fAPs - do you feel responsible for all As?

[anne1707]

And, in the end, you chose your M.

 

Yes I did. But my story is not everybody's story and is not right for everybody.

[anne1707]

But, IME, more often than not the WS chooses as you did, which is why I suspect most AP don't demand to be their MP's one and only.

 

Personally I don't choose to hypothesise like that about what motivates an OW because of not being in that position.

[Got it]

Personally I don't choose to hypothesise like that about what motivates an OW because of not being in that position.

 

Gosh I love a person who doesn't exist on assumptions and presumptions. You are indeed a rare bird.

[LFH]

Gosh I love a person who doesn't exist on assumptions and presumptions. You are indeed a rare bird.

Stop flirting with Anne. She's married.

[ComingInHot]

GotIt,

I would be happy to share why I feel only information asked by either BS or AP should be answered.

To begin, I believe the questions asked by either should be answered w/out embellishment or added information because it is most times painful enough as it is to deal w/w/out information given that may or may not be true and that could cause more harm than good old straight up fact would be (unless one is lying)*

Example; If I asked OW, "Did my H tell you he loved you?" And the OW replied, "Yes, all the time AND he said he didn't love You." Well, to me, only part of that may be true while the latter part may or may not be true & is VERY damaging.

Does that make sense?

I'd continue but H and kids are going to the park*

I hope this made sense.

[Got it]

GotIt,

I would be happy to share why I feel only information asked by either BS or AP should be answered.

To begin, I believe the questions asked by either should be answered w/out embellishment or added information because it is most times painful enough as it is to deal w/w/out information given that may or may not be true and that could cause more harm than good old straight up fact would be (unless one is lying)*

Example; If I asked OW, "Did my H tell you he loved you?" And the OW replied, "Yes, all the time AND he said he didn't love You." Well, to me, only part of that may be true while the latter part may or may not be true & is VERY damaging.

Does that make sense?

I'd continue but H and kids are going to the park*

I hope this made sense.

 

Okay, I see your line of logic, and I agree, you can't unknow something. But how do you start that conversation without delving into too much? And I think obviously everything sad would have to be taken with a grain of salt. Since you both have similar desires, it puts each party on opposing sides. I think obviously the best thing stated would be facts and little opinion. I think I had a similar mindset. If I was asked any questions, I would answer them. I warned dMM that if she ever contact me I was not going to lie about anything.

 

Have fun at the park.

[LFH]

So an AP who assumes their cheater never lies to them must really bug ya then.

 

I would think that the individual would know MUCH better than anyone on here, don't you?

[AnotherRound]

Well...here's something to consider.

 

If the BS has "enough information to judge the affair"...that's subjective, basically the BS has to have enough information that they feel that they can FORGIVE the affair.

 

Most BS's pretty much never feel like they know all that there is to know about the affair.

 

They pretty much just require enough information, and enough transparancy, to allow them to feel that their partner is NOW being honest/open enough to allow them to begin rebuilding trust in their partner after what's happened.

 

The OW/OM get what information they insist on from their affair partner...and pretty much have to do a similar thing. They have to reach a point where they believe that they've got enough information for them to feel that they trust their AP to start/continue a relationship with them.

 

I suspect that BS's feel that they "have more information" because this is typically a rock solid requirement from the WS in order to consider reconciliation...whereas they don't feel that the OW/OM have the same level of information because it doesn't appear that most REQUIRE that information, nor bother to verify the information based on other sources ('snooping'), nor do they feel that the WS has the same pressure to be honest with the OW/OM as they do with the BS with whom they're now scrambling to rebuild trust/reconcile the marriage with.

 

True or not...I can't say.

 

Just offering a viewpoint on why the different perscpectives may vary.

 

I can see your point here. In my case, I didn't have to "snoop" for anything, we live in a VERY small town and EVERYONE talks. I got information from the weirdest places sometimes! The exW and I have some friends in common too -and her name and exMMs marriage would come into the discussion sometimes. I'm pretty quiet about things like that, but I do a lot of listening. I heard things that even exMM hadn't told me - and heard nothing that told me he was lying or exaggerating. This is why I don't share much with acquaintances - bc exMMs exW had some friends that were really telling her business to everyone.

