The Fog - APs take on it?

[Owl]

Eh - there was a specific article provided to discuss. I was hoping to get APs views on it - bc like I said, you few WS and the BSs here have made it abundantly clear that they believe in it. I know you believe in it (or say you do now at the minimum) - But I also know that it would never hold up in a court of law - never.

 

It's not scientific, it's not rational, it's not realistic - bc if it was - there would be no crimes ever. People would just accept that we all do things "out of character" and no punishment is needed - let's just hope that fog doesn't come back again, phew!

 

There's a big difference in looking back, in hindsight, and saying, "Man, I wish I would have handled that differently" or "wow, these consequences are tough, had I known then what I know now"... that's accepting that what you CHOSE was maybe not the "right" thing - or that you bargained more than you were willing to lose. That's just hindsight - not a freakin' fog of endorphins that renders you helpless and out of control.

 

You're still stuck on the belief that it EXCUSES the behavior...which it does not.

 

It simply uses the analogy of "fog" to DESCRIBE the actions/behaviors of the person at that time.

 

Don't you use analogies to help explain/describe things in your therapy sessions with patients?????

 

I don't get how you think this EXCUSES behaviors....where is it stated ANYWHERE that this EXCUSES what's occurred??? PLEASE, SHOW ME A QUOTE OUTLINING HOW IT EXCUSES THE BEHAVIOR????

[Poppy fields]

I have definitely had to utilize compartmentalism in my life. But, I was fully aware and felt uneasy doing that so I knew it was wrong. I just choice to ignore my conscience and press forward with what I wanted at the time. Regardless of the pain I was causing others or myself.

[jlola]

Remember that astronaut who drove cross country in a diaper? She planned to kill her lover's mistress. I am sure NASA gives all sorts of psychological test.

 

But I believe when you are in a relationship that makes your anxious,insecure,unpredictable and intermittent your body/brain chemicals are affected.

 

AR,limerance ca last for years. So can the infatuation stage. Especially if you are in an insecure relationship affair or not. Ask anyone who was involved with a personality disordered person. That up and down roller coaster of uncertain emotions does a number on anyone.

 

Probably why people in affairs seek therapy afterwards and people involved with PD's seek therapy. Healthy relationships do not cause you to need therapy when it's over.

[Poppy fields]

AR

 

You are making a lot of assumptions to discount a phenomena that you dont believe exists.

 

BS do not feel better because their H was "in an A fog".

 

BS and WS who are reconciling do not use the concept of "fog" to absolve the WS from personal responsibility or understanding why they did what they did beyond the chemical stew at play(i.e. the deeper personal issues). The article you posted says its not an excuse.

 

I dont know any BS who is "comforted" by thinking her H was in a fog.

 

You are just making stuff up as you go along to support your position.

 

Why would she make stuff up to support her position? Maybe she believes what she is saying and just wanted to have a discussion with others about her take on the situation.

[AnotherRound]

You're still stuck on the belief that it EXCUSES the behavior...which it does not.

 

It simply uses the analogy of "fog" to DESCRIBE the actions/behaviors of the person at that time.

 

Don't you use analogies to help explain/describe things in your therapy sessions with patients?????

 

I don't get how you think this EXCUSES behaviors....where is it stated ANYWHERE that this EXCUSES what's occurred??? PLEASE, SHOW ME A QUOTE OUTLINING HOW IT EXCUSES THE BEHAVIOR????

 

I get what you are saying - but let's look at this. If it doesn't excuse the behavior to some extent - then why is it needed? If you accepted 100% that your wife made active choices - you would not have a need to "describe her behavior" - bc it's already described - she CHOSE that behavior. Plain and simple. No need to leap around to find a reason "WHY" she chose the behavior - bc you would put her 100% in the driver's seat of her own behaviors - she wouldn't need "the fog".

 

I am saying that it is MY opinion, based on lack of any scientific evidence, that this "fog" allows people to feel better about an affair by allowing them to believe that their WS didn't actively choose to lie to them and engage in an affair (if lying was present). It is soothing to believe that your spouse was NOT in control of themselves - how else would you be able to reconcile that in your head and heart? That, your spouse made these decisions that hurt you to such an extent and they actively chose those knowing full well the consequences?

 

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. Simply by allowing the term "the fog" to creep in (and you even insinuated that she was in some kind of endorphin brain fog!) to the convo at all - you are, to some extent, allowing her to escape the full consequences of her actions. The guilt that comes with her actions is soothed by her telling herself that she was "out of her head" and acting "out of character".

 

Nothing is being shoved down anyone's throat here - if you are choosing to read this, then I hardly knocked on your door and inundated you with my opinion and my beliefs - you actively chose to read this and respond and participate. That's not being "shoved down your throat" just because I disagree with something that makes you feel better...

[jlola]

I can see some merit in what you're saying here in bold. It could well be that people are more FOCUSED on it's occurrence during an affair than any other time.

