rprynne, Suzet*, tigger, Lady Clueless, Eagle15, Mel et al...

Thank you all so much for your input. I would encourage you to consider reposting your remarks over on the Exposure 101 thread since that is where they are much more likely to be seen. (This thread was designed to eventually fade away into the anals of the MB forum... somewhere back on pg one thousand and someting-or-other.)

No time for that other "promised" post at the moment... but I rarely make a threat that I don't follow through on. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

At Peace,
I'm sorry if what I wrote was misleading about your situation. I was going on memory. Thanks for the clarification.

No biggie, SC <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I just wanted to clarify "for the record!"

Lori

rprynne, I appreciate your response as very thoughtful; I must say it made quite a bit of sense. I too believe that widespread exposure is helpful in some cases, but not in all. As for name calling, I will ignore that because it really makes the proponent of that argument appear dreadfully foolish. It usually means that poster doesn't have much content in his/her argument. Mrs. Wondering, I do appreciate the tremendous strength my husband displayed by choosing to forgive me and to work on the M. He is indeed a wonderful man, and I erred tremendously in my A. I am not, however, in a fog...

smartcookie --
this has been an interesting post to read.

I'm very curious about who the resentment would be directed towards. ??

Would a WS harbor resentment towards a BS who exposed them? Why? Wouldn't a WS feel embarressment, shame, humiliation?

But why resentment? Wouldn't that imply that they feel anger about being exposed? Isn't that ALWAYS a possibility when you're misbehaving -- that someone will find out?

To me, that means they are still in "WS" mode rather than "FWS" mode.
Because to anyone who is truly a FWS, they know that exposure is a consequence of THEIR OWN ACTIONS. No one else is to blame.

Exposure for me was a catalyst to personal recovery. Without it, I would never have had to face MYSELF and my own conflict of behavior vs. values. I would have continued to hide behind the facade of my "image".

Well, I got thrown off my pedestal, and I had to face that I am no better / different / superior to anyone else. I came through with more conviction, character, compassion, and strength than I would have if I got to hide.

And for the record, I am divorced. It had nothing to do with resenting exposure. It had everything to do with the state of my marriage prior to my affair. And I deeply regret the path I took of "medicating" myself with an affair. It was the biggest mistake of my life.

Exposure? Its a consequence all WS face when having an affair, and the only person to blame is ourselves.

smartcookie, I don't find this portrayal of your initiative to be honest or convincing at all. It is clear to anyone, except the foghorn crowd, that you are not "seeking answers" at all, but simply framing a pre-formed conclusion - that you know you can't hope to substantiate - in the form of a "question." You can't pretend that you didn't already have this opinion when you "asked" the question. Your closed mind is evidenced by your continual avoidance of the NUMEROUS rebuttals that have answered your charge. You ignore any and all that don't support your "concern" of resentment and instead gravitate to only those who tell you want you want to hear.

So, it is you who is blindly following a pre-fixed premise that you can't support and who is averse to learning anything. And remember, those have been here for some time have experience with this, YOU DON'T. You ignore experienced, successful advice in favor of a "fear" that is founded on nothing but your own very personal bias. So who is being blind here, smartcookie?

You are like the falling down drunk who comes into an AA meeting to tell them how to do it and asks lots of "questions." We always tell him if he would take the cotton out of his ears and put it in his mouth he might learn something. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Your assertion that exposure is an impediment to recovery simply can't be supported. You use this imaginary point, that you have just made up, to validate your premise. But, you offer NO substantiation AT ALL and expect to be taken seriously.

We have explained to you over and over again, and you don't seem to hear us, that no one EXCEPT THE WS has any control over their "resentment." Only the WS has that control.

Further, resentment is not something to accommodated, but to be DISCOURAGED, because it is a character defect. So, instead of trying to change the world to accommodate someone's character defect, why not focus on ways to help the freshly busted develop some character by taking some accountability for their actions?

Now THAT would be a PRODUCTIVE endeavor!

Yes, I DO call your motives into question. GUILTY! If you read my post just above this, I explain why I believe this. A person who is truly seeking to learn does not have a PRE-FORMED opinion and they do not continually ignore opinions [many from very experienced people] that are counter to that pre-formed opinion.

Unfortunately, you are not being helpful with this thread by encouraging others to validate a character defect and PROTECT folks from the consequences of their actions. If you want to help, you should help other WS' see that their resentment is very inappropriate and help them deal with the consequences in a MATURE, PRODUCTIVE manner. That would be an exercise in character building that would go along way in redemption.

