To bust or not to bust

[81West]

She ended the marriage when she stepped outside, not Zinger.

 

This sounds like a cheating spouse saying please don't break up the family , when their actions actually ruined everything.

 

I think Zinger's plan is a good one IMO. If she doesn't fight, then she's not serious or sorry enough about what she did.

 

Unilaterally divorcing somebody is not somehow less destructive to a relationship than being unfaithful. If he wants to deliver the ultimate consequence then they're essentially 'even'. At that point there's no greater impetus on her to fight for their relationship than there is on him. If my hypothetical husband divorced me because he could not or would not move past my infidelity and the vows I'd broken, I'd understand completely. If he meted out an emotionally crushing divorce as a punishment and then sat back and waited for me to 'fight for him'? Wow. Many women, most certainly including me, would find that utterly absurd.

[66Charger]

Many men and women would find absurd, the notion that divorcing someone, because that person cheated is "even" with the act of the cheater. Wow.

[zinger]

Your are correct , I have an engineering background and that is the way my brain works. I cannot just all of a sudden catapult myself into the la la land of leading hearts, spiritual healing and forgiveness.

 

If you think that I 'believe she did these things to kill your marriage just so you could divorce her and renew as a couple, then you clearly shouldn't be together anyhow" - I would like to know a) what on my posts made you to assume that, or b) where from can I get the same weed

 

 

Perhaps you believe OP that matters in love and marriage can exist on a mindset built on things like 100%. My experience in love has taught me more times than not that matters of love and desire only need to be present to be worth fighting for.

 

No one can save a marriage undoing a marriage. No one can know what the true purpose of marriage from the perspective of another is, and especially by ending it. If you already see that a PA is a dealbreaker for you, and perhaps not for her, why do you think you will learn anything 100% by, for example, removing the economic card from the table. If you already do not see eye to eye on some things about marriage, financial stability versus commitment might very well be another.

 

In the end you are , from all i have read in this thread, testing (not a good sign) your wife (not your marriage) on the basis of your quite explicit over rationalisation of your specific marriage. Your concept of your wife and your marriage seems to reside almost entirely in your head, and towards the left.

 

Don't be surprised if she finds this less than something worth trying to rebuild from. Most women know you cannot build love, rediscover it, or otherwise, from the perspective of an engineer. And definately not entirely on the terms of one side because the rational hand of justice fell heavily on his side.

 

You continue to believe that her affair was something she did only to you, and not to first herself. Selfish people do not strike out against their spouses, they hurt them by being indifferent to the pain they will cause in order to be selfish.

 

If you believe she did these things to kill your marriage just so you could divorce her and renew as a couple, then you clearly shouldn't be together anyhow. Until your heart can tell your brain to stop with the nonsense of over valuing her affair and being exclusively in charge of the forgiveness tool, and only seeing her A as something personal, it is you that cannot live in this marriage, not necessarily her.

[zinger]

Zinger here: pretty much what Eric said (the whole quoted post).

 

 

I think you see everything as simple, and this is worse.

 

It is ZINGER who is claiming he is keeping a door open to stay WITH HIS WW.

He did not say what you say he wants. He has been quite ambivalent about this since post 1.

 

Although you probably wish he wasn't vacillating because you think he should turn his back on his WW completely, and never look back, it is Zinger who has to make this decision, and he clearly has NOT reached that point.

 

His attempt to put each option into a seal tight box is not simple, it is rather, complex, because life, and post infidelity, doesn't comply with that need to see everything as black and white.

 

When Zinger says he is done 100% with WW, then things might get very simple. But he clearly has not. His WW is like a child's tooth that refuses to let go, hanging by a thread of nerve, and the child won't let anyone just pull it out for fear of not knowing if there will be pain, and how long it will last. But there it hangs, an impossible nuisance.

[zinger]

You are correct.

 

 

My impression is that zinger is currently at the window, probably leaning toward divorce, but looking for signs in his wife behavior. I'm also under the impression he doesn't like what he's seeing. I think he still sees a lot of regret but no remorse, and she probably didn't really approach the "Was this a PA?" question in any convincing way. Logic says it's probable this was physical, and she's offering nothing to reassure zinger in that department.

 

So, yes, I think, as it is now, this is heading for divorce...

[81West]

Many men and women would find absurd, the notion that divorcing someone, because that person cheated is "even" with the act of the cheater. Wow.