 

Any other time, it's simply part of "falling in love". In an affair, it becomes part of the "why did he/she act the way they did"...there's a lot more analysis that occurs there by other parties than when it just happens as part of a 'normal' (as in, not impacting anyone else) relationship.

 

I have heard of people neglecting kids during an affair.wrecking their finances,risking work, Becoming irresponsible to their obligations in an affair. I do not see that happening in regular relationships.

 

In fact, most single parents I know make sure to know a man very well before they introduce the kids. And if the kids do not like him, they will not pursue further.

 

But WS do not think about that. They know kids most likely won't like affair person. But they don't care or want to think about that.

[AnotherRound]

AR

 

You are making a lot of assumptions to discount a phenomena that you dont believe exists.

 

BS do not feel better because their H was "in an A fog".

 

BS and WS who are reconciling do not use the concept of "fog" to absolve the WS from personal responsibility or understanding why they did what they did beyond the chemical stew at play(i.e. the deeper personal issues). The article you posted says its not an excuse.

 

I dont know any BS who is "comforted" by thinking her H was in a fog.

 

You are just making stuff up as you go along to support your position.

 

Or maybe - others are making up stuff about some alien "fog" to make themselves feel better?

 

Are you saying that NOBODY feels better by believing that their WS was in a fog and not actively choosing to love someone else physically and emotionally? If this is so - then why are people clinging so hard to the fog in this thread? If it's not a comfort - why do they need it? Or want it so badly to be true?

[Poppy fields]

I dont know. Im just posting what I observed.

 

She is making statements that directly contradict the article that she posted that she said she wanted to discuss.

 

The article says "fog" is not an excuse. Numerous BS have told her they dont accept it as an excuse.

 

She continues to post that its an excuse that comforts people.

 

Does that clarify for you?

 

No. I wanted to know why she would make things up to support her position. I still am confused by that statement.

 

I can clearly see we are not all in agreement here, but I don't think anyone is making anything up on any side of the discussion.

[MissBee]

Fine. Fog is not real. It is all in BSs head.

 

Then what?

 

After that, where do we go from here? What do APs stand to gain from this? Validation that they for real meant something?

 

If BSs have a stake in clinging to fog...what is the stake APs have in dismissing it? Both have a stake...we have belabored BSs stake in it. Can we now discuss what APs stand to gain in not believing it or what do they stand to lose in believing it?

 

That is only fair and even-handed.

[Owl]

AR...you're convinced that I must be using this analogy to somehow excuse my wife's behavior.

 

I'm not.

 

I use the analogy to DESCRIBE her behavior.

 

AGAIN...demonstrate specifically HOW her behavior was "excused" through the use of this term to describe it? How did she avoid responsibility for her behaviors during her affair?

 

It's your "opinion, based on lack of any scientific evidence, that this "fog" allows people to feel better about an affair"...yet completely and totally to the contrary of what every BS has posted and stated, and even demonstrated in their own stories here.

 

WHERE exactly is the disconnected reality???

[Decorative]

NOT AT ALL. It was NOT against her will.

 

EVERY CHOICE SHE MADE, SHE MADE OF HER OWN FREE WILL.

 

I GET THAT. SHE GETS THAT.

 

What's the point of posting a thread discussing this if you're ONLY going to accept empirical data that you know damned well can't be provided by a non-scientific community on this forum?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!

 

She should read Helen Fisher.

 

That might clarify and satisfy her need for a scientific take on it.

 

Helen even provides pictures!!

 

LOL

[IfWishesWereHorses]

You're still stuck on the belief that it EXCUSES the behavior...which it does not.

 

It simply uses the analogy of "fog" to DESCRIBE the actions/behaviors of the person at that time.

 

Don't you use analogies to help explain/describe things in your therapy sessions with patients?????

 

I don't get how you think this EXCUSES behaviors....where is it stated ANYWHERE that this EXCUSES what's occurred??? PLEASE, SHOW ME A QUOTE OUTLINING HOW IT EXCUSES THE BEHAVIOR????

 

AR, the article you cite says (in bold) this is not an excuse. It explains it there.

 

You also discounted a WS who described his own fog because he wasn't an AP? I don't get that?

[Owl]

She should read Helen Fisher.

 

That might clarify and satisfy her need for a scientific take on it.

 

Helen even provides pictures!!

 

LOL

 

AR...have you looked for the references provided in the original article to see if you can find that "scientific proof" you're looking for??

 

Might make more sense than posting here and insisting it's the only evidence you'll accept.

[Poppy fields]

Fine. Fog is not real. It is all in BSs head.

 

Then what?

 

After that, where do we go from here? What do APs stand to gain from this? Validation that they for real meant something?

