From another thread:

I think it might be useful to have a discussion about this.

Dr Harley writes,

The Policy of Radical Honesty

Historical Honesty

Reveal information about your personal
history, particularly events that
demonstrate personal weakness or failure.

Whenever you and your spouse make a decision together or try to resolve a conflict with the Policy of Joint Agreement, one factor that must never be ignored is your past. That's because mistakes and successes of the past often provide evidence of what's likely to happen in the future.

While many people feel that embarrassing experiences or serious mistakes of the past should be forgotten, most psychologists recognize that these are often signs of present weakness. For example, if someone has ever had an affair, he may be vulnerable to another one. If someone has ever been chemically dependent, he is vulnerable to drugs or alcohol abuse in the future. By expressing past mistakes openly, your spouse can understand your weaknesses, and together you can avoid conditions that tend to create problems for you.

No area of your life should be kept secret. All questions asked by your spouse should be answered fully and completely with periods of poor adjustment in your past given special attention. Not only should you explain your past to your spouse, but you should also encourage your spouse to gather information from those who knew you before you met your spouse. I have encouraged couples that are considering marriage to meet with several significant people from each other's past. It's often a real eye-opener!

I carry this Policy of Radical Honesty about your past all the way to the disclosure of all premarital and extramarital sexual relations. That's because those experiences are among your most important experiences in life, and your spouse should know anything you regard as important. Past sexual experiences also create a contrast effect in marriage, and it's inevitable that you will compare your spouse sexually with all other past sexual relationships. Knowing your sexual history can make present sexual problems much easier to understand.

I've had clients argue that if they tell their spouses about mistakes made decades earlier, their spouses will be crushed and never trust them again. Why not just leave that little demon alone?

My answer is that it's not a "little demon." If you've had an affair, it's an extremely important part of your personal history, and it says something about your predispositions. If you've had an affair in the past, your spouse shouldn't trust you -- I certainly wouldn't.

But what if you haven't strayed since it happened? What if you've seen a pastor regularly to hold you accountable? Why put your spouse through the agony of a revelation that could ruin your relationship forever?

I'd say you don't give your spouse much credit! Honesty does not drive a spouse insane -- dishonesty does. People in general, and women in particular, want to know exactly what their spouses are thinking and feeling. When you hold something back, your spouse tries to guess what it is. If he or she is right, then you must continually lie to cover your tracks. If he or she is wrong, an incorrect understanding of you and your predispositions develops.

Maybe you don't really want to be known for who you are? That's the saddest position of all. You'd rather keep your secret than experience one of life's greatest joys -- to be loved and accepted in spite of your weaknesses.

Some counselors have argued that the only reason people reveal past infidelity is because of anger. They are deliberately trying to hurt their spouses with that information. Or they might be doing it to relieve their own guilt at the expense of their spouse's feelings.

While it's true that the spouse usually feels hurt, and vengeance or feelings of guilt motivate some, whenever correct information is revealed, an opportunity for understanding and change is presented. That opportunity is more important than unhealthy motives or momentary unhappiness. Historical honesty

The article explains the kind of information about you to which your (future) spouse is entitled. If you read the questionnaire that Dr Harley has constructed, Personal History Questionnaire, you will see that is asks about many things, including your lifelong health, your upbringing and your education.

About your opposite sex experiences, it divides those experiences into "before High School", "during High School" and "after High School". It asks about divorce, extramarital relationships, homosexual relationships, sexual crimes, and fantasies and leanings (such as an attraction to children).

The questionnaire is detailed, and some people would have to spend a lot of time filling in the answers, but that in itself is not a reason for revealing these facts. Dr Harley gives the reasons why your spouse has a right to know these things, and ideally, would know them before marriage:

"That's because those experiences are among your most important experiences in life, and your spouse should know anything you regard as important."

Would you agree that I have a right to know whether my H has been unfaithful (either in marriage or with previous girlfriends), has been married before, has ever paid for sex, is attracted to other men, has been on a "sex tourism" holiday, has been promiscuous, has conceived a child with someone else (and what happened to it), is a recovering drug addict or is on the sexual offenders register? If any or all of those facts caused me to walk away from the marriage, isn't that as it should be?

I believe that a person has NO RIGHT to enter into a marriage and keep those or other facts to himself because they are "spent", and least of all because it would take him years to recount them!

i totally agree that your spouse should know everything about you. you share your life. you should share your secrets. you have alot of time to do it in an intimate relationship

Just to clarify:

This thread is not about a spouse's right to know about events in their marriage, such as an affair.

This thread is about "historical honesty", i.e. the past, before you met your (future) spouse.

One's past has to come into consideration when choosing a spouse. When we apply for a job, we present a resume with our JOB history. Our history determines whether we are a suitable choice for that job. We would never dream of hiring someone without it.

It is the same with marriage, our history reflects our suitability as a spouse. Marriage is a much greater investment with an even greater requirement for a complete and full history.

I kind of understand what Larry is asking about. Basically, what level of detail do you reveal? And I'd add to that - when?

First, there's his spin the bottle example and you can add to that teen idols you had posters of and fantasized about. Also the guy/girl you brushed off, the one you were attracted to but too shy to approach so you just admired them from afar. All sorts of things like this could be part of your history. However, I don't think you need to sit down and list every single thing in one session - in fact it would probably be impossible because many you wouldn't even remember. What I think Harley's intent is that should the subject arise, or your spouse ask about it, you should respond honestly. As in, "Yes, I played spin the bottle and kissed XYZ and was a thrill" rather than covering it up because there's no way the spouse could ever find out anyway.

But some things do need to be brought up and discussed intentionally. Things like how many sexual partners you've had or if you've had an STD or even if you've been married before or lived with someone (people do hide these obvious things). These are not things you are going to discuss on the first date obviously but eventually, if the relationship becomes more serious, you will have to divulge this info and be prepared for any consequences that may result (i.e. being dumped). I think this is where people are more likely to get in trouble.

It's best to have a policy of honesty rule that applies to yourself as an individual before you ever think about marriage. Not radical honesty, but honesty. Don't speak unless it's the truth. If necessary, state that something is too personal and you don't want to share that information, but don't lie about it. That way, when a relationship progresses towards potential marriage, you aren't stuck with a lie from that awkward first date.

I agree with Dr. Harley completely about historical honesty. I remember it being such a great feeling for Mr. W and I when we first saw the Personal History Questionnaire - we discovered that there wasn't anything there that we hadn't shared with each other. The affair [approximately 3 months in length] was the first time there had been any dishonesty on my part between Mr. W and I - and a big reason that I was caught so early [Thank God!] - dishonesty did NOT come naturally to me at all - the amount of conflict it created in me was incredibly debilitating. I was a total basket case.

In particular, I love this part of Dr. Harley's article:


I just had a conversation with our dd10 about that very thing. I was telling her what an amazing feeling it is to have someone know you as well as you know yourself - and love you anyway. I shared with her what a special thing that is between her dad and I. Real intimacy between a husband and wife is a truly beautiful thing - I wouldn't trade it for the world.

You know, I would even go so far as to say that I believe a good amount of historical honesty when posting on this forum is important as well. It is a big reason that I have "FWW", "Dday 2005" and "Recovered" in my signature line. I think the perspective we are offering when trying to assist others here is crucial information for them to have. In fact, to me, it would feel very disrespectful [and obviously dishonest] not to be forthcoming about that kind of stuff.

Mrs. W

That implies that in the early dating process, if you were asked (for example) whether you'd ever had casual sex, it would be okay to say that the question is too personal and you don't want to share that information. Later, when you are progressing towards potential marriage, you should admit that you slept around in college.

I don't get that. I don't know why you wouldn't tell a person you wanted to continue dating the honest answer to his question. He wants to know this because he wants to continue dating you. Since he asks, that information must be important to him, even early on in a relationship.

Why shouldn't he know this about someone he is dating?

In your example, Sugarcane, if disclosing your past of casual sex is too personal to you for first date information, but important to the date, then the date would be able to evaluate whether or not to continue dating you. But let's say the question was even more personal - have you ever been sexually abused or raped? Have you ever had an STD? I can't speak for everyone, but to me these questions are way too personal for a first date scenario. I would, in fact, be turned off by a man who asked these types of questions on the first date and, therefore, there would be no second date. Hence, I wouldn't feel obliged to answer them. But that can be accomplished without lying.

I feel strongly about that too. I think that historical honesty here on MB helps your reader to understand more fully your situation and post accordingly, but it also helps them to decide whether they want to help at all.

That was the reason why, in my first ever post here, I revealed the fact that my H and I lived together for some months before marriage and that I was pregnant when I married. I described our pre-marital lives as liberal, trendy, do-whatever-feels-good, hip city dwellers, hanging with a non-judgemental crowd that got up to all manner of sexual activities. I informed the board that, despite that past, we'd only been married to each other, and that we only had our COM.

I gave that context because I knew from lurking here that people are angry when they find out that they have unwittingly helped affair marriages, or have been deprived of some other fact that would have affected their advice. Also, I could see that our liberal trendy values had come back to bite me in the bum in the form of my H's affair. My H hoped that a bit of discreet extramarital sex should have been no big deal, should I have discovered it.

The point of my post was to ponder whether MB principles could ever be effective if those were the underlying values in a marriage. My values had never been anything like as liberal as my H's and had become less so over the years, but I wondered whether we could change our marriage if H did not change his values.

