To bust or not to bust

[81West]

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.

 

The bolded is reflective of what exactly NOBODY has said or implied here. I am running out of ways to repeat myself, but take some comfort in the fact that Zinger, at least, seems to understand what has been thrown into the mix for consideration.

[81West]

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 think this is an excellent and concise expression of the key issue here. If I may borrow it try one more time to make my point.

 

If a spouse is caught cheating and regrets it they often beg and plead for a second chance. They ask for a chance to prove their regret and remorse, to prove their loyalty going forward, to fix their terrible, terrible mistake. They beg the BS not to leave them, not to end the marriage. If the BS declines that offer and divorces them, that divorce is as you say 100% about the infidelity. The WS has chosen his or her own fate.

 

If the BS then wants/expects/hopes the WS to work to reconcile the relationship, AFTER THEY JUST CHOSE DIVORCE, the BS loses a great deal of credibility. The prospects for reconciliation become all about the fact that the BS chose to inflict a divorce on the WS who begged for that not to happen. Even if Zinger had a million good reasons to divorce his WS, it doesn't matter anymore. The reconciliation narrative is now about one partner inflicting an unwanted divorce on the other and not seeing that as as much of a fatal blow to a bond as cheating.

 

I have no idea how representative I am, but I think I'm a pretty reasonable and rational person. It is absolutely crazy in my mind to unilaterally use divorce as a stepping stone to a possible future reconciliation. It's like throwing Fat Man at Little Boy and then once that's all out of the way politely inquiring if I might get busy fixing things up now. No! You just exponentially compounded the destruction of the relationship in a way that is arguably more direct, more deliberate and more damaging than cheating. Just as some would never forgive cheating I would never be able to forgive somebody putting me through a horrible, unwanted, painful divorce if they were open to or intended reconciliation. I would never allow that cruel illogic in my own life. I would go to the ends of the earth to council others I cared about to never allow it in their lives. I cannot be the only one.

 

The point about emotional security was this: Zinger wants to 'test' his wife to see if she wants him or wants 'the security of the marriage'. Part of a woman wanting anyone is wanting to feel emotionally and physically secure. He cannot separate them. That was the point. If he takes away the security of the marriage no matter how deserved he has still struck a blow to the relationship that will change it, no matter who changed what first.

 

Bottom line: if Zinger is in fact open to considering reconciliation with a profound commitment from his wife to do what it takes to heal herself and her marriage, divorce is an an incredibly risky, rigid and nihilist way to get there. I can't speak for Zinger's wife, and despite what Zinger said I can predict the likelihood of anything. All I can tell you is if he did it to me I would accept the consequences of my cheating and put all my effort into bettering myself for the next person, not the person who used divorce as a punishment or to test my heart. Divorce is an effective solution to one thing only: ending a marriage and the commitment, bond, and future it represents.

[sandylee1]

The bolded is reflective of what exactly NOBODY has said or implied here. I am running out of ways to repeat myself, but take some comfort in the fact that Zinger, at least, seems to understand what has been thrown into the mix for consideration.

 

Abandonment cuts a woman to the emotional bone. Eventually people come to resent people who make them feel small, inadequate and powerless and she could easily see you as differently as you see her now.*

 

Clearly she understands she has put that at grave risk, but if you pull that pin YOU have crossed a line no less than she! Surely you can't think that breaking fidelity vows are any less or any more destructive to a marriage than actually, you know, unilaterally ending the marriage?*

 

81West

^^^^^^These comments you made sound like you were equally blaming Zinger.

[sandylee1]

I have no idea how representative I am, but I think I'm a pretty reasonable and rational person. It is absolutely crazy in my mind to unilaterally use divorce as a stepping stone to a possible future reconciliation.

 

 

You just exponentially compounded the destruction of the relationship in a way that is arguably more direct, more deliberate and MORE DAMAGING THAN CHEATING.

 

 

The point about emotional security was this: Zinger wants to 'test' his wife to see if she wants him or wants 'the security of the marriage'. Part of a woman wanting anyone is wanting to feel emotionally and physically secure. He cannot separate them. That was the point. If he takes away the security of the marriage no matter how deserved he has still struck a blow to the relationship that will change it, no matter who changed what first.

 

 

.