 

You continue to misunderstand that my points are all in the context of the poster's expressed openness to an after-the-fact reconciliation. That completely changes how his seeking a divorce can be seen.

 

There are no shortage of divorce warriors on Loveshack and virtually every one of us is here because we are, were, or soon will be, deeply hurting. All of us to one degree or another are unwittingly projecting ourselves and our own situations all over the advice we offer. It is easy to look at other people's lives and grossly simplify them and encourage swift justice like it's a movie script, like we can maybe slather it all over our own regrets and maybe vicariously live some of it ourselves. We're all well intentioned and doing our best. While I recognize that other people see the situation differently, this is what I see in Zinger:

 

I see a person who is burying deep hurt, sadness and uncertainly under swift action. I see a person who admits he's a "my way or the highway" guy on a committed course way too early for his implicit emotions. In my experience these kind of rigid, inflexible responses hide a fear of being vulnerable, a fear of humiliation, a fear of not being enough, a fear of loss that they simply don't know how to face. The only dignity in reach seems to be control and the iron fist I referenced before. Encouraging a person who is simply scared to be vulnerable, or doesn't know how to be vulnerable, over the marriage cliff as a matter of 'pride' is not necessarily the right advice.

[sandylee1]

Unilaterally divorcing somebody is not somehow less destructive to a relationship than being unfaithful. If he wants to deliver the ultimate consequence then they're essentially 'even'. At that point there's no greater impetus on her to fight for their relationship than there is on him. If my hypothetical husband divorced me because he could not or would not move past my infidelity and the vows I'd broken, I'd understand completely. If he meted out an emotionally crushing divorce as a punishment and then sat back and waited for me to 'fight for him'? Wow. Many women, most certainly including me, would find that utterly absurd.

 

When you break your wedding vows , you can take that as marriage over if you get caught.

 

I'm married and if I cheated on my H and he filed for divorce, it's ALL on me. Same goes for if he cheated on me. There's no two ways about it.

 

If she doesn't want to fight fir Zinger , so be it , but she and her actions are 100% to blame for this marriage ending.

 

Divorce is a consequence of infidelity, not a punishment and when you step outside, you really don't have a leg to stand on.

 

Her infidelity caused the end of the marriage end of story.

[zinger]

Some time ago you have accused me for posting here for the sake of "creative writing" - based on (if I remember correctly) on the fact that dynamics and content of my posts do not align with your high standards. So after receiving this post I felt justified to do what I've done only once here (and apologised to op) - to look into your own threads.

 

What can I say? You are a man of high standards (at least when it comes to writing) and no doubt you feel justified in judging others.

 

I also believe that your quoted remark equally applies to you.

Thank you for your contribution.

 

 

So very noble.

[zinger]

Let me please start with the statement that I do appreciate your point of view even when it's obviously different in many aspects forum mine.

 

To reiterate : I'm not waiting or counting on my FWW to fight for me after the divorce. Divorce is imminent as I've made clear to everyone involved.

 

However as soon as I'm getting a lot of "I'll do everything to repair the damage", "how could I earn bank your trust", " tell me please what could I do to get my husband back and I'll do it " ect - should I assume that it all applies only when we are technically married?

 

To me if she remains committed to all the above after that marriage record is expunged - this will mean a lot to me. If not (and thank you for explaining the likehood of that) - I'm prepared (at least logically) for that outcome.

 

 

Unilaterally divorcing somebody is not somehow less destructive to a relationship than being unfaithful. If he wants to deliver the ultimate consequence then they're essentially 'even'. At that point there's no greater impetus on her to fight for their relationship than there is on him. If my hypothetical husband divorced me because he could not or would not move past my infidelity and the vows I'd broken, I'd understand completely. If he meted out an emotionally crushing divorce as a punishment and then sat back and waited for me to 'fight for him'? Wow. Many women, most certainly including me, would find that utterly absurd.

[66Charger]

THEOP has clearly stated that the heavy lifting must be done by her, DURING OR AFTER the divorce proceedings. If that is something that you could not do, or would put conditions on, that is YOU, not Zinger.

You are clearly trying to state that he is equally responsible for the destruction of the marriage, should he chose to divorce, which is ridiculous. There is no misunderstanding here.

 

Secondarily, I was never a divorce warrior on this thread. I had hoped that there was no affair or PA from the beggining..

