The Fog - APs take on it?

[Poppy fields]

Poppy, note, I haven't accused you or anyone of anything. If one can say BSs have an agenda for believing it, you didn't say it, others have, then isn't the flipside also simply a matter of logic, that an AP...the other member of the triangle, will also have an agenda as well in dismissing it?

 

I don't see fog as not being fully aware and I can't belabor this point anymore. The definitions were laid out at the beginning and have been said several times that one in a fog is not some blameless person who is sleepwalking lol.

 

When I drink a lot, which I rarely do, I become less inhibited. I have never been drunk to the point of being unconscious, but certainly have been inhibited to the point where I make choices that if sober, I'd not have made. Likewise, while inlove I have agreed to things quite consciously I would not have agreed to when not under the influence of the dopamine of love . I think fog is more akin to this...in NONE of these scenarios are you blameless or unconscious...and I find it tiring for people to argue against fog and equate it to unconsciousness, when that's not what is being said. I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but you can't disagree about something I'm not talking about lol.

 

I guess I am confused as to what you are talking about then.

 

You said it was suspicious that APs were saying the fog was not an actual occurrence, so I said I had no agenda in my not believing in it.

 

You are equating being drunk to having a dopamine rush. I don't think that is equal. My opinion. What is it that I am missing? I am not trying to be obtuse, I just think we are having a general disagreement about the same issue, and you seem to think we are talking about two different things. I can see why that would frustrate you.

[AnotherRound]

Owl can hold his own, but re the bold. How condescending to imply that he "thinks" he's held her accountable. Why not just say; your marriage is a sham, your reconciliation a farce, because you used the analogy of an affair fog. The word "fog" is a made up word, used to describe the feelings and emotions one goes through at some point in an affair. I know I certainly felt something akin to that. I didn't have the vocabulary then to name it "fog", but I certainly behaved out of character, against my supposed values, felt the high. Does that EXCUSE my behavior. NO. Would I ever presume to blame my action on the silly buzz word, fog? NO.

 

I think we all get that you (AR) have never felt those things, but why would I need to call you out because you didn't. I think you might just be hung up on the word fog. Perhaps if we called it something else??

 

But because others have (and you've now had more than a few APs call it just that) why must they be wrong? Or rather, why must you tell them they are wrong, that their experience isn't valid?

 

I guess we are just a tad less evolved.

 

Because I never said anything of the sort. If that was what I wanted to say, I would have said it.

 

I don't believe his marriage is a sham at all. I do believe, however, that his wife got off easier than she should have - all things considered. I believe that both of them being willing to believe that her behavior was not of her own accord (that she was on an endorphin high) allows HER many more benefits than it does him.

 

I am telling people that I disagree with them - because I do. Discussion doesn't mean that I have to come round to your way of thinking , lol. It simply means discussing our beliefs and opinions with one another - and sometimes, disagreeing. My beliefs in no way negate Owl's beliefs - we just believe different. And, he believes that he is right - and I believe that I am right. Of course we do - we obviously believe it for a reason. It is my opinion that he somewhat "needs" to believe in the fog in order to proceed with his wife. I didn't say I was right - I said that is my opinion. He can tell me that's now how it is - but I don't have to believe it.

 

Like you often say here - sometimes, people are not really aware of what the truth is in their life - even though we can see it so clearly from out here.

[MissBee]

I guess I am confused as to what you are talking about then.

 

You said it was suspicious that APs were saying the fog was not an actual occurrence, so I said I had no agenda in my not believing in it.

 

You are equating being drunk to having a dopamine rush. I don't think that is equal. My opinion. What is it that I am missing? I am not trying to be obtuse, I just think we are having a general disagreement about the same issue, and you seem to think we are talking about two different things. I can see why that would frustrate you.

 

What happens to your brain when you drink or get high?

 

Neuroscientists have equated dopamine rush in love to how your brain responds when you do drugs.