 

If BSs have a stake in clinging to fog...what is the stake APs have in dismissing it? Both have a stake...we have belabored BSs stake in it. Can we now discuss what APs stand to gain in not believing it or what do they stand to lose in believing it?

 

That is only fair and even-handed.

 

APs don't stand to lose anything by believing in it. However, if someone thinks it is an excuse that is their prerogative, just like it is the prerogative of someone to think it is real.

[Decorative]

As a betrayed spouse? I wish the fog/limerance wasn't true.

 

Because then my husband would not have acted like an alien with a brain transplant and would have realized how utterly insane he looked and sounded.

 

Must I remind people of the paint story, again? LOL

 

Seriously. There's no comfort in observing your spouse blowing up his life, your life, and the life of your babies because of brain chemistry changes.

[Owl]

AR, the article you cite says (in bold) this is not an excuse. It explains it there.

 

You also discounted a WS who described his own fog because he wasn't an AP? I don't get that?

 

 

 

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

[MissBee]

APs don't stand to lose anything by believing in it. However, if someone thinks it is an excuse that is their prerogative, just like it is the prerogative of someone to think it is real.

 

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?

[MissBee]

FWIW I never said it was all in the BS's head. I said it was in eveyrone's head.

 

I wasn't saying you said it btw.

 

For anyone who genuinely believes this, I think it would be interesting to discuss the flip side.

[eleanorrigby]

To me it's a catch all word that other BS's usually get that replaces about 10 other words. It's shorthand. It's not comforting. It's not an excuse.

 

I really like your post on the fog, MissBee, ITA with it.

 

I have a term I call post-breakup insanity. When my ex and I broke up I did stuff, said stuff, thought stuff and acted in completely insane ways that now make me cringe. Whether or not it was biochemical, it was insane! However, the fact is: everything we experience comes from some type of brain process and biochemicals. All feelings/emotions, good, bad and insane, do not emanate from our "heart" but our brains. So the feelings associated with fog, with being in love, with being heartbroken etc. all come from some type of brain process.

 

This is not a peer-reviewed article (hilarious the new trend on the board these days ) but it does a good job of explaining the chemical processes that go into being in love/lust, I doubt it matters if it is an AP or not. I think the fog comes in because unlike single people inlove, because MP already have a constraint...their spouse, they may have to add other processes like rationalization, ignoring reality, compartmentalizing, minimizing consequences in their mind etc. to the process that already happens when courting. I imagine that conflict adds to heightened levels of what will seem to the spouse as insanity.

[Poppy fields]

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?

 

I think everyone has explained their prerogative. I know I did, and I am an OW, a BS, and a WW. What agenda could I have to not believe in ''the fog?" I think people make stupid, hurtful decisions, but I think they are fully aware of what they are doing. They may not feel right about it, but there is clearly a conscious decision being made.

[Owl]

I'm going to back up a bit, I have read posts, (NOT in this thread), where a BS does seem to make excuses for their WS by using the fog theory, but NOT in this thread and hardly ever on this site. Who knows why it happens, maybe it has to do greatly with the stage of grief a particular person is in. There is a stage called denial.

 

The thing here AR is you are disputing what someone tells you is not accurate of what they are doing and many of us see no evidence that they are not telling the truth. Which frankly is quite bewildering, because why get so invested in being right that you can't see the forest for the trees?

 

Or the fog...for the fog??? :)

 

As I've mentioned on previous threads, there are some folks that I feel can't believe the "fog" exists simply because they're still deep, deep in it.

 

They can't see they're own disconnected thinking because they're still deeply engaged in that disconnected thinking.

 

i'm not saying that AR is...but I'm saying it's what I believe is a common reason for some folks not to agree with the concept.

[loredo21]

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.

[AnotherRound]

Fine. Fog is not real. It is all in BSs head.

 

Then what?

 

After that, where do we go from here? What do APs stand to gain from this? Validation that they for real meant something?

 

If BSs have a stake in clinging to fog...what is the stake APs have in dismissing it? Both have a stake...we have belabored BSs stake in it. Can we now discuss what APs stand to gain in not believing it or what do they stand to lose in believing it?

 

That is only fair and even-handed.

 

What I "gain" from not having people believe in the fog is simple - people are 100% responsible and accountable for every decision they make and every action that they take. Their active participation is not minimized by believing that they were not in control of themselves.

[MissBee]

I think everyone has explained their prerogative. I know I did, and I am an OW, a BS, and a WW. What agenda could I have to not believe in ''the fog?" I think people make stupid, hurtful decisions, but I think they are fully aware of what they are doing. They may not feel right about it, but there is clearly a conscious decision being made.

 

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.

[MissBee]

What I "gain" from not having people believe in the fog is simple - people are 100% responsible and accountable for every decision they make and every action that they take. Their active participation is not minimized by believing that they were not in control of themselves.

 

I agree.

 

Being in the fog of an affair doesn't erase one's participation or culpability, but it can put it into perspective.