My historical honesty led to a first post that took about 3 hours to read. It boggled MelodyLane's eyes and I don't think she has ever recovered.

I have tried to learn from the experience and make my posts much shorter. Some days are better than others.

Well, that's fine. You can decide that a man who asks these questions on a first date is not someone you wish to see again. However, if he indicates, by asking, that he wants to know whether you have ever been sexual abused before he dates YOU a second time, then you must either tell him or not date him a second time.

What you must not do is plead the fifth and date him to the point where he feels serious about you, and THEN tell him. You should not attempt to decide for him what is important for him to know about someone he dates.

ITA sugarcane. If someone asks you something you should always be honest about it and my h and i have historical honesty. We did not learn everything about one another in the first date or even the first year probably, but throughout the years we have told each other EVERYTHING about our past.

I can tell you how many people my h has been with, who he played spin the bottle with, who his first was and he can tell you the same about me (if our feable little brains let us remember ).

Most definitely IMO this falls right in line with any other "honesty"

Mel, you mentioned a security clearance in the other thread from which this one leaped. I thought about that this morning. I had one of those. The FBI went all the way back to Grade School and past that to every place I had ever lived and interviewed neighbors. That was when I was 18 years old. They still allowed six months for the clearance because even in those days, people moved around a lot.

I am addressing this to everyone, not just to Mel."

Before I ran my mouth in that other thread, I had read, carefully, again, Dr. Harley's concepts on the subject and I had browsed through the questionnaire. In other words, I processed it through the [u]mental filter of "What ifs." If I were involved in a coaching series with Dr. Harley, I would have the ability to ask for clarification. And I am sure he would give it. But he doesn't do coaching anymore, to the best of my knowledge and I am not a client if he were still in practice, so I am clueless how to deal with the "What ifs" in this radical departure from standard technique. And I have no fear of "Radical" departure since that is what he does.

Now I believe I understand MB basic concepts and even more, have done research to validate some of them to provide better understanding. For example, I have delved into the science behind infatuation and the science behind other types of affection. I have also discussed some of Dr. Harley's methodology as it relates to textbook psychology. I have 36 college hours of psych including graduate courses and a close friend who has his Masters, with whom I discuss various of MB concepts. So I can handle it when the discussion gets technical.

The study of human nature has been one of my fascinations all of my life. And as some of you know, that is a long life indeed. I study, think and explore constantly for my own knowledge. And as a preventative against some of aging's more unpleasant mental disorders.

I have discovered some stuff along the way. For example, Dr. Harley formulated his basic concepts before much was known about the chemical basis for infatuation. Yet the structure of HNHN and the methodology behind his recommended practice mimics very closely those things that people do naturally, guided by instinct, when they're infatuated. Without any scientific study on the subject, I concluded as a hypothesis that MB concepts helped keep a sustainability level of PEA active.

With my very own eyes, I have seen folks blow past one or more MB concepts because they either didn't understand it, it was too complex, or it wasn't complex enough. And that was the sincere ones. Others blew past something because it made the uncomfortable. I have also seen people challenged when they blow past one of the basics. Heck, I do it.

With that as a background just to let you know I wasn't being flippant with my comment or questions, here it is:

In the interest of understanding as much as I was capable, I looked at historical honesty and came up with a dozen or more questions that I have not been able to resolve. I will share some of them with all of you for the purpose of getting your opinions and clarification.

1. How much of any single event do you detail? I was in the military for three years and single. I was also at the beginning of the "Sexual revolution." Depending on age, some men and women have a lot to remember. I can see that.

2. What if you can't remember? Males are afflicted with poorer memory in this area than are women. How accountable should someone be for their memories? For example, I had forgotten that "Adventure" I detailed in the other thread and most of the details until I was thinking on the subject of historical honesty last night and that on popped out.

3. If there is something you did that was embarrassing, should you not also go into detail of why you think it was the wrong thing to do and what you have done to process the guilt? Dr. Harley delves into this, but not in detail.

4. How do you deal with a potential partner's filters in a premarital setting, or how do you deal with those filters in a marital setting post fact of marriage? For example, I have often told the story of a couple sitting on a beach taking in some son and watching people. A vibrant and very good looking teenage female bounces by. Wife says with a sigh and a body that has earned the ravages of childbirth, "I will never look that good again." Husband says, "Neither will she."

I know some women who would belt husband and storm off. I know others who would mentally promise him a serious reward later on in the privacy of their home. I already know the answer to this one, but I want to see what other people think.

5. Males have poor memories. Taking a hypothetical example of a couple who was fortunate enough to adopt MB concepts as their marriage mantra from the beginning, how do you deal with some never revealed detail that crops up with a friend of husband or wife mentions it as a war story? I forgot about that???

I have some other "What ifs" that can be drug out into the light of day if needed. Maybe some folks here have some that I didn't think of.

As a process of Surviving an Affair, you must fill out questionnaires. And one of those is your personal history. So this is a subject that needs discussing here on SAA, in my opinion. I will now shut up and wait for comments.

Larry

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

Larry, you addressed your post to Mel, but I hope you don't mind my answering.

I don't understand the point of the preamble to your questions. Your post suggested that you did not understand or agree with Dr Harley's advice on historical honesty. There was no suggestion in your post that you disagreed with the majority of Dr Harley's concepts.

I started this thread with sections from the article by Dr Harley. In that, he makes what seem to me to be very clear recommendations for "historical honesty". If you want examples of the kind of facts that he thinks are relevant, then you can look at the questionnaire. That shows that Dr Harley believes that sexual experiences as far back as "pre High School" are important. He also thinks that the number of sexual partners, any extramarital affairs, homosexuality and sexual abuse are important. I don't understand how you can still be unclear about what he means after reading these very clear questions.

Is it possible for you to answer the questions? If you were on the road to getting married at present, would you be able to fill out the questionnaire? Is there anything about the wording of a particular questions that you find ambiguous, and impossible to answer? If so, which ones?

I don't understand the problem here.

Let's suppose that someone in the military during those years had frequent, casual sex. They had sex with, say, 40 women, including prostitutes, and caught an STD several times.

This should be told to the potential spouse. There is no moral reason why this should be withheld or played down. Do you doubt that this should be revealed, and if so, why? Because there were lots of women? Because it was a long time ago? Because the man was single? Because this was the 1960s?

None of those is a good reason for not telling the woman about the man she is hoping to marry!

If you cannot remember, you cannot remember! This does not make any difference to Dr Harley's recommendations. What you cannot do is use a general "men have poorer memories" cover as an excuse for not taking this marital need seriously.

Yes, he does. He says,

"But what if you haven't strayed since it happened? What if you've seen a pastor regularly to hold you accountable? Why put your spouse through the agony of a revelation that could ruin your relationship forever?

I'd say you don't give your spouse much credit! Honesty does not drive a spouse insane -- dishonesty does. People in general, and women in particular, want to know exactly what their spouses are thinking and feeling. When you hold something back, your spouse tries to guess what it is. If he or she is right, then you must continually lie to cover your tracks. If he or she is wrong, an incorrect understanding of you and your predispositions develops.

Maybe you don't really want to be known for who you are? That's the saddest position of all. You'd rather keep your secret than experience one of life's greatest joys -- to be loved and accepted in spite of your weaknesses."

You should discuss how you've changed. You should tell your spouse of your efforts to ensure that the past behaviour never happens again. Again, I don't think there is any issue here.

I don't understand the question. What is the issue about historical honesty here; about revealing facts about your past?

If an H had made every attempt to be honest before, and then in the telling of a war story, a friend revealed something new about the past, I think a wife might be upset at the detail, but she is not a irrational monster. Women are capable of understanding that an event that happened among many others in the sex-crazed 1960s might have been forgotten.

The fact that something might genuinely have been forgotten does not make the case for disagreement with Dr Harley. A spouse has the right to know the details of her H's past, especially his sexual history. He is honour-bound to provide as much of that as possible. He does not have the right to withhold information that he can remember for any reason.

Do you agree?

He has every right to say that.

Her past is not a justification for his affair, and I hope she is being told that here. However, her H is correct in saying that he had the right to know about her past before he married her.

Larry, there's nothing to think about! People have a right to know the sexual history of the person they wish to marry!

If someone has covered up her sexual past to conform to cultural pressures, when they come to these forums or coach with the Harleys and are encouraged to be honest for the first time, many years perhaps into the marriage, they should be honest. They cannot hope to have an MB marriage if they pick and choose the concepts they feel comfortable with.

We cannot say to someone who comes here in trouble, that historical dishonesty is acceptable because of the culture she is from. If we are to help someone have an MB marriage, we have to encourage them to apply ALL the concepts.

SugarCane



I fixed that post. I was addressing it to everyone.

The point of my preamble was to show that not everyone reads and processes the same way. Some want more information, some want less. Some are happy with the amount given. I bought SAA because I wanted more.

My point was that I have personally validated as many of Dr. Harley's concepts as I could through research and study.

Except I still have unresolved questions about Historical Honesty. This is a lack of understanding on my part (acknowledged) and no reflection on Dr. Harley.

I am probably making things to complex.

Larry

SugarCane

Ok, I am reading and I hope others will as well. At some point, I want to get into it with you about:


But not now.

I am still digesting what you have said and will reply later on today.

Thank you.

Larry

Me thinks Larry is making this WAY more complicated than it is...........