 

I haven't made this association, scientists have.

 

They are not the same but similar.

 

I was just saying that we talk time and time again about BSs making the fog up and it comes from APs mostly. So that situation is intellectually suspicious. It makes sense the "opposition" would think that (whether fog is true or false). I was asking for more discussion on the flip-side, so it would be a even-handed discussion. Even-handed discussions are more reliable as they consider what is at stake, for either side, with either opinion.

[loredo21]

agreed Miss Bee. If I get in a car and drive drunk, I am intoxicated/in a fog and making stupid decisions. I was fully aware I was too drunk too drive but couldn't make an informed decision because of the alcohol effects. If I get into a crash and wreck someone's car or god forbid wreck them in some way I need to take full responsibility. I look at the "fog" the same way. Being there I know what it can do to one's judgement and remember feeling like I was "high" all the time. In that high I made stupid decisions which I own, but may not have otherwise done if I weren't intoxicated by lust. This is the reason one can "withdrawal" from an A. it is basically a drug wrapped up in a pretty penis shaped bow. (or vagina, what have you)...

[AnotherRound]

Exactly. I haven't seen the arguments, rational thought processes or discussion I'd have expected from a potential MENSA candidate.

 

I've logically, rationally spelled out my viewpoint, and yet she refutes it based on her opinion not backed up by any fact, simply because it's her opinion.

 

NON SEQUITER

 

There are no facts - bc it's not a real thing! lol If there were facts - they would be presented. It is not on me to prove something that I think is false - it's on you to prove that it is TRUE AND VALID. Kind of like god - it's up to the believers to prove it true - there is no proof of a negative.

 

I see your viewpoint, I see it as rationalization as to why you believe in the fog - and that's it. You didn't provide anything other than your experience and your opinions. Where is your proof? I mean, surely - if there are provable brain chemistry activities in effect for years, there is some scientific literature that shows that? I mean - scientists don't do studies and then just throw away the evidence once they are convinced it's true - they share that evidence to show EVERYONE that it's true! lol

 

The little jabs you are taking aren't really necessary. I don't believe in god either - I know that people become a bit panicky when I question something that they "need" or "want" to be true. I get it - it's a natural reaction. But all the jabs do is reiterate that you "need" or "want" the "fog" to be true - and there is a reason for that. It offers you something - or you wouldn't become defensive regarding it. (that is, of course, my read on it).

[AnotherRound]

I'm not discussing prerogatives.

 

It's a discussion thread about fog and it has been belabored here that fog is made up specifically by BSs. Of course, mostly, if not only APs, are saying this. Is it not then suspicious?

 

I think to have a fair discussion, we should now talk about why APs are hell-bent on saying it isn't real...we already discussed ad nauseum why APs think BSs make it up and how it helps them. So the microscope should now be turned to how as an AP IF fog is real...how does it affect you? If it isn't, does it affect you? In each scenario how does it change/help things?

 

Prerogative are a non-point. I am well aware that everyone can think and say whatever they want. However, a discussion board is only useful if people discuss these thoughts and opinions that is their prerogative to have...not so?

 

As suspicious as I find it that the only people I can see using the term are BSs and WSs and people that have a stake in believing it (marriage building websites)... isn't THAT suspicious?

[Poppy fields]

What happens to your brain when you drink or get high?

 

Neuroscientists have equated dopamine rush in love to how your brain responds when you do drugs.

 

I haven't made this association, scientists have.

 

They are not the same but similar.

 

I was just saying that we talk time and time again about BSs making the fog up and it comes from APs mostly. So that situation is intellectually suspicious. It makes sense the "opposition" would think that (whether fog is true or false). I was asking for more discussion on the flip-side, so it would be a even-handed discussion. Even-handed discussions are more reliable as they consider what is at stake, for either side, with either opinion.

 

And I thought I had given my opinion of the flip side. I guess I am having trouble explaining myself.

 

People make irrational, selfishish decisions. I think they regret them, but I still think they are fully aware(I know you don't like my saying that, sorry) of what they are doing regardless of how powerful the chemical rush is to their brains. It is a bad decision, but it is a decision.

 

That is as clear as I can get, and I don't know what else to say on the subject. So I will try not to say anything else.

[Owl]

I see your viewpoint, I see it as rationalization as to why you believe in the fog - and that's it. You didn't provide anything other than your experience and your opinions. Where is your proof? I mean, surely - if there are provable brain chemistry activities in effect for years, there is some scientific literature that shows that? I mean - scientists don't do studies and then just throw away the evidence once they are convinced it's true - they share that evidence to show EVERYONE that it's true! lol

 

 

I think I may have mentioned a half of dozen times or so that this is NOT a scientifc community.

 

However...many people have tried to spell out to you that this "fog" is the same thing as the chemical reaction experienced in the brain that's experienced during limerance/in love. I believe that it HAS been documented scientifically.

 

Perhaps, given that you're a trained researcher and all, you could find the peer-reviewed papers on THAT subject, and see how that might tie in to the concept of "fog"...which is part of that same state in an affair???

 

You put the onus on me to prove that it exists.

 

I call bull*****. Prove to me that it does not. Prove to me that all affair participants truly are making rational, intelligent, thought out decisions during their affair.

[eleanorrigby]

I don't believe his marriage is a sham at all. I do believe, however, that his wife got off easier than she should have - all things considered.

 

She got off too easy? What do you think he should have done?

[cocorico]

At no point during the A were we of the opinion that the other had no flaws, and there was no period of "limerance". Instead, we started off with a purely instrumental arrangement, based solely on sex, and at that stage while we didn't dislike each other, we could probably each have made a long list of why the other was unsuitable for a long-term, full-time R, as well as why we ourselves were. Certainly I was aware of shortcomings on both our sides from the outset, but given that I was looking for nothing beyond some really hot sex, they weren't dealbreakers.

 

As I got to know him better over the years, I learned much more about him than my initial research had shown, and I came to understand several things in context, and became acclimatised to other things, and also noticed that as he got to know me better he relaxed around me a great deal more and I got to see different sides to him than the rather formal public persona. Also, as I got to know his family and friends I got to see him in those contexts, and to learn about aspects of him through their eyes, having known him for decades, and the more I saw the more I discovered to like. It was a slowly growing friendship, developing over the years, rather like wearing in a pair of heavy walking boots until they become really comfortable.

 

Along the way I also learned more about his home situation. He had at first told me he was happily M, or rather, had not corrected my assumption that he was, and had certainly told me he had no plans to leave it. He had gotten back together with her not too long previously after a separation which had been very difficult for his kids, and he made it clear his first obligation was to them. As I had obligations of my own, I welcomed that, and he occupied a small portion of my life, tucked away between my other interests and commitments, dusted off and hauled out when it suited me.

 

He did not rewrite his marital history - I learned about that from his family and long-term friends and when I questioned him about it he would agree that certain things had happened as described by others, but would always defend his then-W and argue for a special dispensation for her shocking behaviour because of her "difficult background" and her "emotional problems". He refused to acknowledge that her behaviour was at all abusive, and would make all manner of outrageous excuses for her even when it was clear that he recognised how ludicrous it sounded. It really was like some weird kind of Stockholm Syndrome, and I encouraged him to read up about that, and to get IC as he was taking strain from the dissonance of the "double life" he was being pulled into.

 

He also got treatment for his depression, and together with the reading and the IC, he began to emerge from the gas lighting he'd been subjected to and to recognise his situation for what it was and to form a concrete plan of action to get him to where he wanted and needed to be.

[GorillaTheater]

The mistake we may be making is assuming that, for some people, "the fog" is some sort of temporary condition.

