Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by seekingbalance
[I�ve said it before: any WS who shows up here and stays is either stupid or brave. To be honest, I�m not sure which one I am, but right now I�m leaning towards stupid.

Or sincerely remorseful. The remorseful ones who are sincere about recovery do just fine, thank you. The problem is that bullcrap has a short shelf life around here.

So whether you are a BS or a WS, if you spout bullcrap, you are very likely to get a well intended 2x4.

The problem is not the board, SB, but your own foggy thinking. Foggy thinking will always be challenged on this board, thankfully.

The problem lies with the lady in the mirror. I realize it is much easier to point the finger of blame to everyone else, but all it does is distract you from the real problem, which is the lady in the mirror. Look in the mirror, SB.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,928
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,928
Seeingbalance, people HAVE tried to help you on this forum...some gently, and some wielding 2x4s. It doesn't seem to matter HOW people post to you, you still don't "get it".

You are obviously intelligent, or you wouldn't be an attorney; however, you cannot intellectualize wrong into being right or making wrongdoing a reasonable action. Mental intelligence does not exempt a person from being, as is commonly said in my neck of the woods, "eaten up with the dumb@$$".

As for the miner having a "bonding moment" with the OW...well, his FIRST thought upon arriving to daylight and not seeing his BW SHOULD have been, "Oh, [censored]! I've totally messed up!"
Why on earth should he expect his wife to nicely stand by and watch him hug and kiss his skank?

So many WSs think that the BS should "just get over it"; but, really, how would they feel if their BS really did "just get over it"? IMHO, a BS who is able to "just get over it" is not someone who is truly in love with the WS.



"Your actions are so loud that I can't hear a word you're saying!"

BW M 44 yrs to still-foggy but now-faithful WH. What/how I post=my biz. Report any perceived violations to the Mods.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by maritalbliss
Nope. I'm saying exactly what I said: I think waywards should have enough respect and sensitivity for betrayed spouses on a marriage BUILDING website to allow them their time to be collectively dismayed about an affair. Yakking about bonding moments between waywards and their lovers ain't it, sister.

MB, I wanted to point out that dismay about cruelty to others is not the exlusive domain of victims. Decent people are ALWAYS dismayed at injustice. The dismay shown here has NOTHING to do with being a betrayed spouse, but with being DECENT.

Decent people are supposed to be outraged at injustice.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 373
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 373
Obviously I am a WS as well so keep that in mind. I read SB's post as a bit more analytical. I think the point she made about the bonding moment was to point out that his love bank is being filled by the OW, not the plan A advocated on here. If the wife had been talking to Steve H. she most likely would have been told, you get there and you keep your rightful place no matter what. Or, as some BS's are told on here, put your big girl panties on. My guess is that the emotions of that moment did not allow for good decision making on anyone's part. (Except the media who deliberately thrives ont his stuff)

SB, I will say I'm sorry you stopped posting on your thread. I would love to hear what Steve H. is counseling you and your H (or maybe just you). I do understand the need for 2X4's though in that they don't know how long they have a person's attention on these boards so they need to get their point across swift and solid. It may not strike the WS then and there and it may scare them away; however, it may also plant a seed to be revisted another day.

Good luck and God Bless

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,928
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 1,928
The only reason I'd have been there when he came to the surface would have been to tell him, "The first thing you need to do is the right thing...tell her to get lost and stay lost!"

The WH apparently thought he was going to get to have a bonding moment with two women...well, kudos to his BW for not playing that game!


"Your actions are so loud that I can't hear a word you're saying!"

BW M 44 yrs to still-foggy but now-faithful WH. What/how I post=my biz. Report any perceived violations to the Mods.
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by sunnydaze53
I read SB's post as a bit more analytical. I think the point she made about the bonding moment was to point out that his love bank is being filled by the OW, not the plan A advocated on here.

And this injustice is to be blamed on the WIFE and not the perpetuators of the crime? crazy I don't agree that SB's post was the least analytical in that it completely missed the true injustice in this scenario. Rather is reflects a profound level of fog that confuses the real victims here.

As a betrayed spouse, I most certainly would not involve myself in a circus act on international TV where the OW was given equal opportunity to greet my own husband. What woman would possibly involve herself with such a scene? To expect this woman to stand there and be given equal footing with a skanky OW would be degrading to her. I would have left too.

