once again posters are wasting time, effort and bandwith on criticizing other posters

it is always sad to me when folks who want and need help are neglected because of this type of behavior

if you don't want to read posts by certain people hit ignore or just skip over their posts

it works

keepmovn

Well heck. Do you not recognise hyperbole? Hyperbole is not lying. Now it is that I am not defending you or defending Mr.W or Mel or anyone else, this post is about you and maybe I can help you.

Albert Einstein is a really smart person. So is Rita Brown and the jury is out on which one (or maybe an ancient Chinese) said:

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over while thinking you are going to get a different result. MrW has a variant in his signature. Dr. Phil puts it in simpler terms: "How's it working for ya?"

Frankly, I see you doing what you accuse her of doing; beating on her until she feels better about herself. Therefor nothing will change for reasons you define when you characterize her posts because you are doing the same thing according to YOUR definition as I understand it. So if you don't like what she does, why do you do the same thing?

Just curious.

What has happened is that moderators edit your posts and those of others who respond in kind. So how is that working for you? Have you made any progress in your crusade? Are you interested in outcomes or venting?

How has anyone been helped?

I respectfully suggest to you that your crusade has made no difference whatsoever expect to harden attitudes and invalidate your message, if you have one that is based on reality and not just your personal opinion. This is not an attack on you as a person, just that what you are doing doesn't appear to be working for you or helping others.

In other words, some folks here say Mel has helped them and they sing her praises. Please accept that at face value instead of assuming that those people are intimidated. When someone comes here to post, they respond to those who choose to offer advice based on which ones they think will help them if their need for help is sincere.

The fact is that everyone is different. I suggest that if you are sincere in your beliefs, you will try to help people in your own way instead of trying to get other people to change their style of helping. In other words, be helpful instead of hurtful; practice what you preach.

There is no way you are going to change the culture of this forum in the way you want to change it, especially using the methods you have chosen. But you can be helpful to people who come here looking for help by simply being, well helpful. I ask again, is your purpose to help people or engage in personal attacks that go nowhere or change anything? I respectfully suggest that the only "Style" you can change is your own.

Larry

Hi Larry! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I know I jump in a bit late here (I see this thread has progressed a lot since I last posted yesterday!) but I do want to respond on your post to me yesterday and tell you that I 100% agree with all of it. People indeed make tiny decisions along the path of an affair and that’s actually what I meant yesterday when I posted that ”people can get involved into adultery one tiny step at a time where the conscience is gradually seared”. The tiny step(s) being taken IS actually the decision(s)/choice(s) that are made.

To me, the following paragraph from “15 steps of unfaithfulness”[/i] says it best:

[i]”Adultery is the culminating act of a dozen or more tiny steps of unfaithfulness. Each step in itself does not seem that serious or much beyond the previous step. Satan draws a person into adultery one tiny step at a time. And he does this over time so that our conscience is gradually seared. This makes it easier to take "just one more step" thinking such a tiny step won't hurt us."

The “15 steps” thread shows clearly how A’s and even the development of romantic feelings towards a person never “just happen” (as many WS’s would like to believe), but is instead a series of events/choices that lead to those feelings. The thread has also shown me that I had taken some of those first tiny steps/decisions long before I’ve eventually developed inappropriate feelings towards OM and crossed the first boundary into EA.

Suzet

We always remember the persons who made the best impression on ourselves when we first start posting and you are among that group for me. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I had to know why. Most BS do or they go crazy.

How would an otherwise good person engage in something so hateful? I was not happy with the one size fits all, slam bam they woke up one day and decided to do it. That did not seem reasonable to me. When I started reading Harley, I was like most folks are gonna be, I picked out the stuff that applied to my own situation as best I could understand it. Later on, I learned the rest. And Harley talked about the gradual slide down the slope. That made sense to me.

I think it was you who led me to the 15 steps. I also thought about seduction in general and a couple of months later saw the cruis ship guy posting. One small, tiny, seemingly harmless step at a time and people go down the path to an emotional train wreck. This doesn't excuse people, but it is an explanation, a reason, one that I can understand and one with which I can deal. And I did and I do deal with it.

All the best Suzet <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Larry

Hi Larry, me again! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I can agree with this. Usually I have a hard time to use the “one size fits all” on everyone and everything. I’m simply not a “white and black” thinker concerning most things in life.

Exactly.

Nottoday (another BS) and I had a similar discussion about this topic last year. If you’re interested you can read about it here. I think our discussion on that thread gave a good perspective from the viewpoints of both BS and FWS.

All the best to you too Larry.

Did I miss the elections?

dang.... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

I voted for you Pep. But I think I was the only one.

Might be a problem with hanging chads.

I am so sorry to hear this Mortarman. Have you tried Viagra? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

Bird,

Great post. I think you made excellent points.

I just want to clarify one thing. You said:


Much has been made here of the particular word "cad". Personally, I find the word on the quaint side, and don't get my underwear in a wad over it. That's just me.

However...

The thread that prompted my post was the one by Bubblebath (which you can find here). In that thread, the OP/BIL -- as far as anyone here knows -- had "flirted" with BB. Nothing more. Obviously the flirting crosses a line. But, apparently, neither of them had professed their "love" for each other, or shared confidences about their marriages, or any of the other things that would up the ante to the level of an EA. There were still some boundaries in place.

And YET... even in that case...

the BIL was called a polecat and a cad. One poster told BB that BIL only saw her as a piece of a**. Another called both of them Hos and Homewerckers, and refered BB to the Jerry Springer show for "help". Another speculated that BIL was so unhappy in his own marriage that he was out to sabotage his brother's marriage. And finally, there was this:


IMO: That's a lot of "piling-on" over 2-3 pages of a thread. I can only imagine what else might have been added if BB & BIL actually talked about their mutual infatuation, or screwed around. Anyway, BB did indeed become defensive. And worse, it gave her an excuse to stay focused on BIL instead of on the real issues at hand -- what's missing inside her, and possibly in her marriage, that's making her so weak and open to the attentions of her BIL.

But as I said, Bird. BB's particular case aside, you make some good points. I'm glad you decided to weigh-in. Thanks.

--SC

Aphelion,


You think that you can say what a person is, based on a single opinion held by that person? And you try to pass that off as logic????? You're kidding, right?

Exposure is a means to an end -- an action to take in order to produce a desired result. No?

So you're trying to say that if someone has a problem with a specific action, they must ipso facto be against the desired result?

If that were true...

--Anyone opposed to affirmative action must be a bigot.
--Anyone who thinks it's wrong to bomb abortion clinics must be pro-abortion.
--Anyone who considers the Spanish Inquisition an atrocity must be anti-Christian (or would it be anti-Catholic. Oh, never mind, let's not open that can of worms again.)

But you get my point. If you don't like my POV on a particular subject, fine. But quit trying to paint me into a box. You're way off.

Oh, and BTW, on the thread where I questioned the BS's exposure to his MIL, who the WW doesn't respect... Techie said that STEVE HARLEY told him directly in a counseling session that it didn't make much sense for him to expose to people his wife doesn't respect.

Of course, that point was summarily dismissed by Mel b/c she once heard Dr. W. F. Harley say something that seemed to contradict that. So I dunno. I guess we should all feel sorry for anyone who is now in counseling with Steve. Apparently, they're wasting their money.

--SC

Mel,


Oh, but I disagree that it fell flat on it’s face. On the contrary!

Some posters took exception to likening a WS to any type of victim. Which is a good point, but not really relevant to the point I was making.

Others took the topic of OP bashing in other directions -- discussing whether or not a BS should engage in it, and when it might be useful to do so to help a BS who’s getting down on himself/herself. Which is fine. Good topic, actually.

There have been a bunch of other spin-off topics – also well and good.

And then there’s the old – “Don’t anyone dare tell ME how to post” baloney. Which, if you go back and read my original post, it should be clear that I was asking people to consider that OP bashing might be counterproductive – NOT trying to “control” anyone.

But among those who stayed on topic – discussing whether OP bashing is an effective way to help the WS see the light…

Only you, Mrs. W, and Top Rope seem to advocate it outright. (And when that didn’t shut me up, you resorted to character assassination – accusing me of things I haven’t done and assigning me motives that don’t exist.)

Owl agreed that OP bashing is counterproductive.
Hopeful4future said I had a good point.
lousygolfer kinda, sorta agreed (I think).
Larry seems to agree that OP bashing is ineffective in most cases.
Pep agreed -- but with a few well defined and well explained caveats.
And JL wrote:


I’ll take one “yeah” from JL over 100 spiteful “nays” from you, Mel.

--SC

Mel,


Define “fixed”. What exactly do you mean by that? Living my life by the MB principles?

There are lots of posters on here, at varying stages of recovery, all helping one another. I don't recall reading in the board rules anywere that one must be "fixed" before they can post. There are also at least a few longtime posters who've decided certain parts of MB don't/can't be applied to their situations. They've taken what works for them and left the rest.

And let me tell you something else…

In my first thread on GQII – when I was struggling with whether or not to tell my husband about the affair that had just ended – you were, I think, the 3rd person who posted to me. You explained why I really needed to tell my husband, saying….


I will never forget that post. It DEFINITELY got my attention, and I immediately recognized what you were saying as one of those rare, universal truths.

***Everyone has the right to know the truth about their own lives so they can make decisions accordingly.***

How can anyone argue with that?

Those words also rang in my ears as I was trying desperately to come up with an excuse to keep the ONS secret. In the end, I had to tell my H, b/c I couldn't get around the truth that I had come to accept -- that he had the right to know -- no matter how much I wiggled and squirmed.

What I didn’t know was... at the time you wrote those words, you’d been hiding information about finances from your own husband for God knows how long. So when it came to radical honesty -- you were good at talking the talk, but you weren't exactly walking the walk. You were telling me what to do, even though you hadn't "fixed" yourself.

Does that dillute the validity of what you wrote?? Not in my opinion. I'm really glad you were willing to post to me and help me see what needed to be done.

Nobody on here is perfect or has all the answers. If you disagree with my POV, state why and leave it at that. If my opinions are so warped and off base... you should have an easy time refuting them without resorting to baseless claims about my motives and the status of my life.

--SC

I wonder what Dr H says specifically about communication about OP during withdrawl and into recovery? Anyone ever ask?

Granted that would be meant for within the marriage between the BS and WS...but wouldn't it apply for very similar reasons here to interactions on the board?

Owl,

That's an interesting question. One thing I noticed from what Orchid and Aphelion wrote... they both seemed to have bided their time and waited for certain "openings" with their WSs. Orchid also mentioned that she used specific information about the OW to counter her husband's fantacies about her with carefully chosen words. She was apparently privy to such information about the OP, which posters on this board would almost certainly not be.

I think it would also be interesting to know how the Harleys approach the topic of the OP as counselors. Weaver gave some insight in a previous post. But it would be interesting to hear more, and from people in various situations.

--SC

Cookie. . .


Well, I don't have a problem pointing out specific actions that an OP engages in as positive or negative. Not many positives there, except maybe he/she went back to their spouse, so let them go <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I am not usually into name calling or labels unless I have all the facts and if I use a label, I try to specifically state what activity, statement, emotional thing caused the label to be applied. The facts speak louder than name calling most of the time even if name calling is emotionally more satisfying as the case may be. Name calling does raise defenses and that might be counter productive or not depending on the person.

*sigh*

I agree that the name calling on BB's thread was not based on the factual statements posted by BB with reference to BIL. Posters drew their conclusions by inference that BIL was doing something inappropriate to create an EA with BB. I found nothing in her posts to so indicate that couldn't also be explained by normal intrafamily relationships. On the other hand, I am more than a little sensitive just how easy it is to cross boundaries within a family.

I felt at the time that running off to tell husband that BIL was acting inappropriately might start a firestorm needlessly, when it seemed to me that BB had the problem and not necessarily BIL. *heavy sigh*

Instead of saying all that and backing it up, I allowed myself to go into emotional overload so I didn't help the situation. When dealing with intrafamily emotions, it can be a minefield. Did I get that right?

In other words, BB had an emotional problem and might very have been projecting instead of dealing with reality. So I thought that we should go after that instead of attacking BIL, who might be completely innocent, or not, but in any event, the evidence was yet to be presented that calling him anything but BIL was appropriate.

My real issue with name calling is that it shouldn't be done until the label will stick because of something that is factual. And a one sided emotional based presentation isn't enough, usually, to apply a label in a situation like BB is in. I used labels to describe the OM in my own situation. I also said why. So it just depends.

But that is just my opinion. Others are welcome to their own.

Larry

Cookieduh... since you want to quote me, do it in context.
Here's my post...and I stand by every word of it. It would take a ho and a homewrecker to have an A with a BIL ... and a BIL that would do something like that would be the same. Now... if her BIL did not do these things then obviously there is no issue with him.

I based my post on what BB had said... not your interpretation of it.

Of course it was relevant. The analogy doesn't WORK because one is a victim and the other has a WAYWARD mentality. There is a completely different mindset between a rapist and a rape victim. You don't treat both the same. Since their reasons for defensiveness are ENTIRELY different, common sense should dictate that their reactions would be entirely different. And they are. Of course, when that one fell flat on its face, you trotted out the addicts analogy, which was even worse, because using misplaced sympathy with an addict is the worst thing you can do. Any recovered addict will tell you that.

You are just miffed that you couldn't defend your point.


Well, the only spiteful person I see on this thread is you, dear. Your anger and spite comes through loud and clear. Always directed towards betrayed spouses, I have noticed.

And this is just MORE support for my statement that you are foggy and should fix yourself before you try and fix anyone else:


First off, only a very fogged out mind could equate not telling her husband how much she spent on face cream
with lying about an affair. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> To a normal, healthy mind, there is NO MORAL EQUATION between the two. But to you, THERE IS, which only BOLSTERS my case.

When we merged our finances and I told my H I spent $130 on face cream, he LAUGHED and gave me a kiss. In your mind, this is the moral equivalent of committing adultery and lying about it. THAT IS AMAZING. And exactly what I would expect from you.

So, I will say it again, sc, fix yourself before you try to fix anyone on this forum. Stop coming here to carry water for the WAYWARD AGENDA and work on RECOVERY for yourself.

[*Just for the record, I have never "hid" my spending from my H. We had an agreement that we would only consult the other about expenditures over $200. In your eagerness to condemn me you confused being embarrassed with being sneaky. Sorry, but no banana. ]


Your opinions are very fogged and are always very easy to refute, sc.

p.s. If Bubblebath, in fact, imagined her "affair" with the BIL, [and we have no idea what has really happened] then it would be incorrect to label him a CAD. However, if she is telling the truth and she is, in fact, having an affair with her BIL, then the correct word would be CAD, or perhaps even scumbag:

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
cad /kæd/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kad] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. an ill-bred man, esp. one who behaves in a dishonorable or irresponsible way toward women.
2. British Archaic. a. a local town boy or youth, as contrasted with a university or public school student.
b. a servant at a university or public school.

There would be no reason to NOT USE that word if it were appropriate. The focus should not be on the WORD, but on the ACTION. It is the ACTION that is bad, not the accurate word used to describe it.

All of this hair-tearing, mouth frothing hysteria is focused on the wrong thing, it should be focused on the ACTION, not the word used to accurately describe it.

I think your newfound interest in searching methods of reaching waywards is very interesting, to say the least, smartcookie, and I sure hope you use some of this newfound interest in helping YOURSELF towards recovery. lol <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Huh? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

The words were carefully chosen but the info was fairly general. The WS and OP love to share their 'wizdumb' and a BS can use it against them, when the time is right.

I believe the question was is it right to discuss the OP while the WS is in withdrawal or during recovery?

That depends. In my case it was for my recovery and it was up to the then Xws to help me heal.

I wasn't privy to anything special. Instead I took the info I gleaned and RB'd in order to survive.

L.