 

Talking away that security is the risk you take when you cheat.

If all she wants is emotional security why did she cheat....she had the marriage and cheated. The choice is or will be hers .

 

Many betrayed spouses opt for divorce even when they think they may be open to reconciliation. They feel the marriage is tainted and want a new marriage to start afresh.

 

You can't know unless you've been there .

 

If that security was so important, then she wouldn't have risked it. Especially when he made it clear from the get go.

 

She has to know he is serious.

Edited June 18, 2015 by sandylee1
edit to correct

[81West]

Abandonment cuts a woman to the emotional bone. Eventually people come to resent people who make them feel small, inadequate and powerless and she could easily see you as differently as you see her now.*

 

Clearly she understands she has put that at grave risk, but if you pull that pin YOU have crossed a line no less than she! Surely you can't think that breaking fidelity vows are any less or any more destructive to a marriage than actually, you know, unilaterally ending the marriage?*

 

81West

^^^^^^These comments you made sound like you were equally blaming Zinger.

 

In the context of a possible future reconciliation, Zinger becomes the one to blame for further destroying the marriage with a divorce. Yes. You can't see that? She begs for another chance, and his choice is divorce. Perfectly appropriate as a response to infidelity, perfectly cruel and destructive as a precursor to a future reconciliation. And by Zinger's own words, she would still be the one having to 'put in the miles'. I would never do it. My feelings and sense of future emotional safety with that person would be irrevocably changed by somebody who divorced me, no matter how much my actions warranted it.

 

If I read this situation and Zinger's emotions correctly my advice would be to take divorce off the table for a period of a six months or so, establish a physical separation if that is feasible and affordable, and simply meet to talk and to listen. He doesn't owe her any compassion at this time, or any forgiveness. But maybe given their history he could decide that he owes both of them some curiosity and at least a small measure of initial restraint.

[81West]

 

Talking away that security is the risk you take when you cheat.

If all she wants is emotional security why did she cheat....she had the marriage and cheated. The choice is or will be hers .

 

Many betrayed spouses opt for divorce even when they think they may be open to reconciliation. They feel the marriage is tainted and want a new marriage to start afresh.

 

You can't know unless you've been there .

 

If that security was so important, then she wouldn't have risked it. Especially when he made it clear from the get go.

 

She has to know he is serious.

 

And there you have it. Anybody who divorces somebody better be prepared to be taken very, very seriously. Be careful what you wish for.

[81West]

Bottom line: if Zinger is in fact open to considering reconciliation with a profound commitment from his wife to do what it takes to heal herself and her marriage, divorce is an an incredibly risky, rigid and nihilist way to get there. I can't speak for Zinger's wife, and despite what Zinger said I can't predict the likelihood of anything. All I can tell you is if he did it to me I would accept the consequences of my cheating and put all my effort into bettering myself for the next person, not the person who used divorce as a punishment or to test my heart. Divorce is an effective solution to one thing only: ending a marriage and the commitment, bond, and future it represents.

 

Sorry...quoting myself to correct can typo to can't. Pretty big difference!

[eric1]

In the context of a possible future reconciliation, Zinger becomes the one to blame for further destroying the marriage with a divorce. Yes. You can't see that? She begs for another chance, and his choice is divorce. Perfectly appropriate as a response to infidelity, perfectly cruel and destructive as a precursor to a future reconciliation. And by Zinger's own words, she would still be the one having to 'put in the miles'. I would never do it. My feelings and sense of future emotional safety with that person would be irrevocably changed by somebody who divorced me, no matter how much my actions warranted it.

 

If I read this situation and Zinger's emotions correctly my advice would be to take divorce off the table for a period of a six months or so, establish a physical separation if that is feasible and affordable, and simply meet to talk and to listen. He doesn't owe her any compassion at this time, or any forgiveness. But maybe given their history he could decide that he owes both of them some curiosity and at least a small measure of initial restraint.

 

The thing that you're not getting here is that Zinger doesn't give a crap if she puts in the miles. The minute she took another man as a boyfriend their marriage was done. Kaput. Not worth saving from any perspective.

 

Now what's going to happen afterwards is she'll have the freedom of doing whatever she wants (well, ethically this time) and he'll have the freedom to do what he wants. That is a pretty blank canvas. I'm sure he'll consider dating at some point as well he probably should. She will probably as well, particularly considering she already is dating.