Plan A has nothing to do with degrading yourself in order to make lovebank deposits, that is a ridiculous notion. The degradation of such involvement would most certainly cause MASSIVE lovebank deposits on the part of the wife. You don't sacrifice your integrity and your dignity to make lovebank deposits. NEVER.

Originally Posted by Dr Harley
"Plan A should never involve sacrifice. In other words, you can be as encouraging as possible about your willingness to meet his emotional needs without actually doing it, and still be in Plan A. And you can defend yourself from your husband's abuse (calling the police or calling his lover's husband) and still be in Plan A. The point of plan A is that you are making an effort to do your part to make your marriage successful, but from my perspective, it should never involve personal sacrifice.

Lets please remember who the real victim is here. It is not the skanky OW and the scummy WS.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 373
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 373
Oh no, I don't blame the WIFE at all. In fact, there is no way that I would be there for that spectacle either. It is just sad that the OW is being given that opportunity to be involved in one of the most moving and memorable moments of that man's life. That is soooo sad.

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by sunnydaze53
Oh no, I don't blame the WIFE at all. In fact, there is no way that I would be there for that spectacle either. It is just sad that the OW is being given that opportunity to be involved in one of the most moving and memorable moments of that man's life. That is soooo sad.

I agree. It makes me sick. This was profoundly cruel to the BW. Its too bad she wasn't run off by the folks running the operation.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: May 2010
Posts: 282
T
Member
Offline
Member
T
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 282
Well I did not realize that SB was an attorney.

So, from one attorney to the other, I am now one hundred percent sure that she is still in a fog. Intelligence plays no role here.

You can logic this one out any way you want to, there is no defense here for either the WS or the OW.

From a legal standpoint, he has a wife that ought to be showed a modicum of respect. She is legally entitled to that.
Look, we are all human beings, and I think that most of us can accept that there is a possibility that you can fall out of love with someone, the issue is how do you handle it.
You have an legal contract-you don't get to just discard your obligations under that contract. You have to first get yourself out of the contract, before entering into the other relationship, where essentially the same obligations will arise.

From a moral standpoint, whatever the reason for the failure of a marriage, it is inherent in both parties to end it in a manner that brings about the least pain.

The public humiliation of the wife here is unforgiveable. There is nothing positive that can be gained from it.


BS me 55yrs
WH 59 yrs
M 34 yrs 6/26/2010
DD 25
D Day May 5, 2010
NC 5/12/2010
Duration of affair 5 years, but other affairs discovered on D Day
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by seekingbalance
Originally Posted by maritalbliss
Save the armchair marital introspection for some other website.

But isn�t that exactly what you are doing?

I have no idea what TOW is.

Originally Posted by maritalbliss
But I do think it's the better part of intelligence for a wayward to sit back and allow betrayeds to have empathy for spouses who have had their worlds turned upside down by wandering spouses.

Are you saying �go away wayward, your observations are not welcome here because of your wayward status"?

I think the existence, content, and response to my very benign post are indicative of the tone of this forum. The lens through which posters appear to see me, the conclusions they are willing to jump to on very thin evidence and the direction in which they jump is so telling.

My very benign post made a couple of observations and posed a couple of questions. Here are some of the responses:

Originally Posted by marriedforever
I take it empathy isn't your strong point?

I see nothing in the post suggesting that I�m not empathetic.

Originally Posted by sugarcane
Ain't no "F" about a WS who writes like that.

Not an "F" that I could post on here, anyway.

I don�t see any basis upon which that could reasonably be concluded frm my post.

Originally Posted by teaser_8
post which sounded like a hooray for the WH and his POSOW

Originally Posted by maritalbliss
Oh, just ICK. Disengenuous, at best, this comment. You can't take mud and wash it white.


There is no hooray stated or implied. There is no suggestion that I was trying to whitewash the miner's infidelity.

What I said was that the reunion between the BH and his OW in this context was probably a bonding moment. Does anyone seriously think otherwise? I didn�t suggest in any way, shape or form that I thought that was a good thing.

Originally Posted by Chailover
Can you say "wayward?" No "WAYWARD!"

No substance here � just shouting.