And for the record, I am a huge fan of exposure for two reasons.

The personal recovery aspect of a WS having to face their actions with no where to hide.

And;

To remove another "tool" from the WS's arsonal. I really thought I could keep my affair hidden...Coax my husband through a divorce...And suddenly have the OM appear on the scene (after a suitable timeframe) and have everyone be HAPPY for me! I thought I could play spin-doctor and have everyone believe that we had a terrible marriage, did everything possible to save it (like attend 2 MC sessions, that way I could tell everyone we "tried" counselling!) but *sigh* it just wasn't meant to be.

Hey Lexxxy,
Really good points. I want to give my persepective on the questions you asked when I have more time tomorrow... but in the meantime... would you mind sharing a few more details about your situation -- like to whom your H exposed and how they reacted? That's the stuff that I'm really curious about (and yes -- shoot me -- have my own opinion about). Thanks.

ML, on the contrary, I believe that SC is really trying to discover some answers. Your post by its very nature, blindly follows only one set of principles and allows for no deviations or true discussions

*thud*

To the Foggy;

Foggy is not a bad word. It's merely an assesment by those that have come before you of your current position. I've been foggy, Mrs. Wonderings has been foggy...almost everyone here has been foggy at one point or another dealing with this mess. The term is thrown around here quite often as a way to say "come on, think about what you are saying/arguing...you are so close to processing this and you just refuse". We also want to make clear to newbies that your advice, statements, arguments, questions should be, in our opinions "caveated" (if thats a word) and/or disregarded as your perspective is not YET in alignment with the principles here on MB.

We are not condemning you to a lifetime of fogginess (though I am certain some remain there). We are hopeful that your perspective will change and become more healthy. By sticking around and continuing with these debates seeds of clarity ARE certainly being planted. So keep going but try not to take offense to us so easily for one day you will be us, no kidding. We are thankful MB has provided the forum for your (and our) development as we ALL put our minds around this momentus event that occured in all our lives. MB, really is the best infidelity recovery program known today. I don't think I could improve it and I really don't see how one fresh out of an affair could even conceive of improving it, but I understand how the fogginess makes one try.

When Mrs. Wondering and I first arrived (I read first but she initiated us posting), she and I both poked fun at the cult like attitudes that were being presented to us. We too thought some of the methods were being portrayed to rigidly and were QUESTIONABLE, to say the least. We thought we could swath our own path. We WERE foggy then so we completely understand and SEE where you all are coming from now. No worries, we love ya anyway.

On the other hand, I have a sneeking suspicion that 1 or more of you may be other than you say you are. Celt, in particular, strikes me as potentially a full blown WS, a WS that is now divorced or an OP. Come on, a year recovered BS that thinks exposure is a bad thing, continual posts on every exposure thread here debating intricacies which are quite clear and is proud of the fact he "saved" his wife's reputation by not exposing her affair. I'm a BS that didn't expose and "saved" my wifes reputation but WE (the Mrs. and I) see absolutely clearly I should have exposed at least to her parents and the single OM's family. It would likely have cut weeks off her 3 month affair. Accordingly, we now consistently encourage others to do FULL exposure in accordance with MB principles. In my opinion, Celt's posts appear specifically designed to stir the pot, distract us from our intended purpose (of helping real couples afflicted by infidelty), play on newbie BS fears, and pointedly attack Melody Lane as she IS one of the many but perhaps the most outspoken "affair buster" superhero. I don't know if this is a concerted organized attack on MB or a personal vendetta against Melody Lane and/or MB...but I suspect it, nonetheless. Sfjaj, a few others and even you Cookie I suspect. Not an accusation, just a suspicion. But then again, I am a conspiracist. I'd investigate myself if I thought I'd find anything. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

On the other hand, we have recently had a handful of WW's show up. Last June when I arrived I only saw a few WW's regularly posting and when a new WW arrived they were usually an island of dissent/fogginess and rarely got support and thus rarely swam against the stream for long on the board. However, with so many arriving at nearly the same time the foggy have been recently embolden to post their opinions and advice regardless of the fact they are mistaken and contrary to solid MB principles. Notice I am not saying they are wrong, IMO they are just not of the proper perspective YET to internalize the brillance of the MB program and ALL its components so they question the PROFESSIONALLY designed, TRIED and TESTED narrow MB path. It doesn't help that they have since been told that their "opinions" no matter how fogged out are somehow valuable and should be respected. I guess we all do really in essence respect the opinion; but, recognize and point it out for what it is, foggy, so that newbies are hopefully not distracted. We respect the foggy individuals as what they are and as they post here PROCESSING what they need to process to become healthy again, whether individually, as a marital partner or as a divorcee. We all are here rooting for you all to fully get it.