My gosh, I just don't see what is so hard about "historical honesty" - Mr. W and I didn't do all of ours in the form of a questionnaire either - but just in regular conversation - telling old "war stories" and everything else - what else is there to talk about in order to get to know each other?

Of course we dated for 5 years prior to getting married, so that was a long time to be able to tell all I guess - but I can't imagine deciding to marry someone any other way???

I remember a friend of ours being shocked once as we recalled an old story [funny, we thought] about a former girlfriend of Mr. W's - She just could NOT believe that we knew that kind of detail about each other - We were shocked that this was "news" to others - It seemed weird to us that other people would not have discussed their sexual pasts with each other...

Why is "your spouse should know everything about you that you know" a difficult concept? And why wouldn't you want them to know????? Why all this "bobbing and weaving" over something so simple? I don't get it...

Mrs. W

I have a tendency to do that until I get it figured out, then my mission becomes making it simple.

I am still waiting to see if some guys will address this issue.

See, men and women are not wired the same. Men try to figure out their girlfriends and wives logically, kinda like how a car works. Women talk to their cars. Men do too, but not in the same way.

Historical honesty is way easy for women to understand. Not so with men. It is the way we are wired. I dunno know how most men think, but I do know how some think. From hashing out this issue in the past with guys, most have allowed as how all they wanted to know was if she was a "good" woman or liked to pull a train with the football team. A few guys had other ideas that were mostly kinky.

Larry

I don't believe Mr. W will agree with you - I'll give him a call at work and see if he has time to address it...

Mrs. W

I can see both points I think. I was a virgin when I married (so was H), but H knew I had been engaged before. And he knew that I had dated one of those "get her as far as you can then dump her" types. We knew he had had one serious relationship and overall some less dating experience. He knew about my sexual Abuse at the hands of a family friend and minister. But the "who did what to whom" details weren't really shared.

After my A, when we really started talking about every detail of our lives, I shared more. I worried that he would think "if I had known that I wouldn't have married her." But he didn't. It bohtered him that I had been so physical with the two other people, but discussing this shed light on some things as well. Since SF was/is one of our major issues, finding out I have always craved ohysical affection reinforced that I was "wired" that way...it wasn't just him or bipolar ir mania or some weird defect that cropped up. And even though I knew a few things he had been through, hearing more about how they affected him shed light for me.

I think this extend to way moe than old relationships too. If we had talked more in depth about our parents' marriages, for example, we would have had a better understanding of our own preconceived notions.

There are probably things I haven't told H - like I don't know if he knows I stole a friend's toy at a slumber party in third grade. But it wasn't some conscious deception, and if I have forgotten about it before I get home today, I am not going to fry myself. But if I don't forget, I'll probably share. No biggie.

Whoa. It isn't that important, is it? It can wait until he has time. I would be interested in what MrW thinks AND what he has heard from other guys.

Larry

Why is it hard for men to understand? Are they "wired" to be dishonest?........

This makes NO SENSE to me...... But then again, I am woman ( now hear me roar!!!!!...... )

But seriously, your argument for men being "wired" different when it comes to RH seem a bit feeble........ You're gonna have to do better than this......

DH and I never dated exclusively before getting engaged (long story) and got married a year to the day after first meeting. And yet we managed to cover all the big points. In fact, the first week we 'dated' we spent nearly every waking moment together talking about EVERYTHING.

Intimacy creates a desire to be Open and Honest. Like someone above said, there's nothing like having someone know all your deep, dark secrets and loving you anyway.

Now, as to the question of how much to tell. Well the point of Historical Honesty is to let the other person know WHO you are. My DH doesn't need a minute by minute play of my previous sexual exploits. He DOES need to know how they affected me - how they shaped who I am now.

And there are valid reasons to not discuss something early on. I had a negative sexual experience in High School. It has shaped who I am. It was mentioned in passing while DH and I were first getting to know each other. But I wasn't ready then to discuss such a personal experience with someone I'd just met. I said I'd had some negative experiences but I wasn't comfortable talking about them, and left them at that. Before we married it was discussed because DH needed to know.

Marriage is about becoming ONE. You have to know your spouse to become ONE with them. The questionnaire is a great way to do that as it relates to the past (Radical Honesty covers it in Marriage). We did it more informally over a series of conversations that have continued - well up to last night in fact. I want to open myself up to my DH - I want him to know me like I know myself so I tell him everything (down to the random thoughts in my head). In turn, I want to know everything about him. THAT's how much you reveal: how much your spouse wants to know and at a minimum, the basic sketch of your past that will provide insight into where you're coming from.

I assure you he won't post unless he has time - When you are the boss there is no one to get in trouble with y'know...

Larry, I think what you are saying is rather insulting to men...

Mr. W and I were 23 and 25 when we met - it was not hard for either of us to be honest about our pasts at all...That is HOW we got to know each other...I seriously can't imagine any other way to do that - what would you talk about other than what had happened to you before you met?

Mrs. W

My DH and I have been married for 32 years. We both STILL manage to learn something about the other's past that we didn't know even NOW. We got married in the 70s when I was 19 and pregnant and he was 26 and we both had a history (we met at a disco bar). We never shared our histories with each other in a one-time sit-down session but rather it has come out over the years. I can see where Dr. H's Q would have been a valuable tool for deciding to marry instead of marrying based on feelings alone. There's not much that we don't know about each other now but occasionally we'll surprise each other.

If you have never studied the basic wiring differences, what I said didn't meet your standards. It does mine.

And just to correct something. I have zero argument for the policy of Radical Honesty when it comes to current events and lifestyle. That makes sense to me. Where I am struggling to understand is the WHOLE thing about Historical Honesty.

HOW MUCH Historical Honesty in terms of details and other issues that would help someone who thinks systematically and mechanistically to understand the concept.

Does that make better sense?

Larry

The phrase that continues to play in my mind as I read this thread is:

"People that have nothing to hide, hide nothing."

Mrs. W

Nope...... And as you can see, I'm not the only one having a hard time understanding why you don't seem to understand RH.....

What I do find interesting though, is that you keep arguing about men and women being wired differently and that is why you fail to understand the concept, yet the whole concept of RH was thought of by a MAN, Dr. H........

Excellent point, Not!

Mrs. W

Larry,

Can you see that QUESTIONING "how much honesty" leads others to question everything about you?

If we had an employee questioning exactly how honest they should be with us, I can assure you they would become the immediate "RED FLAG EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH" We wouldn't care if they were male, female or eunuch either...

Mrs. W

I too do not understand Larry's problem with historical honesty.

Me and my h know everything about one another, he has told me things he has never told ANYONE and that makes me feel good, that he trusts me enough to share those intimate details with me.

I do not understand why anyone would be against sharing their history with someone they plan on marrying. I can not think of one thing that should NOT be told to a future spouse.

First of all, one doesn't have to "plead the fifth" to avoid a discussion one doesn't want to engage in. You can simply state that you find this topic too personal for a first date. There are many things that are not anyone else's business and it can even be considered rude to ask. A first date is often little more than a stranger. Some people may feel comfortable telling every detail of their lives to a near-stranger. Others (myself included) are not and keep very personal things to myself until I've developed some trust with the person. This difference alone could very well be the deciding factor as to the prospects of a second date.

This is a whole lot different than your spouse, or a person you are in a serious relationship with and considering marriage. At this point, if the topic hasn't come up you better bring it up.

What is MOST important is that you don't lie - to your spouse, a first date, to this board, to your hairdresser or your tax collection agency or anybody. Lying is what gets you into trouble.

And this is exactly my point. That WH is wrong for using his wife's past as a justification, but he did have a right to know this before he married her. She deprived him of that right and tricked him into marrying her. A WS does not need a spouses past to justify an affair; they do all that anyway.


I don't know what this means and how it is relevant. One's cultural "direction" is not relevant to the discussion. This is about historical honesty.

Larry, if I didn't know any better, I would say a very foggy person wrote this post. This is a thinly veiled post loaded with odd rationalizations about why a prospective partner can't or WON'T be honest. Why the gymnastics?

And if you agree that the FBI does an intense background check for security clearance, doesn't it just stand to reason that a potential SPOUSE would undergo a more rigorous check? Much more is at risk with a spouse, after all.

I was agreeing that not giving this information until you decide you wish to share it is your right. I'm not sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me here.

I started this thread to discuss historical honesty with the person you were consider marrying. That is the situation that Dr Harley raises in his article, as well as the one in which the couple is already married.

I was discussing marriage. You brought up the situation of a first date; I don't know why.

It doesn't help understanding to say "yes, but what about..." and then bring up a hypothetical situation that the argument did not cover in the first place.


Both actively lying and deciding that the past is not something that your spouse needs to know about is wrong. I don't think I implied anywhere that lying is right.

nope Mel.....according to Larry, it's just a very male mind......

Before we were married, I started sharing some of my more *colorful* past experiences with soon-to-be-husband.
He stopped me.
"I don't want to hear this."
I was shocked.

Later, I came to understand my H better.
I was painting a very vivid, and lurid, picture of myself.
A picture that would be forever burned into his mind.

We've both changed a lot in the subsequent 29 years.
But, I still don't think he'd welcome a blow-by-blow description of some of my most spectacularly stupid hippie-days activities.

My H is blessed/cursed with a very acute memory.
I would say it is not quite photographic, but very close.
He remembers details of every aspect of his life.