Originally Posted by teaser_8
I am also guessing by the response, combined with the fact that the A was relatively recent that R is not in the cards right now? just a hunch cause I am not sensing REMORSE!!!!!

I was making objective observations about a news story, and this poster jumps to the conclusion that (1) I have no remorse, (2) remorse is a prerequisite to recovery, and, therefore, (3) recovery is not in the cards.

Here is my point: if, as Dr.H suggests, somewhere around 50% or more of marriages will experience infidelity in some form, that�s a whole lot of people. For every BS, there is by definition a WS. DrH may have statistics, but I see the WS presence on this forum statistically underrepresented.

Why might that be? Probably a lower percentage of WS are looking for help than BS�s. But even if only 20% of WS�s are seeking help, they are still statistically underrepresented.

I wonder if part of the reason why is the tone of this forum, which, I think is evidenced in this thread. How many WS�s are going to read on this forum for long and post given the tone?

For every WS who wants help and is turned away by the tone, there is a BS who is not receiving the benefit of the advice the WS would be receiving.

I�ve said it before: any WS who shows up here and stays is either stupid or brave. To be honest, I�m not sure which one I am, but right now I�m leaning towards stupid.

To my knowledge, there are currently three WW�s posting here, four if you count me, but I have decided not to post on my thread anymore for my own set of reasons.

Two started posting pretty long after their A�s ended, and the other one�s H is having RA�s. I started posting the very day I ended my A. If I had had the slightest idea what was going to happen, there is no way I would have posted. This was my first forum � I didn�t even know such a thing existed until I stumbled on it the day I ended the A after weeks of reading on the site.

What if the tone of the forum was �WS, come on in! We know you put yourself in a dark, scary horrible place and dragged those you love right along with you. You have done a terrible thing, and probably feel there is no redemption, not way out. Good news! We know the way and want to lead you. The road out is very narrow and really scary too � rocks may fall on you, slimy things will crawl over your feet, you may trip over some roots and get bruised and you may want to backtrack and have a look at that root, you may want to stop at times and rest, or take a moment to look at something pretty, you may go down rabbit trails, and feel so lost you get terrified and want to quit, and you may feel like the road will never end. But we know this road � will you trust us to not let go and take you to a beautiful place.�?

Or, to put in terms that are consistent with the subject matter of this thread, the WS is the miner stuck underground, and the forum has the tools to drill the rescue hole and the pod to lift the WS out through a very narrow chute.

I don�t think that is inconsistent in any way with the MB program. DrH�s materials show great compassion for the WS. He talks in SAA (I think that�s where I read it, don�t have my copy handy) about how the WS is so trapped and in so much pain that suicide sometimes seems the only way out. I haven�t noted him characterizing the WS as �selfish� or �entitled�, adjectives that are routinely used here to describe the WS, in any of the materials I have read � �misguided� is as far as I�ve seen him go. A requisite level of apologizing and remorse doesn�t seem to play into his recovery scheme http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5061_qa.html, and yet that seems to be a theme on the forum in general and on this very thread.

DrH also instills hope that a post infidelity marriage can be even better than the pre-infidelity marriage:

�I believe marriages that have been torpedoed by affairs need not sink. They can be towed into dry dock, repaired and refitted. Once refitted, they will sail farther and faster than at any previous time.�

My counseling sessions with SteveH likewise didn�t have the tone of this forum. I hate the idea that a WS might choose not to avail himself of such a valuable resource because of the tone I see here.

I know that I don�t have the power to change the tone. All I can do is continue to play the music the way I see the conductor telling me to play.

OMG, you are delusional if you truly see nothing wrong with this post. Allllll these posters see huge, glaring issues with what you've written and still you don't see it? Holy delusional thinking, Batman.

TOW=The Other Woman


Me,BW - 42; FWH-46
4 kids
D-Day #s1 and 2~May 2006
D-Day #3~Feb.27, 2007 (we'd been in a FR)
Plan B~ March 3 ~ April 6, 2007

In Recovery and things are improving every day. MB rocks. smile
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
Quote
I wonder if part of the reason why is the tone of this forum, which, I think is evidenced in this thread. How many WS�s are going to read on this forum for long and post given the tone?

Out of curiosity, why stick around if you don't like it? Why not go find some coddlers to pat your back and tell you your posts are fantastic and that it's certainly a sign that you are healing and gosh darnit, your M is probably doing fabulous if this is the way you think?