[AnotherRound]

as a former OW, I completely believe I was in a fog. In general I like to think of myself as a good person who would never intentionally hurt a fly. I am very spiritual and motivated by peace and harmony. The only way I can comprehend myself doing what I did is to believe in the stupid fog. Maybe it's an excuse. Maybe I would just have rather been in a fog than actually a ****ty person. I did and said things that just were not "me". And I will blame it on the affair fog. Sometimes it was alcohol but for the most part I was intoxicated by the affair. fog.

 

And there it is - the dichotomy. That good people sometimes do bad things. That doing one bad thing does not negate all good - but in some people's minds, it does! So, they have to find a reason that a good person did a bad thing. Reason is? They chose to. Simple. They chose to hurt people.

 

Why can't people just own that? And be comfortable with the fact that good people can do bad things at times? That good people can CHOOSE to do bad things sometimes? Why is that so scary? What is it that keeps people from being able to accept this reality?

 

I think it IS easier to say you weren't in control than to just sit and feel the guilt you have for doing a bad thing. To feel guilt is VERY uncomfortable - anger aimed inwards - it's not a feeling many of us would choose to feel very much - if we had the choice. And the truth? There is little that soothes guilt once it's there - we don't forget that we did a bad thing, that we hurt someone else. And every time we remember, we hurt - we feel that guilt - and we want it to go away.

 

Enter stage left "the fog" - Now we don't have to feel "as" guilty! No, it doesn't take away all the guilt - but it does lessen it if we are convinced that we weren't in control. That it wasn't really US who made that bad choice and hurt someone else. Now, we have some relief - a bit of respite from that horrible feeling that we chose to hurt someone else.

 

If you don't want to believe it - that's fine. I get it - it soothes some - I'm not trying to take that from them (heck, they don't have to read this!) - but I do not buy it. I see what it is - an attempt to ease our guilt, and perhaps our anger at our WS a bit - even just a bit is better than feeling that stuff full force.

[Owl]

She got off too easy? What do you think he should have done?

 

I'm curious about that too. Especially as I'm not sure what AR thinks it is that I DID do?

 

AR-...prove to me also how the use of an analogy somehow "excuses" the actions that the analogy is used to describe.

 

"Fog" is simply the word used to describe the actions/behaviors of a person during an affair. It's an analogy. How does that excuse the actions? What if we said "Peanut butter sandwhich" in place of fog...does that excuse those behaviors any more, or any less?

[AnotherRound]

I agree with the above. I may have been in a "fog" but I am 100% responsible and accountable for every decision and every action I made.

 

I'm curious, I've not seen any instances where fog was used as an excuse for behavior. Have you?

 

I think by it's very nature it soothes guilt regarding actively chosen behaviors. For both parties - the WS and the BS. I think that simply by saying that someone was "not themselves" and making choices "that they wouldn't normally make" distances their ownership of said choices.

[MissBee]

agreed Miss Bee. If I get in a car and drive drunk, I am intoxicated/in a fog and making stupid decisions. I was fully aware I was too drunk too drive but couldn't make an informed decision because of the alcohol effects. If I get into a crash and wreck someone's car or god forbid wreck them in some way I need to take full responsibility. I look at the "fog" the same way. Being there I know what it can do to one's judgement and remember feeling like I was "high" all the time. In that high I made stupid decisions which I own, but may not have otherwise done if I weren't intoxicated by lust. This is the reason one can "withdrawal" from an A. it is basically a drug wrapped up in a pretty penis shaped bow. (or vagina, what have you)...

 

LMAOOOOOOOO

 

I've used the analogy of drunk driving before as well. In drunk driving, you know the risks, but you tell yourself you'll be fine and nothing will happen, you'll make it home. Much like in As. It's not like you are completely clueless, you just are so wrapped up in the feelings, you don't want to press the breaks and then just think okay maybe nothing will happen. I mean so many crazy stories of MM packing fake boxes, or really legitimately having these plans with their AP that when dday come, they abandon them. Why does this happen? Can someone who doesn't believe in a potential fog explain then how all the wonderful plans get dashed? I think they get dashed because the feelings in an affair often don't align with reality. Most are feeling the feelings and even make plans as it feels good to plan....but to then come out from hiding and make a choice based in real life, logistics and not just being inlove...wellll....that's where backtracking happens. Why?