From Wikipedia:

Quote

Eidetic memory, or photographic memory, is popularly defined as the ability to recall images, sounds, or objects in memory with extreme accuracy and in abundant volume.

If your spouse says "Don't tell me" .... What are the options?

I have very carefully explained that I do not have a problem with Radical Honesty. I have very carefully explained my total belief that Radical Honesty is appropriate in a relationship. I can assure you that I have always done my best to follow that concept. This was even BEFORE I decided to study the teachings and concepts of MR.

I have very carefully explained that I understood the need for honesty both in an employment context, a security context and a marriage context. I have tried to get each of you who are attempting to explain something that I don't understand to me by using examples and analogies so maybe you could educate me. I have even retreated to a male vs female logic to try to get somewhere so you understand the block and how to help me get past that block.

Male Brain vs Female Brain

I have read very carefully the explanations that have been presented at this point on this subject, all of which, unless I missed something, are coming from women. I get it ladies. It is a big deal with you. I totally get it.

I do believe the comments are going way beyond where they should be. This is not a debate on honesty. I understand honesty. And I understand the importance of honesty. What I don't understand are elements within Historical Honesty that are sexual in nature.

What I want to know is HOW MUCH DETAIL? Every caress, every word spoken, ever act, every encounter, every single tiny detail or a more general approach?

And just as important, HOW do you detail it?

Thank you all for helping me to grasp the parts of Historical Honesty I didn't understand and couldn't even detail correctly. I still don't completely, but a dim bulb is beginning to light up. This is why I have boiled it down to how much detail of a sexual nature is called for. I did mention that for me and many other men, we just don't want to know all that much of the details.

Larry

Absolutely. That would be a knock out factor in choosing an employee or a potential spouse. Imagine interviewing a job candidate after their past and they respond "how honest do I have to be?" Or if a suitor answers the same way? I would be done with that person because honest people do not answer like that. Honest people want others to know the truth about them because they know it reflects well. People who have nothing to hide, don't hide.

As much as is necessary to convey the truth to the reciever's satisfaction. This is not a GENDER issue, Larry; this is an honesty issue. Honesty applies to both women and men.

I get that. I understand that, always have.

How much detail? For example, "Why when I used to make love with XXX, I used to blah, blah, blah..." I don't want to hear that. All I care about is the big picture. Is this person a liar or a cheat? How much detail does it take for me to understand the character of the person.

Larry

Why are you asking me that? I can answer for no one other than myself. That answer will obviously differ from person to person.

I will tell you this, though, if a person acts like a hostile defense witness when questions are asked, that would be enough to convince me they were not honest. If a person was forthcoming and demonstrated WILLINGNESS to be honest, that would demonstrate honesty.

Larry,

It is the QUESTIONING that has the hairs on the back of my neck standing up ~ I GET that all of us can forget minutia...

Let me assure you that [unfortunately] Mr. W and I both were NO ANGELS sexually speaking prior to meeting each other...He was a FRAT BOY for crying out loud - and I was a little sister for a fraternity ~ we get it...

It is not like we sat down and did a play by play of each and every encounter with our respective past partners, but we have been VERY OPEN about all of it ~ perhaps more so than others would be comfortable with, but it suits us...

HOWEVER...Imagine that either one of us had said to the other - "Hmmm, exactly how much do you need/want to know about my sexual past?"

WHOA!!!! HOLD UP!!!!!

The very fact that the question was even asked would have been enough for either of us to say, "NO THANK YOU!!!" to the other...

Asking HOW MUCH HONESTY is a GIANT CLUE that the person ASKING is DISHONEST!!!

Mrs. W

MrsW

HOLD IT.


THAT is my point.

Thank you for making it simple. I like simple after I understand something well enough for it to be boiled down and still be understandable.

Larry

Larry, I hope you are not twisting that to say one should only say what is "comfortable," because that is not at all what is being said here. I was definitely NOT "comfortable" telling my husband about my alcoholism and some of my dastardly deeds, but I owed him the truth. And I answered all of his questions to his satisfaction, making sure he understood fully who I was.

So, be assured the point here is NOT personal "comfort" but complete and total historical honesty so the potential spouse has an HONEST AND COMPLETE picture of who they are marrying. The need for honesty supercedes your "comfort."

Larry,

I'm sorry, but how is it not blatantly obvious that what your spouse agrees is acceptable, is in fact, acceptable?

I do not understand all the gymnastics of this...

No one has explained this so far because, quite frankly, it's self explanatory - imo, anyway...

Not to mention the wild goose chase method used about this being a gender issue...

Rest assured that I was NOT talking about our comfort regarding honesty - just that Mr. W and I are incredibly candid - Pep explained above that her husband didn't want details - Mr. W and I are NOT uncomfortable sharing any and all details with each other...

Brass tacks honesty from me to you: I don't believe this is what you were "misunderstanding" - To me, your posts on this thread signify that you have a problem with honesty - and that would make you a RISK as a marriage partner in my book...To be blunt, I think you are just "crying uncle" because others are questioning you - and the hot seat has become a little too hot for your tastes...JMHO

Mrs. W

I keep seeing Larry asking about how much "detail"-- not how much "honesty".

Example: He admits to her that he did the deed. How much detail about the deed does she need? (say that fast five times)

The 5th grade answer is: until she's satisfied she has the information she needs.

I hope you are right, PM. And the answer, of course, is she needs as much detail as she needs.

I should think that they are:

1. To respect his wishes and not tell him.

2. To force him to listen, if such a thing is possible.

3. To try and discuss why this honesty is necessary.

I can see that if he does not want to know, then he probably will not want to know why he should know. You might not get very far with 3.

However, I would be inclined to at least try. There are some things that he should know, because they could affect his future.

Abortions and STDs can affect future fertility.

A child given up in secret for adoption, or a sperm donor child, might find you in later years.

An affair with a married man might be discovered by the wife, years later when the couple is married.

If he really would prefer not to know that you were promiscuous for some years, then he takes the risk that some nasty detail will turn up years later - like an expose by a past lover when you appear on American Idol! I suppose that if he states his wish clearly, though, you are justified in keeping quiet.

However, I don't think you should use "I don't want to know" as an excuse for not disclosing a child, a sexual crime, a disease, infidelity or an addiction. And of course, once we allow some things to be seen as important and others not, then we get in muddy waters years later when he says "yes, but I didn't mean THAT! You should have known I would have wanted to know about THAT!"

Okay, if in fact that is the case, no one here can answer that, because no one here is Larry's potential spouse that I know of...

I can tell you this, FOR ME, if Mr. W had asked me "how much detail do you need?" that would have triggered my "WTH Sense"...The ASKING of that, would have lead me to believe his intent was to be dishonest...

Mrs. W

Oh I agree, that question would be a huge red flag to me too but I got the sense that he was just looking for an opinion about this and not advice on how to react in a real life scenario. At least that's the way I read it, maybe I'm reading it wrong. It's happened before.

In Pep's situation -- from my understanding -- she didn't ask how much her husband wanted to know, she just started sharing with him and he cut her off. IMO, you can't force someone to listen. However, I say you can reserve the right to use that in your defense if it comes up later and they declare, "I would have never married you if I'd known that about you!"

ETA: Hm, I just remembered that Larry is single. Larry, ARE you asking for advice if this comes up in your dating life?

What a well considered answer.
Thank you for taking the time.

MrsW


And brass tacks back to you.

I said I didn't understand Historical Honesty. I didn't know WHY I didn't understand. It took some back and forth and reading to get it; why I didn't understand.

I am not retreating. That is not my nature. Thanks to those who choose to address the issue, the light bulb went off and I grasped why I was having a problem understanding and I said so.

THAT to me is being honest. Admitting that you don't understand is a form of honesty. Asking for help is being honest. That you would go out into the weeds trying for a different take on that is beyond my ability to analyze.

So I am not going to try.

In my opinion, your characterization of me was out of bounds and was not intended to help me understand anything, it was intended to hurt, to manipulate me into believing something about myself that is simply not true. I live by Duty, Honor, Country, period.

And I have no idea why you did it. I am a person who understands his core beliefs and dishonesty is not one of them. I do suggest that you tone it down a bit the next time you get on a soapbox.

Larry

Thank you SugarCane and Pep. You helped turn on the light bulb in my head. I guess it boils down to that you provide as much detail as is comfortable and needed for the person listening. This while being totally honest about your past, such as "While I was in Japan, I consorted with women who I paid for their services." Or some such statement.

And if you want to know how much more detail to give, you ask.

And one more I will add, guys need instruction manuals on things like this. Women make fun of us. Laugh at us is ok, shooting us is not.

Larry

I'm okay with my posting style...Thanks anyway...

Mrs. W

Larry,

Do you understand what Dr Harley means by "historical honesty" now? Do you understand that he means the things he covers in his questionnaire: number of past partners and when; any affairs, homosexual acts, homosexual leanings, sexual convictions, previous marriages, previous cohabitations, children...all the things asked about in the "sex" part of the questionnaire?

Would you offer this honesty to a future spouse? Is there anything you wouldn't offer?

(There are other parts to the questionnaire, covering religion, how you were parented, your education and other things. I am focusing for the moment only on the sexual history.)

Just as long as you do not interpret on the other person's behalf how much is "as much detail as is comfortable and needed for the person listening". That, I think, allows one spouse to claim that the other does not need to know about their exploits with prostitutes, or their waywardness in their first marriage, because "that detail is not needed for the person listening". That is a self-serving rationalisation.