There are lots of FWSs here who have "gotten it" and stick around ~ my H reads everything I post here, he posts on occasion. Mrs. W, tst, gloveoil...all are FWSs who stick around and don't get called out on their ridiculous posts because they "get it".


Me,BW - 42; FWH-46
4 kids
D-Day #s1 and 2~May 2006
D-Day #3~Feb.27, 2007 (we'd been in a FR)
Plan B~ March 3 ~ April 6, 2007

In Recovery and things are improving every day. MB rocks. smile
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by teaser_8
Well I did not realize that SB was an attorney.

So, from one attorney to the other, I am now one hundred percent sure that she is still in a fog. Intelligence plays no role here.

You can logic this one out any way you want to, there is no defense here for either the WS or the OW.

From a legal standpoint, he has a wife that ought to be showed a modicum of respect. She is legally entitled to that.
Look, we are all human beings, and I think that most of us can accept that there is a possibility that you can fall out of love with someone, the issue is how do you handle it.
You have an legal contract-you don't get to just discard your obligations under that contract. You have to first get yourself out of the contract, before entering into the other relationship, where essentially the same obligations will arise.

From a moral standpoint, whatever the reason for the failure of a marriage, it is inherent in both parties to end it in a manner that brings about the least pain.

The public humiliation of the wife here is unforgiveable. There is nothing positive that can be gained from it.

Great post, ITA with you teaser.


Me,BW - 42; FWH-46
4 kids
D-Day #s1 and 2~May 2006
D-Day #3~Feb.27, 2007 (we'd been in a FR)
Plan B~ March 3 ~ April 6, 2007

In Recovery and things are improving every day. MB rocks. smile
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
Quote
I haven�t noted him characterizing the WS as �selfish� or �entitled�, adjectives that are routinely used here to describe the WS, in any of the materials I have read � �misguided� is as far as I�ve seen him go.

Really? I think I have seen that term used often simply because it is the truth of the matter.

Quote
A requisite level of apologizing and remorse doesn�t seem to play into his recovery scheme http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5061_qa.html, and yet that seems to be a theme on the forum in general and on this very thread.


If a BS requires an apology that is their choice to make. To some it is important, to others it is not...or at least something they are willing to forego. But I would bet my right arm that all BSs want a sincere apology. A cheap apology are merely words that no BS wants. If a WS is remorseful, he/she will WANT to apologize. This isn't rocket science.


BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011




Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.

We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
Quote
I haven�t noted him characterizing the WS as �selfish� or �entitled�, adjectives that are routinely used here to describe the WS, in any of the materials I have read � �misguided� is as far as I�ve seen him go.

Big HUGE difference between Dr. H and us is Dr. H is a psychologist/counselor whose best interest is to keep as unbiased an opinion as possible for those he is trying to help.

It is not possible for those of us who have BEEN THROUGH an affair to be "unbiased". We have been hurt horribly by a FWS and when one comes here spouting perceived sympathy for a WS and his mistress, our hurt comes comes pouring out and we are outraged.


Me,BW - 42; FWH-46
4 kids
D-Day #s1 and 2~May 2006
D-Day #3~Feb.27, 2007 (we'd been in a FR)
Plan B~ March 3 ~ April 6, 2007

In Recovery and things are improving every day. MB rocks. smile
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
I'll save myself the copying and pasting but the terms "self-absorbed" and "heartless" have even been used to describe wayward behavior.

Anyway...the BW was smart to leave. The Chilean OW had no shame...obviously.


BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011




Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.

We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by seekingbalance
[. I haven�t noted him characterizing the WS as �selfish� or �entitled�, adjectives that are routinely used here to describe the WS, in any of the materials I have read � �misguided� is as far as I�ve seen him go.

I have heard him refer to waywards as selfish many times. In fact, he equates the behavior of waywards to that of RAPISTS and wife beaters when he describes the cruelty and trauma of an affair.

But lets say he never characterized a WS as selfish or entitled? Does that mean it is not true? Are you suggesting that posters are obliged to help dysfunctional waywards pretend like they are NOT selfish and entitled?

The truth is that waywards very much ARE selfish and entitled.

The fact that you are chastising others for accurately describing wayward behavior tells me your problem is not with the forum, but with the TRUTH. And people on this forum are not going to help you run from the truth.