 

His throwaway comment about the possibility of forming a relationship again after marriage is just one possible scenario and for that unlikely scenario to occur countless things would need to happen. We could probably list them but the first few would be that she actually became a different person independent of Zinger pushing her to do so, that she actually wanted to try again and that Zinger wanted to try again.

 

Zinger could get divorced and find true love three months later

. That's is prerogative. Maybe he wants to golf for six months without the burden of all this hell she unleashed on him. That's his right. Maybe he wants to join tinder and hammer 19 year old blonds for a few years. Good for him.

 

He probably doesn't know what he wants, but he just knows that he needs to escape this poison, lick his wounds then face life full-on free of this millstone.

[BetrayedH]

I think this is an excellent and concise expression of the key issue here. If I may borrow it try one more time to make my point.

 

If a spouse is caught cheating and regrets it they often beg and plead for a second chance. They ask for a chance to prove their regret and remorse, to prove their loyalty going forward, to fix their terrible, terrible mistake. They beg the BS not to leave them, not to end the marriage. If the BS declines that offer and divorces them, that divorce is as you say 100% about the infidelity. The WS has chosen his or her own fate.

 

If the BS then wants/expects/hopes the WS to work to reconcile the relationship, AFTER THEY JUST CHOSE DIVORCE, the BS loses a great deal of credibility. The prospects for reconciliation become all about the fact that the BS chose to inflict a divorce on the WS who begged for that not to happen. Even if Zinger had a million good reasons to divorce his WS, it doesn't matter anymore. The reconciliation narrative is now about one partner inflicting an unwanted divorce on the other and not seeing that as as much of a fatal blow to a bond as cheating.

 

I have no idea how representative I am, but I think I'm a pretty reasonable and rational person. It is absolutely crazy in my mind to unilaterally use divorce as a stepping stone to a possible future reconciliation. It's like throwing Fat Man at Little Boy and then once that's all out of the way politely inquiring if I might get busy fixing things up now. No! You just exponentially compounded the destruction of the relationship in a way that is arguably more direct, more deliberate and more damaging than cheating. Just as some would never forgive cheating I would never be able to forgive somebody putting me through a horrible, unwanted, painful divorce if they were open to or intended reconciliation. I would never allow that cruel illogic in my own life. I would go to the ends of the earth to council others I cared about to never allow it in their lives. I cannot be the only one.

 

The point about emotional security was this: Zinger wants to 'test' his wife to see if she wants him or wants 'the security of the marriage'. Part of a woman wanting anyone is wanting to feel emotionally and physically secure. He cannot separate them. That was the point. If he takes away the security of the marriage no matter how deserved he has still struck a blow to the relationship that will change it, no matter who changed what first.

 

Bottom line: if Zinger is in fact open to considering reconciliation with a profound commitment from his wife to do what it takes to heal herself and her marriage, divorce is an an incredibly risky, rigid and nihilist way to get there. I can't speak for Zinger's wife, and despite what Zinger said I can predict the likelihood of anything. All I can tell you is if he did it to me I would accept the consequences of my cheating and put all my effort into bettering myself for the next person, not the person who used divorce as a punishment or to test my heart. Divorce is an effective solution to one thing only: ending a marriage and the commitment, bond, and future it represents.

 

I think you can make your point without words and expressions like "inflicting," "struck a blow," and "punishment."

 

The wayward spouse chooses to risk divorce when they decide to betray their spouse. Divorce is a natural and understood consequence of marital betrayal and it's one that the wayward chooses to risk. No one inflicts it upon them but themselves. And it's perfectly healthy for a betrayed spouse to enforce that very reasonable boundary that says, if you break your end of the contract, I am not keeping my end of the contract. YOU chose divorce and that's what you got. If anyone unilaterally chose to end the marriage, it's the wayward.

 

Now after a divorce, if the couple decides to forge a new marital agreement, superb. And the boundaries and consequences are clear and obviously real. The old marriage is dead. Want a new one? You obviously know what you're getting into and the consequences of violating that agreement because they weren't pretend consequences; they were real. Choose to drop a nuke on the marriage? It's nuked. Don't expect me to un-nuke it for you.