Dr Harley makes it clear that ALL our past sexual experiences contribute towards the person we are today. Your future spouse has a right to know what the events have been and how they have affected you. If you were an OW when single, what have you learned from this? What steps have you taken to make sure that you are never involved in an affair again?

If your future spouse is unwilling to marry someone who was an OW, then you have no right to keep the fact that you were once those things from them. And in case you were thinking of asking, no you cannot keep quiet about a fact if the direct question is never asked!

If we are trying to have MB marriages, then we aim for what Dr Harley says; all the facts of our sexual history. He does not say how much detail is necessary; your future spouse will tell you that. She will ask if she wants to know how many times and in what positions. If she asks, you must answer.

Well, I'm sorry, but I'm going to shoot you if you marry me without telling me you were once a ladyboy!

Uhhh, what's a ladyboy?

SugarCane

I think I do. I am going to think about it some more. I may have a few questions after I process it. I have to unload the personal attack before I can really put a bottom line on it in my mind.

I do remember the first time I ever saw that questionnaire, "My God, I could write a novel!" How many weeks will it take me just to cover the highlights? In other words, I was a bit overwhelmed by the job. No fear, just no direction that would simplify the task so I could understand it.

Larry

It was my pleasure, Pep.

I'd be interested if you want to discuss it.

I think it might be something that you cannot be "once". I have a feeling that it changes a man's future for good.

Since some of us have to work for a living (if you call this work and if you call it a living) I will have to either look at this later or skip it all together. I just need to see what everyone has said before I reply in full.

As part of my MB class at church, I hand out the PHQ to couples. I tell them that I strongly suggest that they fill them out and that they share what they write with each other. I also suggest that they not simply try to unload everything that might be a serious enough problem to cause a conflict going forward until they have had time to process a good bit of the rest of MB and ensure that the marriage is the best possible road to begin with since suddenly finding out certain things about each other could be a problem if something has been hidden for a long time during the marriage, especially something that would explain why a certain way of handling something or some dynamic in the relationship.

Example: Suppose you had a brief affair with an older sibling's spouse or BF/GF. The family is estranged and no mention of is is ever made at family gatherings. Perhaps the sibling does not know it happened and so you avoid him or her entirely and your spouse doesn't understand why.

Or maybe the wife had an abortion when she was 14 or 15 years old and the father would have been the 22 year old neighbor who later died in Vietnam. These things not only effect the current spouse who is withholding the information but can effect decisions about things that come along in the marriage as well.

I think that Dr Harley is not talking here about sharing details of what you did in the backseat of a 1963 Dodge when you were 17 years old but the fact that you did in fact do it when you were 17 and that was your first time or whatever. The minutia that might be forgotten over time isn't significant to the discussion of being honest about our history. What matters is our willingness to be honest and to not withhold information we do know.

How much should we share with our spouse? The answer, I think, is "How much ya got?" What you remember isn't the issue as much as sharing what you remember. And also realize that it really only becomes a serious problem if information was withheld in the past. Generally, if a person purposely withholds information about their history before marriage they usually continue to withhold information after they are married.

I'll be back...

Mark

I agree with this completely. I was very clear from the beginning that I wanted NOTHING to do with any woman who had been involved in an affair. I didn't believe in their character and had no faith that they wouldn't do it again. I was agreed with time and again. Then a year and a half later, I find that she HAD been involved as the OW in an affair. This was long after I had fallen in love with both her and her daughters...

THEN you are left holding the bag. LEAVING your family... or at least how you think about them at that time... or sucking it up and taking the chance. I took the chance... and lost DRAMATICALLY.

God Bless ya Mark!!!!!

You said it EXACTLY how I always took RH to mean.....

It just isn't rocket science.....cuz if it were, I'd be in a world of hurt...

Mark,

What do you understand HH to mean?

Do you think that Dr Harley is clear about the kinds of events it covers?

Do you think he is clear about the level of detail required?

Have you found that the gender of the respondents at your church sessions affects their understanding of the questionnaire?

Just how much of our past is relavent is such an interesting subject.
I do think males and females process these things differently.

Recently I was talking to a friend about how much we know of our wives sexual past and how much we want to know.
His immediate reply was that he wanted to "know" he was the best that she had ever had and that was it, definately no other details.
They are a happy couple.

Another couple I know have just recently separated. The woman had had an affair in a previous marriage. The guy knew about this and I think was ok about it, we all have a past.
The devil came in the detail. She was not backward in telling how the affair had "openned" her up sexually. The defining moment in her sexual life. I believe this added information ate away at their relationship and was a big factor causing them to eventually split up.

The first scenario may technically be a lie but it would save a lot of relationships compared to the "full" disclosure of the second couple.

Maybe it depends on the spin we put on it?
What do you say to your wife when she asks "Do I look fat in this?" Do we apply radical honesty?

note - every time i see this thread i read it as "hysterical honesty"...not sure why

You can click on "Edit" and fix stuff.

Larry

This is the hard lesson right here. And though you are focusing on sexual history, the other stuff can be just as damaging. Lies do nothing but cause harm. Adopt a policy of honesty for your whole life and every aspect of it. Never utter a word that isn't true and you'll save yourself a lot of grief down the road. Most importantly, you will ultimately feel good about yourself. Really, because it is a heck of a lot less painful to end a relationship before marriage than it is to find out all this stuff afterwards.

Cheers Larry.

Im new to all this and sometimes need all the help I can get.:)

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.


I disagree that it is a virtue to try and keep a marriage together based on a lie. A good marriage has a foundation of honesty, not lies.


Of course.

Someone that glorified the "benefits" of adultery would be a knock out factor for most people. Most folks would recognize such a person has little respect for fidelity and would pose a dangerous risk as a marriage partner. I know I sure would take a pass.

Or course Tabby. I live by a code: Duty, honor, country and have since roughly when I was in mid-twenties. I feel very good about myself in those arenas, and Duty covers honesty. Can't you tell? I am not smart enough to keep up with lies.

The other stuff is at least as important to display character as the sexual stuff. In between one marriage and another, I was well off. But I told all prospects that I was barely hanging by a thread. And in fact most small businessmen can say that without a trace of a lie. I have had three businesses, all under capitalized and all subject to going down the tubes if left unattended for very long. Most applicants did a fast exit.

But not the lady who I eventually married. And when it happened for real, she worked as hard as I did to restore some level of prosperity to the family. She had no trace of bailing, period. I respect her for that to this day among many other reasons. I think, from the male POV, that what she did when disaster struck, has filled a love bank that can never be depleted. I do think that guys have multiple love banks, but that is a subject for another day.

I do see the guys starting to stick their toes in this water. Be interesting what they have to say, like Pep's husband.

There a few on here who have tried to figure me out. And the one who got it right, said the two words, "Innate Decency." I have had friends who have known me for years who have said the same thing. It is who I am and how I have lived and how I will die.

Larry

The first thing I thought of is a woman who is in love with infatuation feelings. You can't fix stupid.

Larry

Well - no you can.

I was stupid.

Stupid to not realize my H loved me
Stupid to go out alone in las vegas
stupid to get drunk alone
stupid to go with a strange man alone to his room
stupid to cheat on my husband with the man and put my marriage and life at risk
stupid to not go get the cops after the OM and his friends raped me
stupid to tell my husband I cheated on him and not tell him I was raped because i felt so guilty about it all..and now he doesnt believe me and thinks I am covering up for the ONS and not trying to take responsibility for my actions.

You CAN fix stupid...its just a very painful process.

My BH believe people dont change...that also isnt true

People do change...but that to...is a very painful process

AND


Before someone else tries to put me in the dog house, infatuation feelings are great if both parties are available and NOT married. I have already detailed how MB concepts mimic the natural things we do during an infatuation, which allows one to have all the good stuff by having those feelings for someone real instead of someone we just think is real

I firmly believe this is the secret behind how Dr. Harley was able to construct something that, for those who do what he says do, takes one to a different place most never find.

Larry

Along the same lines... but DIFFERENT none-the-less...

When do you talk about what is IMPORTANT to you as far as ENs?

SHOULD you talk about ENs while dating... or merely see if your SO 'fits the bill' so to speak?

I ask this.. because I have done alot of thinking over the last week.

One reason I am in the position I am in is because I actually TOLD my wife (then GF) what I was looking for... and she then BECAME what I was looking for... at least for a short time. Long enough for be to love her, but not long enough to BECOME that within herself.

So I have thought long and hard about this, maybe prematurely, but none-the-less...

When/DO????? you talk about ENs...

and my main example would be SF... or whatever YOUR number 1 EN would be.

For example... MY #1 EN IS Honesty... however, it is so ubiquitous, as to almost NOT be an EN because EVERYTHING rests upon it being in place. Therefore if it isn't there, then nothing else matters, in my book, because I can't believe in SF, affection, conversation, rec, etc etc if HONESTY isn't in ALL of them. That is just for me.

However, when do you talk about your ENs? Like SF? SF is a BIG thing to me, too big to 'dabble' in early on as I have found with my current wife. I put TOO MUCH LOVE into my SF. I FEEL too much love via SF, perhaps where none or little exists in reality on the other side.