BTW, I still consider myself foggy on some issues including in particular conflict avoidance. I am trying to learn and get better but its tough to break old engrained habits. The difference is, I would not begin to tell, question or advise people, how to address their conflict avoidance issues, let alone in opposition to the stated professional principles, until I had at least got a handle on my own.

Foggy is NOT a put down, it's who you are and who I am. I believe us to be at very differing levels of fogginess, but, I guess, thats just my opinion. I wish you all a succesful journey...we really do want to see you on the other side of these arguments and healthy/healthier one day.

Mr. Wondering

Just slidin' in to blow the FOGHORN after peeling myself off the floor from my own *thud* Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />...

I am currently at one of our stores and incredibly busy, this is our "season"...

I, too, will return...Though, Melody is doing an excellent job, as usual...as are others that I don't have time to specifically name, for fear of forgetting one of you...

Thank you new beginnings for the very flattering compliment...I sincerely appreciate it...

smartcookie...Flukette is an excellent example of a FWW that WAS exposed and IS in a RECOVERED marriage...I pray that she will come here and give her story...in an effort to repair *some* of the damage done here...

Mrs. W

So what is being in a "fog" in MB terms?

Mr. Wondering puts it this way:
When I first came here on MB (over a year ago), I understood fog to be a term in which the WS could not "see" the "A" for what it is and and how an "A" is the cruelest thing a person can do to their spouse. At the time I first started to post here, I was in deep withdrawals and could not "see" and was in a "fog". I admit that. I can see now how "foggy" I was a year ago.

But, lately, it seems that the word "fog" is defined as any person that does not agree 100% with MB principles. If any poster should question MB principles, they are automatically told they are in a "fog".

I did a search on the word "fog" on Dr. Harley's articles and only got one hit. Here is the only place I can find "fog" as used by Dr. Harley.:

I found this is the article titled "What are Plan A and Plan B?"


As I said earlier, I always understood the term "fog" here on MB to mean a WS who is in the throes of the pain of withdrawal symptoms. Their eyes are "fogged" due to their pain they are feeling from the withdrawal of the affair.

How did the term "fog" evolve to mean someone who doesn't agree 100% with MB Principles? How did the term "fog" evolve to mean "a person having questions that differ from MB Principles"? Is this how all you MB vets (as you call yourselves) view the term "fog"?

2BNormal,

When I arrived at MB, in 1999, yes, "fog" was a term we used strictly to describe a WS who was... as Harley says in your quote, "Foggy".

As the years have passed, and more folks have joined the forums, discussions have ensued which question if the BS isn't in their own kind of fog; sometimes, anyway. It seems clear many of us (myself, included) are in a fog at different times during our personal recovery... and as Mr. Wondering said above: Foggy is NOT a put down, it's who you are and who I am.

Ultimately, I can only speak for myself on whether or not "fog" means 100% adherence to the MB principles. To me, it does NOT.

Exposure...right.

I have some experience of exposure.

1. Threatening to expose
when I first confronted OM on D-day, he and Squid called OM GF to prepare her saying "Bob is paranoid, nothings happening you know that. Baby why don't we go on vacation to Majorca to show our love to each other".

OM took GF on a romantic holiday to Majorca. He TXTed Squid 177 times in five days while there.

2. OM GF begged me for proof as she was confused. By a miracle I had found a stache of OMs sickening love letters where in his own handwriting he referred to the sex and intimacy he had shared with Squid.

OM GF was DEVASTATED and offered OM half of everything uncontested if only he would f'k off and die. This catalysed the end of the affair, and not only the repair of MY family but of OMs family too. The OP BS has a RIGHT to know what their spouse is up to IMO. Any consequences of telling OP Spouse is just a consequence of the affair, NOT of exposing it.

3. I exposed to some of Squids girlfriends, hoping they would be a good influence. Almost ALL were full of "follow your heart" cosmo bullsh1t, it was useless exposure.

4. My MIL was dying. Her mortal diagnosis certainly catalysed Squids affair. I decided after prayer nOT to tell Nan, so she would not die ashamed of her proudest daughter. I do not regret that decision, as long before she died in November, Squid had once again become a daughter to be PROUD of.