 

And I guess I just noticed that some BS truly believe that they know everything about the affair relationship but can't fathom that the OW/OM might know the same about their marriage. Again, in my situation, exMM told me many things that I'm sure his now exW was unaware he was sharing with me. Things he had never told her - as was later confirmed when others were talking at gatherings around me (I didn't join in - obviously).

 

Maybe that's just a small town thing???? I dunno - I know that it was the talk of the town for a while, and even now it will come up at parties and such. New developments and such or new information that I hear - no need to snoop, in my case. He has a pretty high profile around here too, which probably adds to that.

 

But yes, I can see your reasoning there.

[AnotherRound]

They aren't "judging the A" with the transparency. They are judging the reconciliation. HUGE difference.

 

If an AP thinks "My MP NEVER lies to me - I know he/she never has sex with their spouse (something that is going on in the M) because he/she says so," but they are tossed under the bus on D day, isn't that a rather clear indicator that they didn't really know their MP's M like they thought they did?

 

If all of those things happened to an AP - perhaps. But again, I would say, "wouldn't a married person whose partner had an affair that they were unaware of have to admit that they didn't know their spouse like they thought they did?".

[AnotherRound]

Of course the BS would have no idea what goes on in the A, but an OW or OM DOES know some of what goes on in the marriage because the WS shares that information...Maybe some of it is true, but the re-writing history is what the OW believes, thanks to the skilled MM liar. It burns me when I read that some WS's share very personal and intimate information about their BS's with an AP. Let alone the 'I don't ever have sex, my spouse is mean, abuses/ignores me/yells at me/is always mad and nagging at me' overly exaggerated lines.

 

Yeah, I got flamed here once bc my exMM shared some very personal information with me about his now exW. I don't feel the same about it as you do, but I sure found out that there were others who do!

 

There ARE sexless marriages - I was in one myself. It might not be the "norm" - but they are out there and it's not as uncommon as some would maybe like to believe. I think that bothers me too - that people assume that all WS are having sex with their spouses - they aren't. My exH was a WS - and I have no idea what he told the OW (didn't care, lol) but we were NOT having sex. So, if he told her that, he wasn't lying at all - it was the absolute truth.

[LFH]

Transparency in reconciliation means openness and honesty going forward. No more secrets. It doesn't mean a brain scan and information dump where the betrayed suddenly has perfect knowledge. It means the wayward and the betrayed agree to not hide things from each other.

Do you really believe in that? I'm not trying to be snotty,I'm really curious, but do you really think that someone that has made a habit of lying to you for sometimes years is now going to just suddenly stop lying? This is the core of why I know I personally could never reconcile.

 

But is it TRUE is the point.

 

How many cheaters are going to say everything is wonderful in my M, I have great sex with my spouse, but I just like sex with a different person for variety?

 

*Slowly raises my hand* My boyfriend does. Well he doesn't say everything is wonderful in his marriage, but he rarely bitches about it. It's a known fact that there are some issues but he's not leaving. He admits to having at least pretty decent sex with his wife, we don't exactly use scorecards, but he's never really complained there other than to imply that there are times where she can't be bothered. I'm sure they probably have sex at least once a week or so.

 

You're totally missing the point.

 

No one "suddenly believes them"!!!

 

It takes months, usually years, of repeatedly demonstrated trustworthy behavior, usually verified via other means (that evil "snooping" that everyone claims is such a horrible thing done by BS's trying to recover).

 

Take it from someone who's been there...the person who "suddenly believes them" is a rare critter indeed, and typically someone set up for false recovery. Most BS's have to relearn to trust them after the WS relearned themselves how to be trustworthy again.