[sandylee1]

The thing that you're not getting here is that Zinger doesn't give a crap if she puts in the miles. The minute she took another man as a boyfriend their marriage was done. Kaput. Not worth saving from any perspective.

 

Now what's going to happen afterwards is she'll have the freedom of doing whatever she wants (well, ethically this time) and he'll have the freedom to do what he wants. That is a pretty blank canvas. I'm sure he'll consider dating at some point as well he probably should. She will probably as well, particularly considering she already is dating.

 

His throwaway comment about the possibility of forming a relationship again after marriage is just one possible scenario and for that unlikely scenario to occur countless things would need to happen. We could probably list them but the first few would be that she actually became a different person independent of Zinger pushing her to do so, that she actually wanted to try again and that Zinger wanted to try again.

 

Zinger could get divorced and find true love three months later

. That's is prerogative. Maybe he wants to golf for six months without the burden of all this hell she unleashed on him. That's his right. Maybe he wants to join tinder and hammer 19 year old blonds for a few years. Good for him.

 

He probably doesn't know what he wants, but he just knows that he needs to escape this poison, lick his wounds then face life full-on free of this millstone.

 

Eric , you got it right here and the thing I find is that there are more single ladies , than men.

 

Zinger sounds in a good position to have a great dating experience with a woman who won't cheat.

[sandylee1]

In the context of a possible future reconciliation, Zinger becomes the one to blame for further destroying the marriage with a divorce. Yes. You can't see that?

 

. But maybe given their history he could decide that he owes both of them some curiosity and at least a small measure of initial restraint.

 

No , I disagree that Zinger is to blame for destroying the marriage. Cheating seals the deal. She SINGLE handedly destroyed the marriage by cheating .

 

And given their history..........she didn't give a damn when she cheated, so why should Zinger.

 

Let's agree that your view and that of everyone else differs on this point.

 

I'd do the same as Zinger actually. If my H then truly wanted me back......he'd have to do all the legwork and woeing, but I'll enjoy being single and seeing other guys in the meanwhile.

[Friskyone4u]

Amazed at the implication that Zinger is somehow to blame for divorce or whatever happens. He owes her nothing. Its called consequences of infidelity.

 

It does seem like he really wants to know what really happened between WW and boy toy , and he seems to have the resources to be able to afford a polygraph . One question could determine if this was only EA.

 

Like I said before none of us know anything really of exactly what she has told him other than the probable untruth that they never had sex

[zinger]

That is the point here I'm struggling to get across (here, family even thatIC). This is my fault :I'm not equipped to clearly discuss these matters in writing or verbally. I'll try again. Yes I'm testing my wife. I need to get my trust back. I see no other way of getting it back. The divorce is not for punishment. And yes, I need her to ' put the miles'. Why? Because otherwise I'll be looking at myself as a "doormat" as it commonly referred here who let his wife be worth other man and just swallowed it with no consequences. Why only divorce (I get it how devastating is it)? Please tell me what else remain for me and I swear I will consider this. I did read around here and the other forum Eric had suggested. They talk about transparency, commitment, new boundaries, signs of love, etc. You see, I had all of that . At the end it comes to Zinger fixing this mess one again as I've been doing this since I remember. That is what I'm expected to do. So it will end with "ok, I won't do it again". Not good enough for me. If a drunk driver kills someone dear to me, am I supposed to be happy and at peace when court releases him with assistance he won't do it again, end of story?

 

To me if she deals with divorce (and this is where I appreciate your input really) this will mean something. Tell me what else can I expect from her as an alternative and I'll reconsider and post here a copy of email to my lawyer to stop the papers.

 

If an emotional blow off divorce is to devastating for her and she'll prefer to "better herself for another man", as you put it, so be it. I'll just accept she stayed married to me for the sake of security and move on.

 

Clear as mud isn't it?

 

The point about emotional security was this: Zinger wants to 'test' his wife to see if she wants him or wants 'the security of the marriage'. Part of a woman wanting anyone is wanting to feel emotionally and physically secure. He cannot separate them. That was the point. If he takes away the security of the marriage no matter how deserved he has still struck a blow to the relationship that will change it, no matter who changed what first.