So... when do you get the stones to say "BTW... SF is a big thing for me. Too big to simply ignore. I don't want to sound like a pervert, however, I would like to understand what you feel about SF in a relationship/marriage and what your views are on the subject from YOUR point?"

For me this is a HUGE thing. Because, I don't want to be with a woman who doesn't think SF is significant. I also don't want to FIND OUT what she thinks through trial and error, because I don't want emeshment NOR infatuation NOR her desire to 'please' rather than be 'true' to get in the way. I don't want to say "I like XYZ this often, in this way" because I don't want her to think I am controlling, nor simply give it because she 'likes' me but resent it later. I believe my wife did this, and not only did it NOT continue, but it worsened EVERYTHING between us.

SO... what are your thoughts?

When do/DO YOU talk about ENs? First date? 6th date?

IF you DO talk about them... how do you know that they aren't simply USING what you say to 'catch you' rather than using what you say to "LEARN what you LIKE"? For instance, If I LIKED a woman, and she said "I like XYZ" I would work to do 'XYZ' as often as possible. I would work to incorporate it into who I was... so it would be a 'good' thing. However, if I said I like 'XYZ' and all of the sudden she 'did' it... I would worry about whether she was being honest or merely trying to 'catch' me.

Sounds kinda self centered... doesn't it... but real to me none-the-less.

SC,

I have not found men or women to be more likely to fail to understand the questionnaire nor less likely to understand it as the case might be.

I do know that women have a memory that is more suited to recalling specific details about emotional events than do men. This might be in large part to the fact that women have a lot more interconnections between the left and right sides of the brain than do men. This might be in part at least the explanation of why men seem to be able to (generally) have a knock-down drag-out brawl with a friend where they beat each other silly till neither can stand up and then crawl to the corner pub for a pint.

I think Dr Harley is very clear that anything and everything that effects our character or might shed some light on how we react in a given situation is something that our spouse should be made aware of in order to know when the marriage relationship might be at risk and ideally this information should be made available before the marriage starts.

The minutia of what happened in the back seat of that 63 Dodge (or 74 Ford or 82 Audi) doesn't matter as much as the fact that it happened and even who it happened with. The details of what the hooker and the sailor on leave did that night in Bangkok is not as important as the fact that while serving a tour that lasted 6 months away from home the sailor fell for the trap of "sowing some wild oats" and then pretending that it doesn't matter to our wife ten years later when she gets sick and can't meet our EN of SF for six months and the guys at work are all going on a fishing trip that has a stop in Rio.

There is a valid difference between saying "I slept around when I was in college" and saying "I worked my way through school by spending weekends with various business men having sex with them and their friends so that they would buy me stuff like clothes so I could afford to stay in school." On the other hand if I slept around when I was in college I'm not even sure if the name of every single person I had sex with matters nearly as much as the number that I consider constitutes sleeping my way around.

Q: How many women did you have sex with in your life before meeting your wife?

A: A lot...

Ok. 10 IS A LOT.

10 per month for 10 months is 100 and THAT is a LOT.

1 per week for ten years...

Are we talking serial monogamy with 5 women spread over ten years or are we talking about a different bar pickup every Friday Saturday and Sunday nights continuing over that same ten years?

And men remember those kinds of details just as well as women do, IMO. THOSE are the details that count.

The real issue that I run into with the PHQ is when something has happened since the marriage began and one spouse has been hiding it from the other, perhaps for 30 years.

The thing I think historical honesty is pointing to is questions of character. Having had one or 5 sex partners in a monogamous relationship over a period of ten or more years worries me a lot less than having chased everything in a skirt (or pants) from the time you were twelve until you were 33 and then suddenly claiming ignorance. The things that shape our character or point to our character defects and weaknesses I think are important enough that even us men can remember them. Maybe we don't know the name of every hooker we ever paid for sex if we were really wild and crazy for a while but we certainly know if it was a one time thing on leave or if it was a lifestyle that might put us or our spouse at risk in the future.

I believe historical honesty is of primary importance for another reason beyond just our spouse's right to know. It can in fact be our former weaknesses and sins that we have overcome and no longer participate in that can show our true current nature and how much better we are at controlling our impulses. If I am an alcoholic who has been ten years sober my soon to be bride might not decide to not marry me but might decide on the toast at the reception being made with sparkling apple juice rather than champagne.

What I think it really comes down to is honesty in general. How honest do we need to be to be honest? How many lies can we tell and still be honest? How many secrets do we have to be hiding from our spouse to be hiding too many secrets? How unfaithful do I have to be in order to be called unfaithful? How many times do I have to meet an affair partner in the motel down the block in order to be a cheater?

Even issues of health might come up as a result of withholding information. If my father died when I was 17 of a heart attack brought on by reaction to a drug used to treat him after an accident that left him unable to communicate, my wife might need to know that in case I have the same reaction when I am pulled from the wreckage of my car on the freeway.

I also think it comes down to this. What is important to our spouse is what our spouse feels is important. If I share everything I know about myself and it doesn't matter to my wife and she still wants to be married to me forever, then I am a lucky man. If I hold back something that she feels is important then maybe she won't be so willing to spend her life with me. I don't get to decide what she thinks is important; she does. If she wants to know, it is my responsibility to tell her the truth within the bounds of my ability to recall details she wants to know. If I tell her everything she can decide if it is something she needs to react to or make changes in her life. It just isn't my call to filter the truth for any reason.

Time to go home to my wife...

Mark

I was wrong. Sometimes you can fix stupid. You just told me how.

Thank you.

Larry

What stood out to me is that this is a person who has never recovered. This would be like the rapist who extols the virtue of the "sex" he had while raping. That is someone who is very sick and has never repented. A repentant, recovered person feels grief and sorrow about their crime, they don't glamorize it.

What is the issue with this, Mark? How do you handle it differently?

We did complete the PHQ at the MB weekend and exchanged them. We were told to hold nothing back.

SugarCane:

I am not sure Mark answered all of your questions. I am holding to the concept that guys have a bigger problem for several reasons:

1. We know our memory system has large holes.
2. We fear leaving something out that is important.
3. We are not sure what level of detail to give.

Once we understand how it works, no problem.

And of course the issue that can'tfigure raised. As a rhetorical question, how the heck do you deal with that?

While I didn't appreciate the personal attacks, I do appreciate the learning process and now I think I have a handle on Historical Honesty, and the why, the result, the detail, and the pitfalls.

As it turns out, the naive question I asked turned out to be a bigger hair ball than I would have imagined.

Thank you.

Larry

Larry,

I thought that Mark answered all my questions. I had to read carefully as he did not number the answers, but they were all there.

For example, he said that he did not note a gender difference in understanding or answering the questionnaire, among the groups of churchgoers that he has worked with. He also thought that Dr Harley's writings on HH were clear.

Is there anything in his answers that you disagreed with?

This might be so, Larry, but I can only say that number 1, upon which a large part of your argument has rested so far, does not match my observations.

I don't think that men cannot remember, for example, whether they have ever been unfaithful to a girlfriend or previous wife, or have been an OM, or have had an STD or have fathered a child. I don't think that they can forget that they visited prostitutes or were wildly promiscuous when in the military.

As Mark said, they might not be able to remember the name of every prostitute but they do remember that they have been with them, and whether with two or three, or with dozens. The holes in their memory systems are not large enough to blank out those experiences altogether, in my experience.

Indeed, you seemed to be saying that when you looked at the questionnaire you knew it could take you a long time (and lots of spare paper!) to fill it. That suggests that you DO remember the facts of your past. You seem to not want to give them to a spouse, for reasons that are not clear to me.

I think cantfigureitout's post deserves a separate answer, and I will try to give one tomorrow, as I will a response to Mark.

Briefly on cantfigureitout's question, however, I think that an ENQ must be filled in with honesty. This must be impressed upon both parties. Lying, covering, omitting or otherwise deceiving when filling in a MB questionnaire is silly and self-defeating.

You cannot make a girlfriend or a wife tell the truth. You can only act in good faith. Your faith might turn out to be misplaced, and that will result in a crisis later on, but faith in their honesty is all you have, surely.

Mel,

As a nonprofessional, untrained layman, I have found a couple of instances where something came out on the PHQ that caught the spouse totally off guard and even made them question the validity of the relationship.

Even though the rest of the program made rapid improvements in their interactions with each other as they learned to meet each other's ENs and dealt with Love Busters once identified as well as started actually giving each other enough time to make the whole thing work, in at least one case the issue is still a sticking point between them and at least for now a source of unhappiness.

I guess it is really just the consequence of lying for your entire life to the one who thought they knew you better than anyone else.

I still think it is important, but I tell couples that when you do the PHQ, make every effort to avoid reacting to anything that occurred in the distant past. I am fortunate that no affairs have been revealed yet, or at least none that I am aware of since I don't look at the results myself and do not encourage the people to share everything that they found out about their spouse. I just don't seem to get myself in a position to do that face to face with folks in a group setting where not everyone is necessarily on the same page when it comes to confidentiality.

That answer your question?

Mark

I did understand what Mark had to say and agree in total, no reservations. He basically provided an instruction manual. It was detailed and complete. He also succeeded in attaching the concept to my honor system, which solved that for me as well.

That said, I had already learned a lot from your posts and others who chimed in, to include that it is a serious hot button for many. And should be for all.