I guess I just question this, because I read stories on infidelity that say things like "They slept together only two times and I know this cause I saw emails or he told me" or whatever. Do you know how easy that would be to fake if someone wanted to? Or they say "I stayed because they never said I love you" or "He told me he never really cared about her that it was just sex" and those things are believed by the spouse, maybe because they want to, maybe because it's self preservation, but trust me, just like "I don't sleep with my wife" is a hallmark of the married man looking to score a girlfriend, "She meant nothing to me honey" is the cry of the guy who got caught and isn't giving up her girlfriend or his marriage.

 

Then the AP has no worries come D day. Right? But so many fear that day. I wonder why.

 

Because many people love the person they are with and don't necessarily have their expectations firmly in place, or they haven't discussed how things will be handled or what to expect. The unknown can be scary for everyone. For myself, I certainly wouldn't seek out a dday but if there were one, I don't expect that after the chaos of it were over, that there would be much long term impact on my relationship at all. We've discussed it, we aren't hiding from it, we talk about things and he never has any doubt where I stand nor I him.

[cocorico]

But is it TRUE is the point.

 

How many cheaters are going to say everything is wonderful in my M, I have great sex with my spouse, but I just like sex with a different person for variety?

 

Probably a lot more than you'd think.

 

Even my H deluded himself of that when we first got to know each other. I'm not a social worker, I didn't want someone in an unhappy M who wanted to use me to self-medicate to make his life or his M better, I wanted someone whose life was as great as mine was who simply wanted what I wanted from the liaison - great sex, and maybe some other points of intersection. And from what he described, he fitted the bill. It was only later once he experienced what a proper R should be like that he realised just how little he'd been settling for in his M.

[ComingInHot]

GotIt, " Okay, I see your line of logic, and I agree, you can't unknow something. But how do you start that conversation without delving into too much?"

 

Good Morning!

Your question is the HARD part & wasn't possible for exOW in my stitch. I'm hoping that my experience & what I learned & share here will help future ow's /exow's do a "better" job than mine*

 

First if communication is given and/or accepted by either AP/BS it has to be w/the pre-determined & accepted acknowledgment of communicating ONLY the basic facts w/out emotional embellishment or added information. This is especially difficult because A's are the creation from emotion/s.

 

Example; exOW told me my H said he & I Never have sex. She asked if this was true. I answered a very simple, "No." In the beginning I was concerned she would feel more hurt & betrayal if I had added, "We have amazing sex five + times a week" plus she didn't ask at first how often.

It was my hope that by setting the tone, she'd reciprocate in kind. She couldn't or wouldn't, I don't know which.*

And I DID allow myself to be "baited" into one conversation emotionally. I wish I had had more strength not to have engaged at that point.

For everyone out there, I hope this helps for you going forward.

[anne1707]

Not necessarily. Those outside of a situation, particularly an emotionally charged one, is able to view things much more objectively.

 

That may be the case Donna if you know the people in real life but that argument is much harder to support when based on the postings of one person on an internet forum.

[cocorico]

Not necessarily. Those outside of a situation, particularly an emotionally charged one, is able to view things much more objectively.

 

Only, those outsiders are not seeing the situation. They are seeing a tiny bit of the situation that the person in the situation has chosen to present, filtered through those same blinkers that may be distorting the view that the person in the situation experiences. They have no additional information *about the situation itself* that they could usefully bring to bear, unlike a real life outsider who sees the situation itself and can draw their own conclusions. It is like looking at a photograph of a concert and imagining you know more about what happened at the concert than the photographer.

 

All that an outsider can usefully add is their own experience and understandings based on their own experience - which may help, or may confound, or may be totally irrelevant, since the outsider is working on assumptions rather than grounded information.

 

It's pretty simple, really.

[cocorico]

I believe this question was asked already a page or two back.

 

It is a good point that warrants repeating

[LFH]

Not necessarily. Those outside of a situation, particularly an emotionally charged one, is able to view things much more objectively.

 

So, you know more about my life than I do? Wow. Fascinating. I never knew it could work that way. Are you peeking in my windows? Do I need better miniblinds?

Tell me, how do you know more about my life, when I have not posted all the details, than I do.

[LFH]

My point exactly. And it is in the cheater's best interest to say what he or she has to in order to maintain the status quo. Now if they leave the M to be with the AP I might think they had been telling the truth. But an A that drags on indefinitely?