 

Bottom line: if Zinger is in fact open to considering reconciliation with a profound commitment from his wife to do what it takes to heal herself and her marriage, divorce is an an incredibly risky, rigid and nihilist way to get there. I can't speak for Zinger's wife, and despite what Zinger said I can predict the likelihood of anything. All I can tell you is if he did it to me I would accept the consequences of my cheating and put all my effort into bettering myself for the next person, not the person who used divorce as a punishment or to test my heart. Divorce is an effective solution to one thing only: ending a marriage and the commitment, bond, and future it represents.

[zinger]

Zinger sounds in a good position to have a great dating experience with a woman who won't cheat.

 

Looks like these women are hard to find at least in my surroundings.

[zinger]

Ok, the digest is:

Met mid spring at after art show party.

She had seen a talent that is being held back by routine life

Started helping and supporting.

He felt in love, she became "emotionally attached"

Knew what she's is doing is wrong but loved his emotional dependency on her and flirting, compliments and admiration from him.

Claims still loves me.

Claims never told him she loves him or considered leaving me for him

Spending a lot of time together talking and "connecting at shortish level"

At times almost like looking after him (she bought him some painting supplies and gave reference for a job ad an example)

He started seeing the scene for intimacy, invitation to sirens time alone in his place etc

She resisted but didn't cut it.

Confirmed hand holding, touching faces and as of recent confession wrapping his arms around her shoulders and waist and trying to hold her.

Claims sometimes it was also"motherly".

He never asked her to divorce me for him but said "its painful for him that we are together ' and" she deserves better husband than me, I don't deserve her". She said to him she didn't want to talk about this (eg. me)

 

That's is in short what I know for now.

 

 

Like I said before none of us know anything really of exactly what she has told him other than the probable untruth that they never had sex

[zinger]

Pretty much spot on. Only I hate golf.

 

 

The thing that you're not getting here is that Zinger doesn't give a crap if she puts in the miles. The minute she took another man as a boyfriend their marriage was done. Kaput. Not worth saving from any perspective.

 

Now what's going to happen afterwards is she'll have the freedom of doing whatever she wants (well, ethically this time) and he'll have the freedom to do what he wants. That is a pretty blank canvas. I'm sure he'll consider dating at some point as well he probably should. She will probably as well, particularly considering she already is dating.

 

His throwaway comment about the possibility of forming a relationship again after marriage is just one possible scenario and for that unlikely scenario to occur countless things would need to happen. We could probably list them but the first few would be that she actually became a different person independent of Zinger pushing her to do so, that she actually wanted to try again and that Zinger wanted to try again.

 

Zinger could get divorced and find true love three months later

. That's is prerogative. Maybe he wants to golf for six months without the burden of all this hell she unleashed on him. That's his right. Maybe he wants to join tinder and hammer 19 year old blonds for a few years. Good for him.

 

He probably doesn't know what he wants, but he just knows that he needs to escape this poison, lick his wounds then face life full-on free of this millstone.

[SycamoreCircle]

I haven't kept up with all of the details. I will say this...her description of their relationship sure sounds conscientious. Bottom line---to paint a landscape, you can remind a cloud that it looks perfect in this one spot. But when the next wind blows... a cloud is only a cloud.

[zinger]

I'm absolutely ready to be single right now. This is what is going to happen and - as I posted above - it'll take some hard work to convince me to change that.

 

 

And there you have it. Anybody who divorces somebody better be prepared to be taken very, very seriously. Be careful what you wish for.

[georgia girl]

Zinger,

 

My first post on your thread and I am married but have never cheated or been cheated on. With those disclosures, what you describe above to me is not a physical affair. I will leave it up to others to weigh in, but I don't think it was much of an emotional affair.

 

Now gently, because you have been through so much, may I suggest that divorce - or the nuclear option - may be because you are hurt and angry. That, in fact, your current course of action is as self-destructive as hers.

 

Before divorce is the only option available to you, perhaps the two of you could both find individual and a marriage counselor to work with. You can always divorce later, but there really isn't any way to "undo" a divorce. In the end, I don't think -at least right now - what you want is a life without your wife. That is what divorce means. You have to realistically expect that you will have no relationship with her if you divorce.