 

Regardless, the OP feels that a PA is the death of the marriage, so that's that.

I respect the open forum and your right to your opinion, so let's just agree to disagree.

[Realist3]

Some time ago you have accused me for posting here for the sake of "creative writing" - based on (if I remember correctly) on the fact that dynamics and content of my posts do not align with your high standards. So after receiving this post I felt justified to do what I've done only once here (and apologised to op) - to look into your own threads.

 

What can I say? You are a man of high standards (at least when it comes to writing) and no doubt you feel justified in judging others.

 

I also believe that your quoted remark equally applies to you.

Thank you for your contribution.

 

I apologize if my remarks may have offended your sensitivities.

 

 

 

I would hope that anything I have said would be on the bottom of your list of troubles at the current moment.

 

 

I wish you the best.

[zinger]

Based on a number of posts above it is clear to me that I have not summarised / described the summary of what I know in a more or less cohesive way.

 

This is predominately because I'm not good in writing personal staff. I'll post another attempt of summary soon (assuming that is what these comments suggest).

 

Will also answer any specific questions.

 

Thank you.

[Friskyone4u]

Based on a number of posts above it is clear to me that I have not summarised / described the summary of what I know in a more or less cohesive way.

 

This is predominately because I'm not good in writing personal staff. I'll post another attempt of summary soon (assuming that is what these comments suggest).

 

Will also answer any specific questions.

 

Zinger, you don;t owe us any explanations on anything if you are not comfortable with it, but it would make it easier to make comments that are relavant if you did.

 

Now back to your WW. People do get back together after divorce. And you will see how true her desire to do anything to repair the damage is even if you do divorce. It may even acknowledge that your old marriage is dead and if you reconcile it will be a new marriage.

 

I can't really say much else because I have no idea really how deep or profound this betrayal was, and i believe there are differences. All of us believe this was more than an EA but there is a difference if it happened once versus if she was banging him every other day. Some may not feel like that. Neither is acceptable !!!! But to you it may be different

 

So i just hope you sort it all outas best as you can.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Friskyone4u

[drifter777]

... While I recognize that other people see the situation differently, this is what I see in Zinger:

 

I see a person who is burying deep hurt, sadness and uncertainly under swift action. I see a person who admits he's a "my way or the highway" guy on a committed course way too early for his implicit emotions. In my experience these kind of rigid, inflexible responses hide a fear of being vulnerable, a fear of humiliation, a fear of not being enough, a fear of loss that they simply don't know how to face. The only dignity in reach seems to be control and the iron fist I referenced before. Encouraging a person who is simply scared to be vulnerable, or doesn't know how to be vulnerable, over the marriage cliff as a matter of 'pride' is not necessarily the right advice.

 

I don't know zinger well enough to say this is true or not. However, if it is 100% true - is any of this wrong? If this is who he is then doing anything BUT divorcing her will destroy his ego & self-esteem. He is trying to keep his psyche together and is reacting to this betrayal in real-time. His deeply held moral belief system is one of the only things he can rely on to guide him right now. He is who he is and there's nothing at all wrong with who he is. Swift, decisive action based on conviction is a reasonable, rational response to this trauma.

 

Many, many men are wired this way and it's simply how they choose to live their lives. Guiding principles that come from a strong character are not bad things simply because others don't agree with them.

[zinger]

Update : Seriously this is such an important point of view (and useful to me) I'd really like to know more. I mean the aspect of "I'll do anything" vs "emotional security".

If I take it one step further : the process of divorce is easy (technically) to control - a message to the lawyer and it is cancelled or on hold. Let's say I did that. This blow to her emotional security is out of the picture. But one's hypothetical (and my FWW real) husband is going to be a very pissed off and cold dude for a while (definitely my case). Will this be another damage to her emotional security that will quickly replace "I'll do anything" with "pffft". Does this all apply only when I'm nice and forgiving.

 

Please understand I'm not trying to be sarcastic or making disparaging remarks. This is important fur me and would like feedback her especially - if not against the rules - from the "better half of the humankind"

 

 

Let me please start with the statement that I do appreciate your point of view even when it's obviously different in many aspects forum mine.

 

To reiterate : I'm not waiting or counting on my FWW to fight for me after the divorce. Divorce is imminent as I've made clear to everyone involved.

 

However as soon as I'm getting a lot of "I'll do everything to repair the damage", "how could I earn bank your trust", " tell me please what could I do to get my husband back and I'll do it " ect - should I assume that it all applies only when we are technically married?