Adulterers are selfish, self centered, cruel and entitled. Until you can look at yourself and admit the truth, you have no chance of recovery. Honesty is the first step and you have not even taken STEP ONE, Madam.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,490
Originally Posted by MarriedForever
Quote
I haven�t noted him characterizing the WS as �selfish� or �entitled�, adjectives that are routinely used here to describe the WS, in any of the materials I have read � �misguided� is as far as I�ve seen him go.

Big HUGE difference between Dr. H and us is Dr. H is a psychologist/counselor whose best interest is to keep as unbiased an opinion as possible for those he is trying to help.

It is not possible for those of us who have BEEN THROUGH an affair to be "unbiased". We have been hurt horribly by a FWS and when one comes here spouting perceived sympathy for a WS and his mistress, our hurt comes comes pouring out and we are outraged.

P.S. we also know that you will not recover your M if you express to your BH what you expressed here. And that is a tragedy because your BH deserves better than that ~ you both do. Your M CAN be better than ever but it's going to take a whole heck of a lot of humility on your part. Unfortunately, from your post you are not expressing humility, not at all.



Me,BW - 42; FWH-46
4 kids
D-Day #s1 and 2~May 2006
D-Day #3~Feb.27, 2007 (we'd been in a FR)
Plan B~ March 3 ~ April 6, 2007

In Recovery and things are improving every day. MB rocks. smile
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by MarriedForever
It is not possible for those of us who have BEEN THROUGH an affair to be "unbiased". We have been hurt horribly by a FWS and when one comes here spouting perceived sympathy for a WS and his mistress, our hurt comes comes pouring out and we are outraged.

Do you mean "unbiased" or morally neutral? There is a huge difference. Being unbiased does not mean you don't know right from wrong and have checked your morals at the door. And Dr Harley most certainly is not morally neutral when it comes to the crime of adultery.

I consider myself unbiased when it comes to these issues, but I am certainly not morally neutral, a sign of moral cowardice at best or a defunct conscience at worst.

One does not have to be "hurt" by a crime in order to become outraged by injustice. For example, I am outraged when I hear about robbery victims. I am not outraged because I have been a robbery victim, but because I am DECENT. Only an uncaring person would not be outraged at the cruelty inflicted on this poor married woman.


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 132
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by MelodyLane
The problem is not the board, SB, but your own foggy thinking�.The problem lies with the lady in the mirror.

Since the problem, or issue, I was addressing was the fact that fewer WS�s seek help here than do BS�s, I�m certain I�m not the problem.

You might think that isn�t a problem.

You might think that my suggestion that the overall tone of the board, in distinction from my personal thread, might have something to do with that is wrong.

You might think that it isn�t abundantly clear when a post, however harsh it might be, is meant to be helpful versus demeaning. You are wrong.

Originally Posted by MelodyLane
You can logic this one out any way you want to, there is no defense here for either the WS or the OW.

This is illustrative of what I see as the issue.

There is no way what I wrote could be construed as a defense of the WS or OW.

In actual fact, Sunnydaze was right on in spotting what I was thinking. The wife in the situation is in a lose/lose. That bonding moment between her H and the OW may be a tough hurdle to overcome if she wants to save her M. On the other hand, the public humiliation of being there would be unendurable, at least for me. What that woman is going through is appalling.

Originally Posted by MelodyLane
The fact that you are chastising others for accurately describing wayward behavior tells me your problem is not with the forum, but with the TRUTH.

Again illustrative of what I see as the issue. I wasn't "chastising" anyone. I was pointing out something I've noticed in DrH's books.

I agree that WS�s are selfish and entitled. They are also lost souls.

I�ve gotten lots of great help here and I am thankful for it. I want more WS�s to seek out that great help. I wonder how to do that, and the last post was my thoughts on the point.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
Originally Posted by seekingbalance
There is no way what I wrote could be construed as a defense of the WS or OW.

Not ML, but obviously this is not true if many construed it that way. Your very first remark implied that the BW may not be loving and/or faithful...what was the point of that remark? You say "we" (in the universal sense) don't know but neither do you. The tone of that remark alone sounds like you were trying to defend the APs.


BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011




Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.

We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,352 guests, and 57 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5