A.

 

There was an incident in which I did go through my husbands wallet. It felt really weird because I had gone against what I know to be true: that I am not responsible for another persons actions, nor can I control or change another person.

 

In the instance of discovery, when a BS states what they can handle and what they can't, that IMO is direct communication stating facts. I've done that before. Policing is quite another issue IMO. I tried that one before too and it made me feel more insecure. In this case they were ONS's accompanied with a sex addiction.

 

I lost a lot by trying to police him, I lost me and what I am about. It just doesn't work for me, it's just setting a person up for failure in some form.

[pureinheart]

why not an "open marriage" then?

 

wanna know why? because it's the illicit nature of an affair that draws you in.....the secretive aspect of it.....the naughtiness of it. that's the appeal.

 

No, on all counts for me.

[MissBee]

From the OM/OW/WS perspective, what do you think about this? Do you think that a spouse requiring NC forces the APs apart? Drives them even more secretly together? Or is it really irrelevant, if they want to be together then they will be. Have you had any experience with this? How did it turn out?

 

 

My truthful feelings are: who has the time?

 

I think it is one thing to be in an affair that the person has to sneak around before dday, but I think it would be even more uncomfortable and strange that after a dday the relationship has to now contain even more stealthy elements. For me, if there was a dday, that will be the day you make a choice one way or another. If you don't, I will. But to have the opportunity to make a choice and to bold faced lie and say you will no longer talk to your AP and you want to reconcile when you don't mean it, takes brazenness to another level that I personally couldn't tolerate. I mean how does one reconcile this as the OW/OM or the BS? From BOTH angles you are dealing with someone who instead of making choices and being upfront, they continue to find more lies and deceit.

 

I think one is dealing with a very immature person, who is acting like their spouse is their mom/dad who has banned them from speaking to their boyfriend/gf so they defy their parents and do it secretly. If your spouse finds out about your A and you truly want to reconcile...you will. However, if you still want to have an AP, why not simply say that is what you want, make that choice and leave your spouse alone to live their life? Why agree to NC and reconciliation then secretly continue seeing your AP? It just seems absurd to me. But then, many people engaged in As are conflict avoidant and employ lots of passive aggressive tactics or behaviors that are not straight forward, so doing something like this makes sense in that regard.

 

As an adult I don't have the time or interest in playing run-from-the-prison-warden aka the BS. I mean, teens do this. I did it as a teen, it was very stressful and I was so glad to gain independence so I could tell my parents upfront what I was going to do or not do and live my life without having to do all of that. This is to be expected in adolescence, it is a normal developmental process, but I think having to do that as an adult to be with someone else's spouse would QUICKLY wake me up and make me not want to bother with all that rigmarole. As there is absolutely no need for it.

Edited May 27, 2012 by MissBee

[MissBee]

I hope I'm staying on subject here, but NC for me is all about me moving on with my life. Putting the A behind me, means NC is a necessary means.

 

If I were a BS, I'd need NC from my WS with his AP, for well, just obvious reasons, anything else would be stirring the pot for all the unecessary things it would create.

 

But that's just me , to each his own. .

 

No one can force anyone to be with them and no one should be with someone against their will. So as a BS, I can't force my husband to be with me and if he wants to leave, he can go...he should go. He can't have me and another woman, as many MM try to. If he wants that, too bad for him, but that is not my choice and by secretly continuing the A, he is trying to override my choice of not wanting to share. That's selfish.

 

If my husband has an A, I doubt I'd be able to reconcile. But reconciliation, if I so choose, is a two-way street and something we BOTH have to be in voluntarily. I cannot force a man to do anything. My requirement for reconciliation would be that my spouse chooses to go NC himself, chooses to cut this person out, chooses to close that door, chooses to prove to me he is penitent and wants to work on what happened, how, why and move on from there. Therefore NC would not be instituted by me....but by him.