 

To me if she remains committed to all the above after that marriage record is expunged - this will mean a lot to me. If not (and thank you for explaining the likehood of that) - I'm prepared (at least logically) for that outcome.

[Realist3]

Based on a number of posts above it is clear to me that I have not summarised / described the summary of what I know in a more or less cohesive way.

 

This is predominately because I'm not good in writing personal staff. I'll post another attempt of summary soon (assuming that is what these comments suggest).

 

Will also answer any specific questions.

 

Thank you.

 

 

10 characters

Edited June 17, 2015 by Realist3

[No Limit]

Personally I don't see R happening and lasting with a spouse who refuses to spill the beans and instead prefers gaslightning and rug sweeping.

[BetrayedH]

Update : Seriously this is such an important point of view (and useful to me) I'd really like to know more. I mean the aspect of "I'll do anything" vs "emotional security".

If I take it one step further : the process of divorce is easy (technically) to control - a message to the lawyer and it is cancelled or on hold. Let's say I did that. This blow to her emotional security is out of the picture. But one's hypothetical (and my FWW real) husband is going to be a very pissed off and cold dude for a while (definitely my case). Will this be another damage to her emotional security that will quickly replace "I'll do anything" with "pffft". Does this all apply only when I'm nice and forgiving.

 

Please understand I'm not trying to be sarcastic or making disparaging remarks. This is important fur me and would like feedback her especially - if not against the rules - from the "better half of the humankind"

 

The fact of the matter is that infidelity is a breach of your wife's vows and a breach of your marital contract. That was your wife's choice. She "unilaterally" chose to take a crap all over the marriage at that point. So, now the ball is in your court. How do you respond? In my view, the natural consequence is that the marriage is over; the agreement is null and void.

 

Now, can you take actions that improve your chances of staying married? Sure. You can just accept that unacceptable treatment. And you can find all kinds of rationalizations for doing it, like trying to preserve your wife's emotional security so that a reconciliation is possible. Some people also say that trickle-truth, breaching NC, pining for the OM and so forth are symptoms that are to be expected as your wife clears away the "affair fog." They'd say you can't expect those emotional feelings to just instantly disappear.

 

So, how much more unacceptable behavior are you willing to tolerate to give yourself the best chance of reconciliation? You know, so she feels emotionally secure with you and stuff. And what does that say about you? I mean, her behavior was pretty disrespectful of you. How much more disrespect is acceptable? Does this approach seem unhealthy or desperate to you?

 

Considering that your wife doesn't seem to understand healthy boundaries in a marriage, does this communicate what healthy boundaries she should be abiding by now? Or does it teach her that she can breach boundaries and that's ok with you?

 

It's hard for me to communicate the range of my experiences with this. But I can tell you that I regret not taking a firmer stance in regards to infidelity in my marriage. My desperation to stop the bleeding with patience and understanding simply permitted my wife to continue lying, denying, and minimizing. I stayed there bleeding out, waiting for her to heal the wound that she inflicted. It was pathetic. It delayed my healing and it was counter productive to any efforts to reconcile.

 

Your wife needs to hit rock bottom, and then she may change. Soften the landing at your peril.

[MuddyFootprints]

I don't think an "I'm willing to do anything" attitude is helpful or sustainable in true reconciliation. It demonstrates weakness and a lack of personal boundaries, which both your wife and you need to firmly establish.

 

I don't get the sense that she is truly there yet.

 

Emotional security is of extreme importance for both of you. Unless you are both working to help each other feel safe, it's not going to work for either of you.

[Poutrew]

Seriously, I just don't see how any form of R is going to happen if the wife can't come clean about the actual mechanics of the affair. Was it emotional or physical? If physical, what was involved? Full on intercourse? Oral? Anal? For me, it'd be easier to get over an emotional affair, than a physical one. The thought of another mans spoor on or in my woman just creeps me out too much. My last gf, which I posted about on LS, was easy: a bite mark on the ass. A deal breaker.

 

 

Unfortunately, Zinger, I think you need to get a professional polygraph test done on the wife. Let her know that these things aren't like the lie detector games at a party. A real test involves hooking her up to a machine that measures brain waves, breathing rate, skin resistance, etc. The same exact question is going to be asked many times, with just small variations in the way it is asked. There will be many questions asked that seemingly have nothing to do with the affair, but will help the polygrapher build up a picture of the subject. The test will be exhausting, and emotionally traumatic. It could take many hours to complete. She will need to absolutely know that her future as a married woman will depend on her answering each question.