Until I understood the concept, I was unable to correctly envision the level of detailed response that was needed. Think me waffling between my previous ignorance and what I know now. I do clearly remember giving my X every single gross detail I could remember in a series of conversations that lasted over six months. AND I remember pulling similar details from her until she got used to it and volunteered. Since that time, she has done nothing that I couldn't have predicted based on what she told me. Eyes wide open.

What I did intuitively then and what I wanted to know now is two different things.

Let me paraphrase something that Dr. Harley said that will clarify what I meant by memory. It was in one of his books or on the site, but I can't find it at the moment. He said that he had just learned that estrogen helped women have a better memory than men. Then he jokingly lamented that Joyce would thus have a better memory for all his past transgressions.

At the same time, I understand that memory cannot be used as a cop out. Of course I remember the gross details of the stuff I have done in my life, if not all of the exact details. And I of course know why I did what I did at the time with 20/20 hindsight. Heck I can even tell you why I adopted an honor system that I have lived by for decades.

What I didn't understand at the time of my initial expression of ignorance and think I do now, is the level of detail required. I think I got it SC about as well as I am going to get it even though saying that might expose me to more character assassination attempts. Actually, what I do understand is the end result and from there, the instruction manual becomes more obvious.

Thank you.

Larry

I can see how that could have the potential for major fireworks if a spouse has lied for years and years about something and may even cause some to want to end the marriage. I know that there are some things that would cause me to end the marriage. I would rather know the truth, of course.

Larry,

I have to tell you that whether a guy can remember all the details of something or not I don't think really has any bearing on this. The mandate is not to explain or recall all details of every event of your entire life or even the silly young and dumb parts of it. Rather I think that what it says, that we should share with our spouse whatever we know about ourselves pretty much only applies to what we remember. If we don't know it, we can't share it.

I do think that anything that might be a life changer or a character modifier would be significant enough that it should be quite memorable. I remember the first girl I took to the prom. I remember the color of her dress. I don't remember her friend's name who went with us or her friend's boyfriend's name who drove the car. I do remember the car breaking down and the old woman with the drunken husband who let us use a phone to call my date's parents for help. I also know the car was a white Caddy rag top but can't tell you what year. To me the night wasn't about the car...

Where a problem might occur is if our wife doesn't believe we don't recall or can't remember a name or a date or some such.

I can still remember the phone number for my grandmother from when I was about 4 or 5 (both grandmothers actually) and one of them has been dead for almost 30 years and changed her phone number four times after the one I remember. On the other hand, I can't for the life of me remember the address of the house we lived in when our son was born or the number of the apartment we lived in when we got married, though it is only a two minute drive from where we live now.

I think in both cases here I recall some details and not others because the house we lived in when my son was born we only lived in for about three months and the only significant event of that period was his birth. I recall vividly holding him in my arms as he stared through the window at the dog running through the snow with our daughter. The event was about him and not the house. In the case our first apartment, we lived in it from August until November and then spent our fist Christmas together at another apartment in a different town. Soon after our daughter was born and I recall a lot of details about her but can't remember if we moved again before or after her first birthday. Again, the year she was born wasn't about where we lived, it was about her coming into our lives.

I know during an affair seldom does the WS always recall the same kind of details that the BS remembers with clarity. I'm talking here about things like whether or not the affair partners met on a certain date or what movie was shown at the theater where they met one afternoon at the height of the affair. The fog doesn't just effect the interactions with the BS but even causes a significant amount of life to be lost for the WS. I don't know if men are more prone to this phenomenon or not but I have seen it around here enough to know that it happens.

And to assuage the the fears of those who might misunderstand me, I am not talking about a WS who trickles out the truth spread over month after month of agonizing torture for the BS who is working so hard to attempt recovery in the face of getting another new "worst case scenario" type of revelation on a daily basis; all while claiming lack of ability to recall the details. I am talking about how months or even years into recovery something might cause the BS to trigger and the FWS is oblivious to why it is a problem. Might be something like how the WS blew off the birthday of the BS in order to have a rendezvous with the AP at a free concert in the park. The WS might recall the concert, even the songs that were played or who was in the front row but has no recollection of having done such a thing on the BS's birthday. The truth is, they weren't thinking about the BS at all that day...

So in this instance the WS might see a concert or a free concert or even a song or artist as a problem since that was the experience part that they had themselves. They did not realize they had left the BS alone at home on the day of his or her birthday since they did not experience the pain of that themselves in any way. The birthday is not a logical trigger for them since they did not even think of the BS's birthday that day or at least during the rendezvous with the AP.

To the WS it wasn't about the birthday, it was about the rendezvous in the park that afternoon.

But I would say that the idea that we must have perfect recall or even not have significant memory loss to tell the truth about the past is a false assumption at best. It isn't in the details that we can recall that the truth lies but in the sequence of events that have shaped, defined and identified our lives.

Mark

Mark

After considerable reading and reflecting, I can say that I understand the point you make. And it makes sense to me.


Thank you. That I can do and have done. And more importantly, I have learned how to discuss with someone at a cordial level when needed on this forum. I have a couple of threads to get back to on the subject.

Larry

Honesty should be practiced in all relationships whenever possible not just to show our strenghths but also to understand if we are loved in spite of our weaknesses. There is also when is it the right time to get into our pasts and why? What is the nature and expectation of the relationship?

If you can't talk about everything with your prospective soul-mate with an expectation of being loved even if you had made very poor judgements in the past then there must be a reason why you don't trust them. So the relationship is stunted in a place that you need understanding and forgiveness in, a deep dark secret that you know was wrong.

..But what if you were abducted by aliens? Ok so you know what I am saying right? What if someone as a young person went to jail, does time and after they have been out for ten years and rehabilitated so completly that they cringe when they think of the past they escaped. Should they wear the scarlet letter so they would only be accepted by thier own "kind"? Or should it be possible that they have a relationship with someone based on now and not the past?

Also ppl tend to rewrite history as we all know and few of us want to be honest when we screw up and take the blame. If we are blessed enough to be forced to see where we were wrong its possible we made right decisions and remain forever vigilant to never hurt ourselves or others again.

Are we willing to completly open up and re-live old past decisions all over again and should we have to without good reason? Again it depends on the nature and expectations of the relationship. With a soul-mate anything should be open for discussion in time.


I would love to say that ppl are forgiving and strong enough to love each other without judgement but its not true. We all learn here that betrayal of someone you trusted with your life is one of the most painful and destructive and traumatic experiances anyone can endure and it takes years to buy back what is sold in a second. Forgiveness might come fast but forgetting takes time and not without help from sources outside ourselves. We just are not strong enough to take that pain and we need to protect who we are and our value God places on us before we trust someone else to love us, and in that order. If we believe in a just God who loves us not because he needs us but because thats why he created us to begin with is the only way this makes sense. It only makes sense to those who know they are alone and responsible for thier actions.

The point is that there are some out there that have so much baggage that to even start a relationship they had to leave it all at the train platform. If they are diciplined to follow the rules that relationships require to thrive and throw themselves fully and honestly into the new relationship it might just be painful to dig up bones that have no reason to be dug up.

But again anyone not able to discuss any subject with thier soul-mate has a problem that should be addressed if the subject is relative to the present state. Relationships are our greatest gifts we have and require tending to above all else.

My H thinks that whatever he did before our marriage is his business and none of mine.

He knows EVERYTHING about me!

About 4 year ago, we were on vacation with our best couple friends. I don't drink beer at all, but H and the other husband and wife do. They had already been into the beer for quite a bit, which tends to loosen my H's tongue at times.

Well, the H friend was worried about their son, who was having difficulty with recovering from his girlfriend breaking up with him.

My H offered to talk with the son, and the H friend said, "I think he needs to talk with somebody who had a relationship that suddenly ended."

H says, "I had a relationship that ended suddenly when she got killed in a car wreck."

??????!!!!!!!!!!!

I immediately recalled that a girl my husband had known was killed in a car accident shortly after our marriage (exactly 3 months after our wedding, as it turned out!). I also remembered that he was incredibly upset, and I was upset because HE was upset, even though I had never met the girl.

Anyway, I confronted him over this. He, of course, insisted that when he was talking about a "relationship", he meant that they were just really good "friends". Hmmm...well, if they were such GOOD FRIENDS, why did I never meet her? If they were such GOOD FRIENDS, why didn't she attend our wedding?

I really don't think they were together after our marriage, but I AM thinking that he may have had a massive crush on her, even after we were married. I don't know if they ever had a physical relationship (he says not), but from what I understand, she was the sort of girl to hang out with a bunch of guys...and pair off with whichever one took her fancy. Basically, it seems like being her "friend" came with "benefits". I don't think my H would have ever turned down a benefit.

THIS revelation has done more damage to my desire to recover our marriage than all the cheating that went on before.

I most certainly had a right to know about it BEFORE I said, "I do".

SSO


I am not sure what you mean in the part I underlined.

As I understand it, historical honesty means you expose it all, warts and all, to the level of detail that your partner wants or to the honest extent of memory. More baggage just means it takes longer to get it all out.

Larry

Quote:
What do you say to your wife when she asks "Do I look fat in this?" Do we apply radical honesty?

Answer
Of course.

Melodylane, I do not entirely agree with you here. Generally we give friends and family compliments. If we think they look ugly we tend not to remind them of this. It is simply not necessary.
My point is we are all selective with our comments and for good reason. Such negative comments would just cause hurt for no benifit.

Quote:The first scenario may technically be a lie but it would save a lot of relationships compared to the "full" disclosure of the second couple.