 

Just as APs will find a way to be together if they want to....someone who wants to divorce and leave their spouse, will also do so. That said, I see no sense in pretending to reconcile and allowing your spouse to dictate that you go NC if you don't want to...besides selfishness and still wanting to "obey the rules" so you can stay married and have an AP. How is that a better choice? I don't see it...but I just know that when I think of it, it seems unnecessary.

[MissBee]

NC is often a component of reconciliation but in and of itself, NC isn't reconciliation.

 

Reigniting the A, to me, simply means the the WS isn't willing to chose. He/she isn't choosing the M nor is he choosing the AP - he/she is choosing both.

 

And you are making another huge assumption. You are assuming the WS chooses BS over AP - it is not necessarily true. The WS may not give a whit about the BS per se. However, the WS may be acutely aware that the BS may file for D and colloquially take half the $$ and assets. The WS may be staying simply out of greed. Or a desire to "look good" to others (friends and family). Or maybe the BS provides "something" that will be lost if the WS chooses to D (or gets D by the BS) - say unofficial access to government or political favor.

 

Again, its a choice. The WS reignites the A for love/sex et al but chooses to keep it hidden because material needs outweigh those emotional/sexual ones.

 

I'm tying this directly to your "Pro-love" thread...the AP sees the A as a choice born of love. But its equally true that the BS "sees" the M (read lack of D papers filed by WS) as proof of their love (presuming the BS is in the dark). The only one who knows is the WS...and the answer the WS gives is VERY dependent upon who is asking.

 

It is truly a moot point and question.

 

I would be VERY wary of reading ANYTHING into a WS's re-ignition of an A outside of the fact that he/she wants to remain M AND have an A. If a WS truly favored one over another...he would choose the one favored. They don't, they choose both.

 

Very well said!

[skywriter]

No one can force anyone to be with them and no one should be with someone against their will. So as a BS, I can't force my husband to be with me and if he wants to leave, he can go...he should go. He can't have me and another woman, as many MM try to. If he wants that, too bad for him, but that is not my choice and by secretly continuing the A, he is trying to override my choice of not wanting to share. That's selfish.

 

If my husband has an A, I doubt I'd be able to reconcile. But reconciliation, if I so choose, is a two-way street and something we BOTH have to be in voluntarily. I cannot force a man to do anything. My requirement for reconciliation would be that my spouse chooses to go NC himself, chooses to cut this person out, chooses to close that door, chooses to prove to me he is penitent and wants to work on what happened, how, why and move on from there. Therefore NC would not be instituted by me....but by him.

 

Just as APs will find a way to be together if they want to....someone who wants to divorce and leave their spouse, will also do so. That said, I see no sense in pretending to reconcile and allowing your spouse to dictate that you go NC if you don't want to...besides selfishness and still wanting to "obey the rules" so you can stay married and have an AP. How is that a better choice? I don't see it...but I just know that when I think of it, it seems unnecessary.

 

 

Right, and yes, I agree NC would have to be initiated by the WS.

[beenburned]

PIH,

 

I think checking up on the WS after d-day is simply a way of seeing if the WS is now being trustworthy.

 

If a BS finds out that the WS is still being unfaithful, then she can feel comfortable that she did all she could do before filing for divorce.

[Spark1111]

I think the assumption that a BS insists on NC is somewhat sophmoric.

 

On dday, many a WS begin to minimize and gaslight the spouse regarding the depths of their feelings for the affair partner, whether out of shame, or frustration at having been caught, or both.

 

It's crazy making, especially when that same WS is begging to reconcile, let it go, she's "just a friend."

 

It strikes the BS as soooooo self-serving as the WS is simply trying to return to their "status quo": Secure married life and affair on the side. They simply want to continue with both and lie rediculously to do so.

 

Who wants that? So going NC is the first step in trying to restore trust with the BS that the WS is serious about their intent.

 

If the WS and AP then decide to go underground and be even more secretive, well, there is not much a BS can do about choosing to trust again and being deceived more, can they?

 

You cannot protect yourself against what you do not know unless you are clarvoyant.