Indeed.

 

Which is also what I've been saying for quite some time about the people who are now thinking that their "formerly" wayward spouse is being truthful.

We get it

These guys can lie.

Even so, sometimes they don't. Sometimes we do actually know what we are talking about and having someone pop up like a jack in the box every time we state something only derails a conversation.

[cocorico]

But when a tale such as the M couple never has sex is being told, the only one who can verify the veracity is the BS who, coincidentally, is being avoided at all costs.

 

Or... The counsellor the BW consulted about the problem of the sexless M. Or the doctor from whom she sought a Viagra prescription to resolve the problem. Or the friends she confided in about the persistence of the problem. Or the kids who wonder why dad locks his bedroom door at night while mom doesn't lock hers. Or the neighbours who observe totally separated lives, with the spouses never in the house at the same time, living past each other. Or the OW who is on Skype all through the night with her lover and sees him sleeping alone in his own bed, in his own bedroom, and hears the snores of the W amplified down the passage. Or the extended family and friends who stay over on the guest room and watch the spouses avoiding each other all day, and going to bed separately at night, and waking up to resumed avoidance the next day. Or the postman who overhears the angry, shouted arguments. Or the colleague who is accidentally and embarrassingly copied in on an accusatory email exchange where the BS harangues the WS for sustained lack of sexual interest. Or the other customers who are mortifyingly forced to witness the BS screaming at the WS when she happens to stumble across him shopping in the same supermarket. Etc.

 

All of which have been known to happen.

[ComingInHot]

But again, I would say, "wouldn't a married person whose partner had an affair that they were unaware of have to admit that they didn't know their spouse like they thought they did?".

 

Each & everyone of us are "capable" of doing Anything.

 

I may have my head in the clouds and look at life "glass half full", but I'm Not stupid.

 

I knew he was just as capable of cheating as I or anyone else was, I Did however, believe he wouldn't go ahead w/it when the invitation or given circumstances allowed.

 

Does that mean he wasn't the man I thought he was or I didn't "know" him? Nope.

Does that mean I wasn't surprised or shocked when he did cheat? Nope.

 

Now, if he turned out to be a serial cheat, pedophile, murderer or junkie, then he$$ yes I'd have to say I really didn't know him at All! But, so far, that's Not the case. few*

[LFH]

Or... The counsellor the BW consulted about the problem of the sexless M. Or the doctor from whom she sought a Viagra prescription to resolve the problem. Or the friends she confided in about the persistence of the problem. Or the kids who wonder why dad locks his bedroom door at night while mom doesn't lock hers. Or the neighbours who observe totally separated lives, with the spouses never in the house at the same time, living past each other. Or the OW who is on Skype all through the night with her lover and sees him sleeping alone in his own bed, in his own bedroom, and hears the snores of the W amplified down the passage. Or the extended family and friends who stay over on the guest room and watch the spouses avoiding each other all day, and going to bed separately at night, and waking up to resumed avoidance the next day. Or the postman who overhears the angry, shouted arguments. Or the colleague who is accidentally and embarrassingly copied in on an accusatory email exchange where the BS harangues the WS for sustained lack of sexual interest. Or the other customers who are mortifyingly forced to witness the BS screaming at the WS when she happens to stumble across him shopping in the same supermarket. Etc.

 

All of which have been known to happen.

Coco, NONE of those things EVER happen silly.

 

ALL guys who cheat are happily married, never having any stress or maritial strife in their lives. They are pampered and coddled and sexed up daily and nightly. Their spouses take care of them and themselves and never refuse sex, or love or affection. It's only that they've fallen under some magical spell cast by the evil temptress that causes them to suddenly grow a forked tongue and be able to speak nothing but lies to all. Once the precious princess finds out the truth, the spell is broken and he is freed of this curse, and once again can speak only truth and the evil sorceress is cast out, never for him to attempt to contact again, and they live happily ever after.

[William]

Another thread, now off-topic, which started talking about other members on this site. Thread concluded. Do not start any similar threads in this forum. Thanks.