 

So sorry if this feels unsupportive. I can't imagine your pain. I just don't want to see you compound it.

 

Hugs, GG

[zinger]

Regretfully I'm not sure I understand...

 

 

I haven't kept up with all of the details. I will say this...her description of their relationship sure sounds conscientious. Bottom line---to paint a landscape, you can remind a cloud that it looks perfect in this one spot. But when the next wind blows... a cloud is only a cloud.

[Furious]

Ok, the digest is:

Met mid spring at after art show party.

She had seen a talent that is being held back by routine life

Started helping and supporting.

He felt in love, she became "emotionally attached"

Knew what she's is doing is wrong but loved his emotional dependency on her and flirting, compliments and admiration from him.

Claims still loves me.

Claims never told him she loves him or considered leaving me for him

Spending a lot of time together talking and "connecting at shortish level"

At times almost like looking after him (she bought him some painting supplies and gave reference for a job ad an example)

He started seeing the scene for intimacy, invitation to sirens time alone in his place etc

She resisted but didn't cut it.

Confirmed hand holding, touching faces and as of recent confession wrapping his arms around her shoulders and waist and trying to hold her.

Claims sometimes it was also"motherly".

He never asked her to divorce me for him but said "its painful for him that we are together ' and" she deserves better husband than me, I don't deserve her". She said to him she didn't want to talk about this (eg. me)

 

That's is in short what I know for now.

 

 

Is this the guy who ran out the back door when you arrived at his work to talk to him. Is this the guy who had no problem with your wife buying him art supplies and accepting an expensive watch as a gift. Really, he has his own place and they never slept together. Really...they only held hands. This guy accepted gifts and allowed your wife to pay for his "art supplies, but he thinks you're not good enough for her.

 

This guy is a player, the staving artist, who acts deep and seeks a woman with deep pockets.

 

Common sense Implies your wife your wife is lying. Really, they just held hands and hugged.

[Morro72]

Claims sometimes it was also"motherly".

I sure wish my mother had bought me a Tag Heuer watch.

[m.snow]

This guy is a player, the staving artist, who acts deep and seeks a woman with deep pockets.

 

Common sense Implies your wife your wife is lying. Really, they just held hands and hugged.

 

the dude is a pick-up artist! no pun intended. stuff he is portraying and say are like from how to pick-up chicks 101 wayne dating tips.

 

she went to his place and no sex come on. they had sex. period.

 

but but but.. just read this thread.

 

has the OP ever had an EA or PA? from what your writing i don't think so.

your an honest man in a not so honest world.

 

Don't Divorce your wife have sex with her, play her for all she's worth don't kick her to the curve just yet!

 

give her the chance to make up, have great sex if its not adding up to what you want. try to find other women.

[beatcuff]

To me if she deals with divorce (and this is where I appreciate your input really) this will mean something. Tell me what else can I expect from her as an alternative and I'll reconsider and post here a copy of email to my lawyer to stop the papers.

 

If an emotional blow off divorce is to devastating for her and she'll prefer to "better herself for another man", as you put it, so be it. I'll just accept she stayed married to me for the sake of security and move on.

 

if i understand your dilemma: you are attempting to determine whether she wants to be with you for you OR she wants to be M to you for M (the security it offers, the prevention of shame when D happens, etc).

 

if she wants the former (you for you) you may consider R, if the latter (for M) you will D.

 

if that is the question, i am not certain how you can determine which, but instead offer this: if W posted on this site about her A and the current situation the overwhelming advise would be for HER to start the 180. further as the proceedings move along she will become convinced it's over (which the 180 gave her a head start). so by the time D is final, she has resigned to the fact that D is what YOU wanted and she will move forward without you.

 

your expectations she will continue to pine for you after D and want to restart are extremely slim. her family and friends (and this board) will be constantly telling her to move on, 'get over him'. so even if she really wants you will never know.

 

my only suggestion, and its weak, would be to sit down and tell her your dilemma and have her respond. hopefully she will provide an honest answer: the best one would actually be: "i don't know". REAL honest thoughts and responses are filled with doubt (are we certain about anything -- except death). the faster the "anything to save M" comes, my rather poor intuition would be she wants M for M not you.

[m.snow]

i have not heard anything about kids? does OP have kids with wife?