 

So checking cell phones, email, surveillance, etc. is just a protective measure to ensure your spouse is serious about reconciling NOW and have STOPPED lying.

 

I didn't insist on NC because I didn't care.

 

He knew, however, that if he was serious about me, I wouldn't stand for continued contact with his AP. What self-respecting woman wants to share her man with his mistress? Yuck! He would NEVER tolerate me even speaking with an old boyfriend, let alone maintaining a friendship with an XAP.

 

So he instituted NC a few months after dday. A month after that, I let him move home with no guarantees of 'us."

[onthefence210]

It should be common sense on the WS that when your S finds out about your A that there can be no type of relationship/friendship with the OW/OM. There should be consequences stated at that time as to what will happen if such a relationship/friendship should begin again. If the BS can not implement these consequences if she/he should find out about contact then she can no longer portray herself as a victim. She is just plain stupid in my book. WS who are in marriages out of some sense of loyalty to their kids and really don't love their S will continue to cheat and if they don't cheat and don't try to fix the problems in the marriage that led to their actions...expect to be left when your last kid goes off to college. No marriage will ever be happy or healthy unless the problems can be acknowledged and worked on. And for that it takes a lot of effort. That is a good sign that a WS is recommitted to the marriage. And BS be prepared to own your own issues. Affairs are just symptoms of problems that already existed. I know my marriage was pretty dead years before I met my OM.

[bentnotbroken]

It should be common sense on the WS that when your S finds out about your A that there can be no type of relationship/friendship with the OW/OM. There should be consequences stated at that time as to what will happen if such a relationship/friendship should begin again. If the BS can not implement these consequences if she/he should find out about contact then she can no longer portray herself as a victim. She is just plain stupid in my book. WS who are in marriages out of some sense of loyalty to their kids and really don't love their S will continue to cheat and if they don't cheat and don't try to fix the problems in the marriage that led to their actions...expect to be left when your last kid goes off to college. No marriage will ever be happy or healthy unless the problems can be acknowledged and worked on. And for that it takes a lot of effort. That is a good sign that a WS is recommitted to the marriage. And BS be prepared to own your own issues. Affairs are just symptoms of problems that already existed. I know my marriage was pretty dead years before I met my OM.

 

 

If marriages are dead burial would be the proper protocol. Living with the dead and playing with the living is kind of :sick:. Just for the record...affairs are a symptom of the cheating party's inability or unwillingness to cope in fashion that is healthy for all involved.

[Owl]

I'd like to suggest some reading material for the OP...it might well help to understand a lot of these things that you don't 'get', or agree with. Things like "the fog", "affair addiction", "withdrawl", the need for NC, etc...

 

Start with "Surviving an Affair", by Harley. I'd also check out "The Five Love Languages" by Chapman (special attention to chapters 2 and 3 if I remember right, there's a bit of information there on the different phases of love that come into play big time in infidelity).

 

You might also do a good google search on the very questions you pose and look at some of the reading material you can find on that, outside of various forums.

[alexandria35]

Here's where I'm confused.... if at any time you are inclined to re-start the affair it means that any type of NC/reconciliation wasn't helpful or wasn't effective, so what is the point?

 

If they are really over it, or if they never mattered, then they just stop being important, they become immaterial and it shouldn't matter if they see them.

A long time ago, the gymnast Nadia Comaneci gained weight. Her coach then prepared and served her meals. This became a problem she wasn't loosing weight simply because presented when in the presence of non-diet food, she of course ate it, because she had no desire not to. She didn't understand why or how this was important or how it was impacting her life. She didn't make a choice, he just took away her food.

 

Not a 100% apt analogy but it is what popped into my head.

 

This makes no sense. Do you know Nadia Comaneci? How do you know she had no desire to lose weight? Why do you think she didn't understand why or how it was important or how it was impacting her life? You make her sound stupid. Maybe she fully understood the consequences of bad eating but she simply had a weakness or addiction to bad food that she couldn't overcome. Do you think all overweight people love being overweight and they're too dumb to know that being overweight has consequences? Or that smokers don't understand that smoking is bad, or alcoholics don't know that excessive drinking is not good for them? Food, cigarettes, and alcohol can all become horrible unhealthy addictions that people will struggle greatly to break free of. Relationships can be the same.