So do I believe in exposure ? UTTERLY. Would I 'scatter gun' expose in retrospect ? No. I think exposure was perfect in my situation. If OM had not had a GF or spouse I would have told the world, however.


Finally to all who think MB is a cult or too prescriptive I say two things:

1. Proven instructions should be followed fully. An Sutomobile with three wheels is not 75% as effective as one with four wheels. It takes all the stuff to indicate all the benefits, like MB.
2. As adults in democracies you will note the lack of a sticker on "surviving an affair" saying "you MUST do MB to the letter on pain of fatwa or death".

Do as you would, but don't argue non-MB stuff works better than MB stuff in surviving affairs. It doesn't work for everyone, but as James Dobson says in "LMBT" "the fastest horses don;t always wn, but you should still back them anyway"

All blessings.

[No one ever said the term "fog" applies to "anyone who disagrees with MB principles." But rather to a pattern of FOGGY THINKING that indicates a disconnect from reality. The FOG is in no way exclusive to just those in withdrawal and no one has ever said as much. It starts with the onset of the affair and can last well beyond withdrawal, if any. With most, it is most acute DURING the affair. It also applies to some Bs'es who are here for entirely different reasons with an entirely different set of traits.

In the case of a WS, I define fog as a state of mind that is not very far in their recovery, if at all. That may emcompass a lack of self honesty and accountability about their bad behavior. This stunted recovery is usually demonstrated by a lack of remorse towards one's victims, continued blameshifting and a strong aversion to anything that resembles accountability for one's actions.[an aversion to exposure to one's victims or others is usually a good sign]

A person who is not fogged out will NOT resent exposure as they have accepted the truth, that they are to blame and no one else. You see this transition from many of our TRULY RECOVERED FWS' on this thread. [see MrsW, newbeginning, KiwiJ, Lexxy, atpeace and others]

The main one we see here is a tendency to BLAME THE VICTIM for any potential "resentment" the WS may feel when facing the consequences of her actions.

Now, you are right that sometimes this is not due to a FOG, but rather to a constitutional INABILITY to be honest with oneself or perhaps a LACK OF MORALS. In other words, they will NEVER recover, because that is AS GOOD AS IT GETS. And, yes, we do have some FWS' here who demonstrate that trait, sadly. Some have been in so-called "recovery" for quite some time.

They are simply constitutionally incapable of being honest and accountable for thier actions. They have very little remorse and are hostile towards BSes. They will NEVER experience what we would consider a true recovery because their problems stem from a deep seated CHARACTER DEFECT, rather than an ABERRATION OF CHARACTER.

THAT is how I generally define the "fog."

If foggy is not a put down, but describes who you are and who I am , then I would like to see the term "fog" or "foggy" clearly defined by the MB vets that throw around the word. I would like to understand why this term "fog" is taken out of context from the original term as meant by Dr. Harley in his articles.

As I felt the term "fog" meant a year ago, I didn't feel it was a put down at that time, because it was meant as a term for a WS that was still in the pain of withdrawals and could not "see" clearly as a result.

But, if the term "fog" evolved to mean something other than this, it could very well be viewed as a put down by FWS's who feel they are no longer in the pains of withdrawals. Because I have only viewed the term "fog" as how Dr. Harley stated it in his articles, once I was over my withdrawals, telling a poster he or she is in a fog can be viewed as a put down. Why? Because we are FORMER WS's who have overcome the affair and can see the affair for what it was. We can see the affair for the cruelty it caused our spouse. We no longer view the affair from our "one-sided view", but can see the affair through the eyes of our spouse as well.

BTW, my question has nothing to do with resenting exposure or not...it is just a general observation of how the word "fog" is used on this board.

Mr. and Mrs. Wondering, that explanation of "foggy" makes some sense, but, as for your theory of labeling all who don't agree completely with all MB principles as troublemakers, is a real disservice for those of us who are making our way through recovery...it's rather sad, actually. I'm strong; I am not afraid to recover while holding my own opinions, but other WS may be completely turned away and not seek to recover their M

EXACTLY! EXACTLY! EXACTLY!

Lexxxy your insight into this MB stuff never ceases to amaze me.

My WW has said several times that I ruined her life through exposure, when actually I didn't ruin her life...only the life she was pretending to have with OM through lies and deceipt. She will NEVER be able to introduce OM as her NEW BF now because EVERYONE knows the TRUTH!

BTW, for the record my WW attended 3 MC sessions <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />