I am not sure why you view this as a problem. Her H has a right to know that is her attitude about adultery. That history told the man something about the woman that caused him to NOT want to stay married to her. That is HIS RIGHT. I would be utterly disgusted and appalled if a partner told me that a filthy affair was beneficial. That would demonstrate a distinct lack of remorse that reflects a lack of respect for marriage. The woman is a pig. Obviously that so appalled him that he chose to end the marriage. He had to have known he was not safe with such a skank.

It sounds like he either made a mistake in choosing to marry her or perhaps she withheld some things. Either way, he had a RIGHT to know that history and he had a right to end the marriage over that history.

Melodylane
From what I read on this site I have come to see just how powerfully an affair can affect people emotionally.
I believe a womens sexual response is very closely connected to her emotional state at the time. To me it is not a big leap to imagine that many women (possibly most women) that engauge in an affair are likely to have their most intense sexual response at this time.
We can judge and condem the affair but their sexual response will still be what it is. They can not change that.

My point here is, If he loves the women and wants to marry her.
How useful is this knowledge to a potential long term partner?? Is comparisons to this high emotional state fear? Does any husband really want to hear that they will not measure up to a past experience?
I think not, the knowledge of the affair is enough.

I agree about 'how much is enough'...

It is personal and completely with the purview of the person to whom you are speaking.

I believe that being open and honest is paramount, however, I also believe that sometimes, the person might not want all the information or all the information AT THAT TIME. Finding out that you had 10 previous lovers over dinner might be enough to think about for a week or two. Then if he/she wants to know more...they can ask the specific questions they want as they want the information.

HOWEVER, I BELIEVE you answer ANY AND ALL questions asked HONESTLY AND COMPLETELY? You can do it in parts, such that you answer the specific question and then allow the other person 'time' to think and respond, potentially asking more specific questions which they deem important to them. But you must ALWAYS bring up issues which might be 'out of their realm' of thought, such as of those 10 partners, 3 were while I was dating someone else seriously. Or 3 were at an orgy... or whatever. The specifics might or might not be necessary...

But in MY thinking... the LESS you would like to talk about an issue... the MORE your partner probably needs to HEAR about it.

Jack,

In the scene you presented, the wife asked if she looked good.....that means she should be prepared for whatever answer her husband gives her whether it be good or bad. I would rather know if they do make me look fat, because then I could change. Who wants to go around in something that makes them look bad???...

JB, that is not a Marriage Builders stance, though. In the case of your friend who extolled the virtues of adultery sex, her husband would naturally recognize that as a character issue and run for his life. If he didn't understand that, then he was crazy and just got out because he is lucky.

In the matter of "do I look fat in this?" Dr Harley most certainly does recommend answering truthfully. He recommends doing it in a NON-lovebusting manner, such as "those pants are not nearly as flattering as these." He said he makes sure Joyce doesn't go out in the unflattering pants.

Jack, what you are missing is that a recovered person does not value adultery sex. A recovered person views adultery sex as a degrading, piggish act. A recovered heroin addict does not view being high as wonderful unless he is still addicted. When he is no longer addicted, he sees it in a realistic light, as disgusting and putrid and degrading. You can't put aside the morality of adultery because adultery *IS* a moral issue.

In this case, the new H needed to know that his new wife had that attitude towards her adultery. [and why he would even marry a woman with cheating in her past is beyond me] That is very different from comparing sexual experiences in past relationships. What she did was the equivalent of a rapist extolling the virtues of rape "sex." Her attitude towards adultery sex would alarm anyone who values marriage because a recovered person will not romanticize adultery sex. Your friend was smart to get out when he did so I would say that honesty benefited him in a great way.

Absolutely...

Jack, you asked about a situation where a woman might ask "Do I look fat in these pants?" Just guessing here but it is likely she is not just fishing for a compliment but more likely reassurance, that she is still cared for. The question is so obviously loaded that I don't think it is ever just asked in passing with no thought preceding the asking.

My wife asks almost every day..."How do I look?" or "Do I look OK?"

But the "Do these pants make me look fat" kind of questions are really a sign that something else is at play than the look in the pants.

Possible truthful answers to this can vary but hopefully honesty has reigned in the relationship from both sides of the fence and when she asks that question she is actually looking for honest input and not setting you up. Because in some cases the real answer is "It isn't the pants" and in other cases it might be "I like them tight." Just a guess here but the question comes from already knowing that there is a problem and she is asking from a point of wondering if the pants cover up what she has already identified as being a problem.

But that isn't even what this thread is about. The thread began as a discussion of historical honesty. I think that CFIO's comment is exactly the point of historical honesty. What makes Dr Harley's position so radical is that he doesn't say that we should answer any and all questions that might be asked of us. What he says is that we should willingly share with our spouse whatever we know about ourselves.

If you think about that for a minute you can see that there is a difference between the two. You absolutely must answer any and all questions honestly but you must go beyond answering what is asked and volunteer anything you know about yourself.

This is where so many folks who have an affair fall down in the beginning of recovery and it often results in a failure to restore the marriage. A WS will take great pains to express the exact answer to the exact question that was asked knowing full well that the intent behind the question was to find out something deeper than just the answer to that individual question.

So the conversation goes something like this...

Did you have sex with him?

"Yes."

Did you have sex with him more than once?

<Let me see, does he mean more than once in a day, more than once without stopping, more than once in the two years we were having sex, more than once at the motel down the street...>

"What matters most is that I cheated on you and I am very sorry that I hurt you and..."

When it comes out later by asking , how many times did you have sex with him that the answer is really something like 100 times, the process becomes "Well, I couldn't figure out what you meant when you asked before. I thought you meant on the day you were talking about (or even better- the day you asked me...) and so I couldn't really answer you because I didn't want to hurt you unnecessarily (There's necessary hurt?) and...

Just guessing this kind of return to the marriage is NOT going to result in much of a recovery even if it lasts another 50 years...

The harder you find it to answer a question the more likely it is to need to be answered honestly.

But Dr Harley goes a step further and says we should honestly tell what we know without the right question being asked. That makes it radical but does not mean is has to be brutal or done in an unloving way full of love busters.

Where the honesty in Jack's question comes into play is in the ten years of gaining weight that led up to that moment in time when nothing was said about your feelings regarding how much weight your wife was gaining. The honesty is across the board honesty. If my feelings are that my wife is becoming less attractive to me because of gaining weight then it is up to me to inform her of my feelings, again, I don't need to state it as a love buster.

This prevents the question all together so that you aren't tempted to answer about the yellow pants with the red pockets making her look like the south end of a north bound school bus or the brown ones making her look like a quarter horse about to foal...

In a marriage that uses PORH routinely, questions like this don't actually come along very often since truth has been given freely and not just in response to a loaded question that needs o be unloaded before the answer is given.

Mark

And this is the key. Dr Harley was asked about this once [on the radio show, maybe?] and said he would tell Joyce if she looked fat in those pants. But he would not do it in a mean or lovebusting manner. He would tell her something like "dear, those pants are not flattering." Rather than say something mean like "you look like a cow!" The idea was to tell her enough to motivate her to change the pants so she doesn't go out in them.

And as Mark also stated, if there is weight gain that has made one spouse unattractive, that should be brought up too. In a kind way, not a lovebusting way.

Mel and Mark:

Weight is an issue that is rarely discussed on the forums. In fact, I have never read any post that addressed weight, both that gained by males and females. Dr. Harley has no fear and he goes after the subject in one of his EN's.

Larry

It's been discussed quite a bit over the years. Here is a good Q&A on the subject:


Meeting The Emotional Need For
Physical Attractiveness

Letter #2

Dear Dr. Harley,
After many months of struggling to lose weight and look nicer, I've come to the conclusion that what you have written is hurtful, hateful and belittles women. While I have failed miserably to lose all 80 pounds, I have changed my eating habits (no more than 15 grams of fat a day) and exercise 5 times a week. I have lost a grand total of 35 pounds. All this to try to lose some weight so my husband would continually accept me. I have come to the conclusion that if my weight means so much to others that they are encouraged by people like you to shun me, they are not what I want. I can't help my looks as they were given to me by my mother and father. You ought to be ashamed of yourself to think that marriage is only of value when the wife is thin.

Before I read your book, I was fat and happy. Now I am a little thinner, and angry. I am sending in my membership to NOW as people like you who are so immature as to rely on a woman's outward beauty need to be exposed!

Sincerely,

R. J.
Michigan



Dear R. J.,
Everything you say about the need for physical attractiveness can be said about any other emotional need. It can be applied to the emotional needs for affection, admiration, conversation and all the others. I have counseled men and women who ask, "why can't I be accepted for who I am? Why does my spouse expect me to change?" There are spouses who are unaffectionate, have no interest in sex, don't like to talk, would prefer not to earn a living, refuse to pick up after themselves, lie about everything, can't say a complementary word ... I could go on and on.

Why should physical attractiveness be any different? It's not easy to meet most emotional needs, and physical attractiveness is no exception. Of course it's hard to lose weight. If you found a way to lose weight without any suffering, you'd be rich in no time. Those of us who are predisposed to be overweight (I am included) fight hunger all our lives. Why do we do it? I do it for a host of reasons, health, for one. But another important reason for me is that I want to look as good as I can to my wife.

You want to be loved for who you are and not what you do. So do I. We all do. But the reality is that you have not loved your husband for who he is, but rather for what he does. If he did not meet any of your emotional needs, your feelings toward him would have changed considerably from the day you said, "I do." You married him because you loved him and you loved him because he met your emotional needs. If he were to stop meeting those needs, your love for him would fade away.

You may feel that being overweight is a trivial matter--that there are far more important considerations in marriage than physical appearance. But I leave that judgment up to each spouse I counsel. It's not for me to tell them what should or should not be important to them. They tell me. And many tell me that it's important to them for their spouse to lose weight.

If your spouse tells you that your loss of weight would meet one of his most important emotional needs, you have a choice. You don't have to lose weight. In fact, you can choose to gain weight. He will probably accept you no matter what you weigh. It's not a matter of acceptance, its a matter of whether or not you're meeting his emotional needs. What I suggest in His Needs, Her Needs is that, in exchange for your spouse meeting your emotional needs, you meet his and lose weight.

You've lost 35 pounds. I know you are very angry, but what you've already accomplished is terrific. Losing weight is one of the more difficult challenges of life, I know. I hope you'll build on your achievement, lose the rest of the weight, and in spite of the sacrifice, be happy you did it.


here

Thanks Mel.

Guess I have missed the threads. I am familiar with what Dr. Harley has said Mel, and he has made the point several times in several ways. He has no fear

Larry

Cantfigureitout asked a question that I think deserves a thread of its own. However, I should like to say something here, and then perhaps if the topic grows we could give it the separate attention it deserves.

My summary is that Cant was asking about being honest in discussion your ENs. I've cut down the post to the final questions:


Well, isn't meeting someone else's ENs always a form of "catching" them? Isn't it always a benign form of strategy, or tactics, done for the best reason; to have a happy, romantic, passionate marriage?

Dr Harley talks at length about how meeting someone's ENs can seem unnatural to any of us. Some people dislike the idea of actively meeting needs because people should be "natural". They should not have have to change themselves to make someone fall in love and stay in love with them.

If a man is not naturally conversational, then he may resent being told that he needs enthusiastically to meet his wife's EN for conversation each day. However, the return on his effort will be a more loving and satisfying marriage for him, so the idea of resentment is misplaced. The goal of meeting ENs is to deposit sufficient units to make and keep his LB account high. That is a very deliberate strategy.

In a troubled marriage, the goal is to "catch" our spouse, just as it is the goal of the single woman to "catch" a husband. However, we have to learn that "keeping" our spouse in a loving marriage requires daily work. The single woman who "catches" you and then neglects you once the ring is on her finger is choosing to have a mediocre marriage for herself, as well as for you. Surely most normal women do not want that? Wouldn't you say that most mediocre marriages are the result of lack of knowledge of good strategies, rather than a deliberate decision to create misery?

Most people want a good marriage. Many lack knowledge of how to have one, and that is where your knowledge of the Harley programme would come in. Introduce the programme to the woman you are thinking of marrying.

As for when to do that; well, I wouldn't recommend the first date! It is surely a matter of knowing when things are becoming serious and deciding that it is time to express feelings and explore intentions.

Yes... I agree to some extent. It IS about catching but in my opinion, it is MORE about enthusiastically meeting the needs of your beloved.

Now... as a dating man 7 years ago, I knew what I wanted and didn't see it in who I was dating. The initial OXOXOXOX had dissipated into a more sedate relationship in which I could look at the person. The person was NOT who I found I was looking for. But instead of walking away, I told her, at her instistance, what it was I WAS looking for, and once again, she became it... for awhile. But as I look back, she resented it and took it out on me in other ways.

So... while for ME to hear what she liked, it would have been great because the person I am is one who wishes to give. However, the issue became mine when I couldn't separate out the 'real' person from the 'fake' person. Who I THOUGHT was real was the person who I fell in love with. This person, in reality was the fake person.

I have thought alot about this over the past week. Where did I go wrong? What did I learn? What would I do differently? HOW would I do it differently? Who do I want?

Certainly it would appear that the first date is not a place to be talking like this... I would agree. There is enough stuff to talk about that you don't have to delve this deeply. However, what about the 3rd date? 6th date? etc...

When do I have the right/responsibility/courtesy to say "Hey... btw I really feel alot of love through sexual fulfillment, so if that isn't your thing... see you later." The only other alternative is to ACT upon your desires... and since you can't simply 'talk more' to see how your EN for conversation is met, you are really playing with fire.

For SF... and perhaps ONLY for SF... you have to break a huge barrier for evaluation. Taking the religious path, you simply DON'T until you say I DO. But by then, you might be stuck with someone who simply doesn't have anything for SF which you want and is unwilling or unable to meet those needs. Taking the 'popular path' you engage in SF before marriage. However, as I stated, I seem to have an unnaturally HIGH sensation or EN for SF involving my sense of LOVE. Therefore, by the simple act of sex, I might find myself 'overly' indulgent in my love of the person.

Now... you say... What difference does it make if you LOVE her? Well... the issue is that SF, for me, was a huge factor which I believe clouded my judgement on other aspects. I ignored other things about our relationship which were important, but not AS important compared to my perception and feelings given adequate SF. The real issue began when SF from my wife became diminished, ie from our wedding night onward, LITERALLY.

THEN, you see, you are stuck. Without SF, and the love you felt from it, you soon find that you are getting little else by the way of a relationship. This impacted me greatly, and I tried desparately to explain my needs to my wife. However, the more I tried, the more she withdrew.

So... back to my original thought. There certainly is merit in being able to TRUST that what you say will be understood and taken as you mean it. I would mean to explain my ENs to my GF and for her to take them as precious things for her to care for. THIS is how I would take them in her place. However, see, for me in my marriage, explaining my ENs caused me to be pulled into a marriage which was not good for me. I don't believe that on the outside, she tried to trick me, but I also don't believe that she ever understood what I was saying and why, and therefore, when all was said and done, she resented my desires for her because they were not WITHIN her to begin with.

There lies the crux... should you ONLY wait ans see if your SO has the attributes you need of his/her own free will and volition or should you believe that you can explain what you need, and be heard in the HEART?

Well it takes a brave man to admit that he likes sex for sexs sake and ask his girl how she feels about that.

"Hey hon, what turns me on is that I turn you on so tell me, am I doin a good job?"

Or in a dating situation I think that it needs to be addressed up front that you find sex so important that you are willing to give it the respect of mutual desire and when the time comes you will have allready discussed what you both like.

I tend to think like Seinfeld who said "Getting married for sex is like flying in a plane for the peanuts" But then again I am in the plane for more important reasons. The peanuts are just a pleasent treat that comes with the movie and hot towels.

If SF is not mutually desired between a couple then to me their is an issue and a problem a-brewing so I think its tottally healthy for men to need it and have problems if they don't get it. The fact that they seem to need it more than females,(sometimes), should be evidence that they need to do more to make thier mate feel loved so she will want to give herself to him.

But here is the problem the questionarires that need to be maintained are designed to address. What makes her feel loved? We are "in" love with others because of what they do for us right? Its understood that its conditional right?

Loving them can be done even if we are not in love with them but its up to us how much we will stick our neck out in the process and depends on how confidant we are in how we love them. Or in what love is.

Present state of the relationship.. like why is the past being brought up? What purpose is the past going to serve? If one is troubled about something like a past triger and can share openly with thier mate to search out emotional issues that still bother them, maybe ones that they were not even aware of then it can help bring us closer as we realize how preciuos the fact we are together is. Historical honesty can bring up areas that challange a marriage that both people thought was fine but its how we deal with our partners emotions that define if we love them with all the warts.

As we learn about how imperfect our mates are will we run away afraid or embrace them as we handle the past sensitivly and responsibly? This is what gets ignored if we don't work to stay in love as we have the "honeymoon" blinders taken away and see who we are with more as time goes on.


So, If we are not able to discuss anything with our spouses we are in trouble because we are afraid of the truth being revealed that we are human and there but for the Grace of God go I. Again its about how we deal with our mistakes that define our character and our relationships, just like the ability to repair mistakes define a true craftsman.

Depending on the individuals ability to face themselves and thier past communication about it can be a place to grow if and when the state of the relationship needs this History. Whenever security is questioned by either party it is up to them to search out where it comes from and deal with it as soon as possible.


Relevent to the present state just means that we are not allways aware of problems and fears and when they come up is the time we must deal with them. Trying to open up all the past and emotions in a detailed history does not mean we wont have to revisit them sometime as we go along happy for years and they agian might raise there ugly head, or maybe for the first time we become aware of them. Like crossing that bridge when we come to it when we didn't even see the river coming in the first place.

Okay, I am the woman you are discussing. I did NOT trick my husband into marrying me. The 2 things I with held from my H were not sexual intercourse with 2 other men. It was a drunken sexual act in college before I was dating my husband. He did ask about it when we were dating but I did not disclose the entire truth about those two events. EVERYTHING else he knew. He knew how many people I had slept with. He knew if I had had any STD's. He knew when I lost my virginity. He knew ALL of that. The reason I was hesitant in telling him the whole story from college was because it was 2 guys that we both knew from classes. He played basketball with one of them and we were in class with the other one. I just told him the whole truth about it a little over a year ago. I felt guilty because he was pressing me to tell him more about my past if I hadn't already. I did NOT set out to "trick" him into marrying me. He knew WORSE stuff I had done before college and he did not hold that against me.

Tink, I don't quite understand. Have we been discussing you directly? Which poster raised your case? Was that poster your husband, or was the poster reading about your case on this forum?

Or do you mean that we been discussing cases exactly like yours, but not you directly?

In any case, your H has an OW, and it would seem that THAT is why he is divorcing you.

Hey sugarcane. Yes some people were discussing my specific situation. Larry brought it up. I don't mind that he did. This is what he said:

Oh, and a good one just cropped up already. We have a thread here where a wayward husband is throwing up his wife's past as justification for his adultery. Not in those terms. Instead, he says if he had known about xyz before he got married, he wouldn't have married her.

But wait a minute, there is more here than meets the eye. MALES are culturally directed to cat around. But they want a mate who hasn't had all that much experience. FEMALES in many cultural settings are taught to HIDE their experiences or gloss over them.

How do you handle those basic instincts? Think a bit before you answer.

Larry


OK. So, the story is....my H and I met in college. We knew eachother when I had messed around with two different guys that we both knew from school. I did this when I was drunk and it was NOT sexual intercourse. But it was sexual. It was STUPID and I regret it. I had done worse stuff in the past in HS and right before college. My H knew about those events. I didn't tell him the whole truth about the 2 guys from college b/c I thought he would be real upset b/c we knew them. And b/c I had already told him so much about my past I just thought it was going to blow up in my face. I SHOULD have told him the whole truth. But, I didn't. I told him a little over a year ago. We had been married 6 years and had two kids by then. He was angry. He said maybe he never would have married me and that he's not sure if he ever would have dated me if he had known. Then he let it go and we moved on. Then when he was in cali for 4 months without me (moved b/c of a job...no money for us all to move out together...) he came back to get us and was bringing up this stuff from college and other things from our marriage. He said he wasn't sure if he wanted to be with me and that he needed to figure it out. This was because he felt that maybe our marriage was invalid since he felt I "tricked" him into marrying him by with holding information from before we were dating. So, this is my dilemma. Oh, and he has a "best friend" who is a woman. He became close to her the last two months of being in cali by himself. They talk all the time and go out for drinks together. He says he can do this b/c he doesn't see a marriage and he feels that he is in a "crisis". But people on here have made me to feel that yes he is NOT Justified for his A by using the college thing. but that yes he is justified for maybe wanting out of the M since maybe he never would have married me in the first place. So, I am in a great mental state as you could guess.

Thats exactly WHY he needed to know the truth. He knew them. Because he was exposed to them, it was more imperative that he know who the foxes in the hen house were. This is the whole point of radical historical honesty. It should be a complete and full job application for marriage. The interviewing spouse has a right to all this information.

In the case of my marriage, if I had known more details about my H's sexual conquests I would not have married him. One of his liasons was a MARRIED WOMAN and I had a right to know this. This would have changed my mind about marrying him.

Tink, I'm sorry this has upset you. I posted about about this on your own thread.

Yes, I know exactly how he feels. I was similarly tricked and defrauded. My marriage was a FRAUD that was perpetuated on me by lies and trickery. If I had been told a few pertinent facts about the women he slept with I would not have married him. I felt resentment for YEARS about being tricked like that.