Answer
I disagree that it is a virtue to try and keep a marriage together based on a lie. A good marriage has a foundation of honesty, not lies.

Melodylane, the first scenaro maybe true, the marriage is not held together by a lie. The point here is, I believe and he believes, that it is not necessary to grade past experiences and then make comparisons of which past experiences were better than the present one. This is sure to be a disaster.
All that is really needed to know is you rock her world.

Originally Posted By: Jackblack

Another couple I know have just recently separated. The woman had had an affair in a previous marriage. The guy knew about this and I think was ok about it, we all have a past.
The devil came in the detail. She was not backward in telling how the affair had "openned" her up sexually. The defining moment in her sexual life. I believe this added information ate away at their relationship and was a big factor causing them to eventually split up.

Answer
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, how useful is this knowledge to a potential long term partner?? If he loves the women and wants to marry her.
I believe the knowledge of the affair is enough.

Jack.

Since you addressed others I will not comment.

Look just below Dr. Harley's welcome message on this page. Note the FAQ button. Click on it and scroll down to where it says:

What UBBCode can I use in my posts?

Hit the plus sign and read. That section of the FAQ will tell you all you need to know about the tricks on here. You can learn to type the codes in yourself.

Also, you can hit the quote button at the bottom of any post and see the codes in action.

Larry

Thanks again Larry

My reason for being here is to gain knowledge and refine/modify my thoughts etc. Hopefully to help in my own relationship.
To advise on someones elses marriage is way beyond my scope.

I fly a few kites and are more than happy for anyone to shoot them down. It helps me learn.

Of course. [/quote]

Melodylane, I do not entirely agree with you here. Generally we give friends and family compliments. If we think they look ugly we tend not to remind them of this. It is simply not necessary.
My point is we are all selective with our comments and for good reason. Such negative comments would just cause hurt for no benifit.

I disagree that it is a virtue to try and keep a marriage together based on a lie. A good marriage has a foundation of honesty, not lies.

Melodylane, the first scenaro maybe true, the marriage is not held together by a lie. The point here is, I believe and he believes, that it is not necessary to grade past experiences and then make comparisons of which past experiences were better than the present one. This is sure to be a disaster.
All that is really needed to know is You rock her world.

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.

And then he got her pregnant.........

And this means............??

This means there is a baby coming in 3 weeks. Time for him to end his sleazy affair and step up to the plate.

And what does this have to do with historical honesty?

Well, since I started this thread, I take exception to these statements. The thread was started as an effort to discuss the concept of HH.
Are you interpreting the actions of those who disagreed with you as "an effort by a few folks to take (you) down a notch or two"?

I was one of the people who disagreed with you, and my "effort" was put towards exploring a disagreement. In fact, earlier you actually suggested that someone start a thread on HH, and I took you up! I didn't realise that you saw the discussion as an effort to take you down.

You appeared, up until Tink's post, to have appreciated the discussion that I and others had held with you, and I believe you claimed to have a better understanding of the concept. It is a bit surprising to read now that you feel that "much of the Historical Honesty thread had nothing to do with...Historical Honesty". So it hasn't helped you at all, contrary to what you said?

Mel, I think Believer is talking about Tink's situation.

Yes, I know.

Thank you for not discussing this on Tink's thread. After reading HH, she was at a point of despair. I can see others in that position as well who were not aware of the implications of HH when they entered into their marriage and were influenced by popular culture.

My understanding of HH was outlined in my comments to Tink based on Tink's situation and none other. I attempted to put HH in context for her. I either succeeded or not. I wasn't trying to soft peddle it for her. But someone who deals in more blunt language might think that is what I was doing.

I do not hold you accountable for what I consider to be a vicious personal attack that occurred in that thread. I wanted to be informed, you knew that and you did a great job as did others. When it got personal, my mind checked out for a while as I evaluated why someone would attack me personally.

I came to a conclusion based on my knowledge of past events that need no discussion.

I do not hold people accountable for they do not know, only when they are reluctant to learn when presented with the need. It is common practice in the real world for people to fail to detail much of their past. For whatever reason, I didn't do that, but I am not everybody. I am me and I in fact did detail my personal history and not just in sexual details. I hold myself to a standard of Duty, Honor, Country, period, end of story.

I do understand how there may be people of good will who do not detail all of their personal sexual activities from the past. I also understand how there will be people of bad will who take the same route. This is part of the dance where people mate up.

HH comes into play when someone embraces MB concepts and at that point, there is a questionnaire to file out and I now understand how to do that. I didn't before you started your thread. I was hung up on detail. But I didn't know WHY I was hung up until I got more of an education. Thank you again for starting the process.

What is missing in the equation used to challenge my character in terms of honesty is that I did detail my personal sexual history (and more) before I got married. I didn't need a MB concept to tell me to do it. So I guess, part of my lack of understanding of HH derived from somewhat of a disbelief that anyone wouldn't do it. Heck I don't know, things went so fast and furious, I didn't stop, calm and evaluate, I just reacted. That isn't the usual way I do business. Sorry.

I thanked you at my end to the discussion and I thank you again. You did a great job. I believe it got out of control at one point, but that is not something you could stop, even if you wanted to.

Right now I am being nagged incessantly by an ADHD seven year old son. So if I did not clarify something, let me know and I will so do.

Apparently the only area where there is still some doubt about my understanding of HH is holding someone accountable for what they did not say who were culturally influenced. I do hold them accountable, but I don't beat on them because of context. This forum is partly about starting over, a fresh start.

Correct me if I am wrong.

In a nut shell, HH is about honesty and the display of character through revealing personal history in as complete a detail as memory serves, but not necessarily all the salacious detail unless the potential partner really, really wants it. Pulling a train would not be a salacious detail, it would be a necessary truth. The level of detail would be as outlined in the questionnaire.

I think that Dr. Harley covers it with his questionnaire that is part of people getting started down the road to a better and stronger marriage based in part on HH and in part on many other MB concepts. When someone trips over HH, it is time to find a fresh start, which for many people is exactly that, a fresh start. It also may be time to run for the door. I got that too.

Hope this helps.

Larry

Okay, yes I know he needed to know because we both knew these guys. Now I suppose I have completely ruined everything and shattered a family b/c of my dishonesty. Like he says, my kids are innocent and I am not. So I will go ahead and continue to blame myself for everything b/c obviously I am the big sinner and he is not. He never "lied" to me about anything from his past (as far as i know) so he is the saint. If he D's me then it is MY fault. I will be sure to let you know if he does that. You probably think I deserve it.

He made this 3rd BABY with me MONTHS after I had told him the truth. Almost a year after I had told him. Does this mean anything?

Also, if you NEVER would have married your H because of the past things he didn't tell you that you now know about, why did you stay with him?

I stayed with him because he was truly remorseful and it did not engage in the blameshifting, rationalizations and elaborate excuses as you have here.Your reaction is not of someone who is truly honest and sorry for what they did, but of someone who is just sorry they have to answer for their crimes. He proved himself to me, not by blaming or making excuses but by taking full responsibility for his acts.

HOw am I BLAMESHIFTING? I did show him when I TOLD him about the events that I was SORRY. I didn't justify anything I did. I told him I didn't mean for it to become like this and I didn't realize how much damage I had done. Because that is the TRUTH. I didn't realize how much damage I was causing. SHeesh. I have told him that if he wanted to leave me then I wouldn't blame him. I told him that when I first revealed my secret. Over a YEAR ago. The reason I am upset now is b/c he was moving on with me and made a BABY With me and now he is pulling this crap! SEriously, I took responsibility for my actions. I knew what I did was wrong. I told him that. But I didn't intend for things to become this way. I relaly didn't. And the fact that he forgave me and moved forward with me for a YEAR should show how [censored] it is of him to pull it back out and now threaten D.

tinkerbell, there are so many examples of blameshifting and rationalizing that one hardly knows where to start. You blamed it on being drunk and then rationalized the lie by saying you did it to "protect" yourself. If my H had said the things you have said here after his lies, he would be GONE, I assure you.

To rephrase -

My real issue is that I DID tell him and accept responsibility at the time I told him. I realize not telling him before was a mistake and I realize the pain that decision has caused. I had no real concept of how much damage withholding information from him in this way, would cause. I am so very sorry. However, now I feel continually punished DESPITE my Open and Honest explanation. While I would do anything to have NOT done it, I still did it and at the time, he stated he accepted my apology. EVEN to the point of continuing to make love to me, resulting in OUR current pregnancy. What I did was wrong, and I accept that. What I don't accept is an inconsistent and incoherant and thus far, unending lability in his acceptance. He 'forgave me' but still holds it against me? I understand that it takes a while to actually forgive. However, as a person, his wife, and the mother of his soon to be born child, I require some type of stability in his thoughts. He has the responsibility to work on this issue and either move past it or be removed from it. But he cannot continually whip me with his threats of divorce.

- My interpretation of a reasonable response Tink... I understand what you are feeling. Not that yours was inappropriate in any way.

Tink,

I live in England, which is 4-8 hours ahead of the USA. It is now 3.30AM. I went to bed and woke up after a short time, worried about how upset you were in you condition, so I came down to read and I see that things are worse.

I think you should stop perpetuating this argument and focus on dealing with your H's affair.

I can't stop you discussing this issue on your own thread, but I'm stopping it here. I'm asking the mods to lock this thread.