 

No contact is just common sense to me and not just for affair situations. It's the standard advice for anyone trying to break free of a relationship that they have decided is not healthy for them. It's the fastest and best way to break the attachment but it only works if the people in no contact fully understand why they are doing it and what the benefits are. If they go no contact but spend their days romanticizing the affair and fantasizing about their affair partner then it's pointless. However how is a betrayed spouse to know what is going on in her spouses head when she/he requests no contact and the WS agrees? If the WS then decides to get even sneakier and more deceitful how is the BS to blame for that? That just makes the WS a big creep as far as I'm concerned.

[silktricks]

If the WS wants to reconcile with their BS - truly reconcile - not just play a part AND the BS wants to reconcile, then the building blocks of the marriage have to be laid anew. The cornerstone of a good marriage is trust. Trust has been totally blown apart by the actions of the WS at least, and possibly the BS as well (dependent upon what led up to the affair).

 

NC is one of the things that can be used to rebuild the trust. Checking to see if the WS and/or BS are where they say they are, are doing what they claim to be doing - all of that is not to be a warden, but rather to rebuild trust.

 

But NC that is demanded rather than offered, is in my opinion pretty much useless. You can't rebuild trust with an unwilling participant. It has to go both ways.

[Radagast]

If the WS wants to reconcile with their BS - truly reconcile - not just play a part AND the BS wants to reconcile, then the building blocks of the marriage have to be laid anew. The cornerstone of a good marriage is trust. Trust has been totally blown apart by the actions of the WS at least, and possibly the BS as well (dependent upon what led up to the affair).

 

NC is one of the things that can be used to rebuild the trust. Checking to see if the WS and/or BS are where they say they are, are doing what they claim to be doing - all of that is not to be a warden, but rather to rebuild trust.

 

But NC that is demanded rather than offered, is in my opinion pretty much useless. You can't rebuild trust with an unwilling participant. It has to go both ways.

 

This makes sense to me. I had an affair and I knew that this might lead my wife to wonder whether I was being completely honest and trustworthy with her, too, even though our relationship was built on the firmest bedrock of honesty. I wanted both to be and to appear to be above reproach in matters of honesty and honour. She has all my passwords, she has free access to my phone and all of my devices, to all of my friends and family. She is free to check up on me any time she wishes. To my knowledge she has not done so, but if she did I would not take it amiss. There is nothing for her to find, were she to look, and I would rather she had her uncertainty settled if she were to become unsure than to have her left in doubt and insecurity. Her security and her happiness mean far much more to me and I want her to know that.

[MissBee]

If the WS wants to reconcile with their BS - truly reconcile - not just play a part AND the BS wants to reconcile, then the building blocks of the marriage have to be laid anew. The cornerstone of a good marriage is trust. Trust has been totally blown apart by the actions of the WS at least, and possibly the BS as well (dependent upon what led up to the affair).

 

NC is one of the things that can be used to rebuild the trust. Checking to see if the WS and/or BS are where they say they are, are doing what they claim to be doing - all of that is not to be a warden, but rather to rebuild trust.

But NC that is demanded rather than offered, is in my opinion pretty much useless. You can't rebuild trust with an unwilling participant. It has to go both ways.

 

This is very true.

 

In love and a marriage, I need someone whom I know chooses me fully and who I choose fully. Someone who is there because they want to be there and who wants to put in the work. I'm not interested in having a dog I am leading on a leash .

 

If a post-A reconciliation was going to occur, that would be one of the top criteria, this person's willingness to abandon that path and step fully and willingly into the rebuilding. Otherwise, there is no point. I can't and don't want to "fight for my marriage" alone, it has to be 100%, 100% and in the case of a WS: 200% and 100% respectively smh.