 

In any case, in my A, I don't think he experienced fog. He didn't do any of that crazy stuff, although some of his logic was off . My dad though LMAO....the stuff OW shared that he said and told them, I'm like wow, you are insane, completely and utterly insane. He told one OW he wanted to have a baby with her and he would be so happy about it LMAOOOOO....when my mom confronted him, he said he didn't recall saying it, but he "might have". Was he just lying to OW? Maybe not. I genuinely think my dad gets life, thrill and all the good feelings you get when inlove with these OW. We have an infinite capacity to experience that with any number of people, even when married, and that's also why sometimes it is not being married to the "wrong person" but usually that high wears off with everyone and then when you feel it again with someone else, you can abandon all to go with it, until reality hits. So yea I'm sure he meant it as any single guy would say to a woman he cares for or is infatuated with....but even some single guys get caught up saying this stuff too. I remember the things I agreed to when inlove with my ex and while having an orgasm LOL!!! After which I was like wtf....why would I have said that?? With a MM, though, it becomes esp problematic when they make these love-filled promises and then *womp womp* their real life bursts in. Then that's when all is put on the table and the BS is like whaaaat? And they're like whaaat??? And the OW is like wait, whaaat???

 

It's a mess for everyone, single people too. I think everyone needs to have their feet planted firmly in all relationships and don't run off with only their emotions and feelings. I think it's much easier for single people to do so than a MP having a secret affair.

[AnotherRound]

But, when you say this:"I get that you think you aren't excusing her behavior and that you are holding her fully accountable - but from out here, it doesn't appear that you are."

 

Surely you can see why I wrote what I did. The word "think" is the big tell. I "think" Owl knows his wife and the health of the reconciliation and marriage way better than you do. So, no, it's not a big leap to calling his marriage a sham.

 

And I can't remember saying often (or at all) "sometimes people are not really aware of what the truth is in their life - even though we can see it so clearly from out here"? But, what ev.

 

Agreed - which is why I said that it doesn't seem like that to me and not "I know that you are using it this way"... I don't know it - I think it, from what I'm reading and observing.

[Owl]

I think by it's very nature it soothes guilt regarding actively chosen behaviors. For both parties - the WS and the BS. I think that simply by saying that someone was "not themselves" and making choices "that they wouldn't normally make" distances their ownership of said choices.

 

I don't see where it says that they "weren't themselves" in the article...I'll go back and read.

 

It says that they weren't acting like they did normally. That they were acting irrationally, out of character, and often demonstrating thoughts that made no sense to the people that knew them.

 

It didn't say that they "weren't themselves" like they had a cold or something.

[Owl]

Agreed - which is why I said that it doesn't seem like that to me and not "I know that you are using it this way"... I don't know it - I think it, from what I'm reading and observing.

 

So how did she get off easy, based off of what you've observed?

 

What is it I didn't do that I should have, in your opinion? What more should she have had to do, in your opinion?

 

Where, specifically, did I do or not do something more (or less) than I did, in your opinion?

 

I really do want to know. Give me specifics.

[AnotherRound]

I think I may have mentioned a half of dozen times or so that this is NOT a scientifc community.

 

However...many people have tried to spell out to you that this "fog" is the same thing as the chemical reaction experienced in the brain that's experienced during limerance/in love. I believe that it HAS been documented scientifically.

 

Perhaps, given that you're a trained researcher and all, you could find the peer-reviewed papers on THAT subject, and see how that might tie in to the concept of "fog"...which is part of that same state in an affair???

 

You put the onus on me to prove that it exists.