In the end,Zinger, you'll know your wife more thoroughly than you ever thought possible. Maybe more than any human has a right to know about another human. Whatever monster from her ID she has been hiding in her subconscious will be exposed for the world to see. If she refuses the test, then you'll have your answer. At that point details are irrelevant, and you'll at least have something concrete to base your next course of action on.

 

 

My guess is that she'll refuse and play the 'woe is me" card. If I were a psychic, I'd be telling you that you will soon be a bachelor...

[No Limit]

My guess is that she'll refuse and play the 'woe is me" card.

 

That is the equivalent of a confession to a PA. (Honestly, no doubt it was going on for a couple of months and physical.)

[Just a Guy]

Hi Folks, I don't get it. Right at the beginning of this thread I think Zinger made it amply clear that infidelity was a deal breaker and that his wife was, one way or the other, aware of it. That knowledge did NOT stop her from going ahead with her affair and, as has been amply reinforced here, it was most likely a PA rather than just an EA. With that in mind I do not understand why some people here are questioning Zinger's decision to go ahead with the divorce and are some how trying to make it appear that the WW is the victim in all this. Emotional Security, if at all that is at stake here, was thrown out the window by the WW and not by Zinger. I do not know how he can be accused by some people here of denying his WW the right to this Security and thereby being cast in the light of the perpetrator rather than the victim himself. In fact has anyone of those who are coming out in support of the WW thought about the pain and emotional suffering that Zinger has had to undergo ever since he confirmed that his wife was involved in an affair? If so I haven't seen it unless I missed it somehow. The debate about his divorcing his wife from a rigid standpoint and then standing back and looking for signs of his wife making efforts to recover the marriage and try and reconcile with him seem to me to be completely hypothetical, in fact unreal.

 

There have been cases where the WW has made strenuous efforts to reconcile with their betrayed spouses after they were divorced. LovingDKT3 and Sophie I think, are two such spouses so it is possible to reconcile even after a divorce and start off on a completely new footing. If it happens in Zinger's case so much the better for him.

 

Lastly I would say that it is entirely up to Zinger as to how he wants this matter to pan out. It is his prerogative to take action as he deems fit and the rest of us should just stand back and offer him helpful advice and not be judgmental of what he does and does not do. Warm wishes to all.

[sandylee1]

Well said justaguy.

 

Just because a WS spouse is remorseful, does not entiltle them to reconciliation.

 

They can bring down the heavens if they like. You don't have to forgive and reconcile.

[Grapesofwrath]

When you break your wedding vows , you can take that as marriage over if you get caught.

 

I'm married and if I cheated on my H and he filed for divorce, it's ALL on me. Same goes for if he cheated on me. There's no two ways about it.

 

If she doesn't want to fight fir Zinger , so be it , but she and her actions are 100% to blame for this marriage ending.

 

Divorce is a consequence of infidelity, not a punishment and when you step outside, you really don't have a leg to stand on.

 

Her infidelity caused the end of the marriage end of story.

 

When I talk with friends who are in troubled marriages and considering infidelity, this is precisely the point I make to them. If you cheat and you are caught, then the demise of the marriage becomes 100% about the infidelity. The WS loses all credibility. Even if he or she has a million legitimate reasons to be unhappy in the marriage, it doesn't matter anymore. The narrative is now about cheating.

[gettingstronger]

When I talk with friends who are in troubled marriages and considering infidelity, this is precisely the point I make to them. If you cheat and you are caught, then the demise of the marriage becomes 100% about the infidelity. The WS loses all credibility. Even if he or she has a million legitimate reasons to be unhappy in the marriage, it doesn't matter anymore. The narrative is now about cheating.

 

 

 

I have to agree- it would be what broke the camels back- when you decide to cheat over talk about what you are missing in your marriage, you have crossed a line that is hard to uncross- not that I am comparing cheating to stealing but if you say you stole because you needed XYZ, the judge is going to say, well what other alternatives did you explore before stealing-

 

Please don't take this off track comparing cheating and stealing- or play semantics- my point is, like or not, agree or disagree-cheating is one of those things that just sticks out as a really bad choice in dealing with any kind of martial woe-