 

I call bull*****. Prove to me that it does not. Prove to me that all affair participants truly are making rational, intelligent, thought out decisions during their affair.

 

I have researched - and have not been able to find even a mention of it in the scientific community. That's the point. It just isn't there. I could look at temporary insanity research - as I can see that is pretty much what people are claiming - but I already know that has been pretty much discarded as invalid.

 

The research just isn't there - there is no proof. And yes, the onus is on you to prove it true - that's how it works. Negatives can not be proven - I can't prove that something doesn't exist... lol... if you have proof that it does, please share it! Aliens don't exist. God doesn't exist. Ghosts don't exist. How would you prove that those are true statements? Yeah - you can't, bc the only way to discount a negative is to prove a positive.

 

I will read anything you present that is peer reviewed by reputable sources that says that "the fog" is a true phenomena. I promise!

[MissBee]

As suspicious as I find it that the only people I can see using the term are BSs and WSs and people that have a stake in believing it (marriage building websites)... isn't THAT suspicious?

 

It makes sense. The only person who can verify the fog is the WS who experienced it and the BS who experienced it secondhand and witnessed it. This is logical AR. What fog would the AP experience?????

 

In any case, as I said, I don't do polarizing. We belabored the BS aspect already hence I said, alright, lets be fair now and talk about the other aspect, why some APs are vehemently against this and are also the only ones dismissing it.

 

It is the due diligence for you or anyone to be suspicious of the fog being promoted by BSs (and also the claim which was suspicious to me was that BSs make it up, no mention was made when I saw that, of the WS). Likewise, it is due diligence to look at who is dismissing it and then examine what stake they have in it. Then after understanding everyone's stake, we can further explore the validity in the claims, more objectively.

[Owl]

I have researched - and have not been able to find even a mention of it in the scientific community. That's the point. It just isn't there. I could look at temporary insanity research - as I can see that is pretty much what people are claiming - but I already know that has been pretty much discarded as invalid.

 

The research just isn't there - there is no proof. And yes, the onus is on you to prove it true - that's how it works. Negatives can not be proven - I can't prove that something doesn't exist... lol... if you have proof that it does, please share it! Aliens don't exist. God doesn't exist. Ghosts don't exist. How would you prove that those are true statements? Yeah - you can't, bc the only way to discount a negative is to prove a positive.

 

I will read anything you present that is peer reviewed by reputable sources that says that "the fog" is a true phenomena. I promise!

 

What, specifically, did you research, and where?

 

What terms did you look up, in what database or reference system?

[AnotherRound]

She got off too easy? What do you think he should have done?

 

Held her 100% accountable for actively making every choice she made and NOT allowed her to skirt some of that by claiming she was in a fog and out of her own control.

[eleanorrigby]

I will read anything you present that is peer reviewed by reputable sources that says that "the fog" is a true phenomena. I promise!

 

here you go

The Fog (1980) - IMDb

[loredo21]

I get where you are coming from. You're a realist. And that's perfectly okay. I usually tend to agree with you too But in this case I honestly have NOTHING to gain from using the fog thing. My H has barely even grilled me on the A topic. He never brings it up anymore. And is completely happy with me and our life and has forgiven me. I have never ONCE told him that I was in a fog. ever. I still haven't forgiven myself though and admitting I was in a fog doesn't make me feel better about what I've done. It doesn't help. It probably makes it worse for me wondering who I am and if I am ever capable of that sort of behavior. It makes me question everything I know about myself and believe to be true. The fog I was in was a curse. Not a get out of jail free card. Maybe I am contradicting myself, I dunno. I should probably zip it before someone starts looking at my previous threads

[Owl]

Held her 100% accountable for actively making every choice she made and NOT allowed her to skirt some of that by claiming she was in a fog and out of her own control.

 

What, specifically, did I not hold her accountable for?

 

What, specifically, did I let her skirt by using the term "fog"?