</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Of course you silly woman, otherwise I wouldn't be worthy of the name TOOMuchCoffeeMan, wouldn't I? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Just my kinda guy!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Here is why I don't think the ultimatum matters...

What do wayward spouses say:

1) It just happened....for that to be true they clearly weren't thinking about the consequences.

2) I never meant to hurt you...again not thinking about the consequences.

3) My needs were not being met....again thinking about self not consequences.

In other words almost all wayward spouses are not operating with the normal regards for the consequences. Ie the death penalty may provide justice for society but most studies say it does little to deter. As with the wayward spouse they don't think about the consequences...ANY of them. They don't think about hurting family, spouse, their image etc etc. They don't think about the impact on job, finances and so on. In short if they disregard so many other consequences why would one more (will leave you if you cheat) really matter.

After all I have heard many a woman say they would cut "it" off if their man strayed and yet many men do stray.

Stunned_dad your post reminded me of a birth day card my daughters gave me that had a grinning chimp on the front with the following:

DAD, all your advice over the years didn't go in one ear and out the other---In fact, I'm pretty sure that a lot of it never got in at all (but thanks for trying). La, la, la I can't hear you.

I guess that the same applies to WS who get the ultimatum. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

<small>[ July 13, 2003, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: T00MuchCoffeeMan ]</small>

Joining this fine discussion a bit late in the piece, but here's my 2c worth:

Loooong before the A, my H was the one who said if you ever cheat on me, it will be good bye/the end. I have found myself in a few situations (ie, being hit on) which could have led to PAs, but the thought of losing my H was always the first thing in my mind. The difference is in those that start as EAs.

The EA progresses so insidiously that it's not obvious to the participants exactly what they are doing. In their minds it's not an affair, and then by the time they finally get round to going physical they're so in love that they don't care about the consequences/will do anything for the OP/etc etc etc. The consequence of losing their marriage doesn't even factor into the equation because they have already left emotionally.

Hence, my conclusion is that the ultimatum works to prevent affairs of the PA/ONS variety. People who engage in those affairs in the face of a divorce promise are likely to be sex addicts. However, for affairs that originate from friendship/emotional attachment ultimatums mean nothing. And since this is the kind of A that most of us deal with, we cannot rely on naive ultimatums/promises as a preventative measure.

In behaviourist terms, an ultimatum is an attempt to promote desired behaviour using threats and the fear punishment (unpleasant consequences). This approach doesn't work terribly well in children and in animals. Nor should we expect it to work on WSs since their cognivite functioning seems to take a severe dive during an A (... just look at some of the OP they fall for! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> )

Far better to promote desired behaviour by rewarding it when it occurs.

Just on the topic of "unpleasant consequences", the ultimatum approach may actually work to PROMOTE/SUSTAIN the A. For a person in the grips of an EA, who perceives that their marriage is loveless and dull the thought of losing that marriage is not an unpleasant consequence, but infact a desired consequence. So the naive ultimatum may infact reinforce affair behaviour.

BTW, Post DDay, my WH did a U-turn on his original opinion of divorcing should an A happen.

Oops, this is more like 5c worth.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Oops, this is more like 5c worth.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">More like 50c worth (you have to account for inflation you know <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> ).

I too share your view with regard to ultimatums but I have to disagree that ultimatums only work on PA/ONS though, because there are some FWS that have had them while under the influence of alcohol which lowers their inhibitions and makes them especially susceptible if there's been a dry spell of sexual intimacy with their spouses. Sometimes even having a friend or friends who don't respect the marriage or the BS could induce the WS in having a PA with the old saying 'what s/he doesn't know won't hurt her/him'.

I think that the point we are all making one way or another is that for an ultimatum to have its desired effect, there must be a basic level of cognitive functioning and a perception that the consequences will outweigh the likely benefits of the action being undertaken. Those under the influence of alcohol have temporarily impaired their cognitive functioning.

Is that another 2c?

Here is my .5 worth. Why is everyone presuming that an ultimatum is intended to change anyone's behavior? In my case, it is not. It is simply a statement of fact, a promise. Its not intended to change anyone's behavior. If I thought I had to make a threat to keep him in line, he wouldn't be here.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">"Why is everyone presuming that an ultimatum is intended to change anyone's behavior"</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Because ML I beleive that in the vast majortity (not all) cases it is a form of controlling the future behavior of a spouse. The only time I see where an ultimatum might work is if the BS has practically lost all love for the WS (like I did with my XW).

ML, you are right in saying an ultimatum is a statement of fact. It is a statement of consequences. When most people give the naive ultimatum ("If you ever cheat on me that will be the end of us") it is a statement of fact, not a threat intended to control behaviour because at that point in time, neither party are contemplating cheating on the other. It only becomes an ultimatum when on or other party tests it out.

But wait there's more .....

Isn't Plan B a form of ultimatum?

Plan B is a behaviour modification plan. Plan A establishes the BS as a desirable person (stimulus) to be around. Plan B removes that (negative reinforcement) only to be returned when the aberrant behaviour (the A) has ceased.

Or did I completely misunderstand Stage 1 Psych?

^^ bump ^^ for an interesting thread....

Early on in my M, my W gave me an ultimatum, "if you cheat on me I will divorce you and take the kids." But that thought was in the back of my mind from then on. The ironic thing is that my W was the one who cheated, and now she is begging me not to divorce her.
Michael

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
After all I have heard many a woman say they would cut "it" off if their man strayed and yet many men do stray.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I was going to do just that...make him and "it" two separate parts...but then I couldn't decide which one to keep and which one to toss?

Anyway, I've posted this before but in one of the articles on the Marriage Builders website...Harley says "my wife told me if I ever had an affair she would kill me", yadda yaddda.

So does Harley think that her threat has helped keep him and the frau, lily white? (of course, along with him being an expert on the "beast" of infidelity? Which also leads me to whine: you can study a beast but if you have never been a beast, can you really *"know" the beast?*)

I disliked that comment when I came across it...Harley should know by now how hurtful it can be to hear such phrases taken lightly.

To add my answer to the orginal question. No one thinks that the BS is going to have a devil may care attitude when the A is discovered. Doesn't matter if they have threatened Divorce or Death or Dismemberment "if you ever cheat on
me"... verbally...most everyone knows that an A is a slam-dunk into holy hell when it is uncovered...no matter what was said previously in the marriage.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by T00MuchCoffeeMan:
<strong> could it possibly be setting up an emotionally unsafe environment for the future WS and make him/her more likely to stay in an affair longer that s/he would have if the ultimatum had not been issued? My beleif says 'yes it's true' but I would like to get your opinions on the subject.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">An additional question related to this thought...do you think this "unsafe enviroment for disclosure" could account for the high number of Christians involved in long term affairs? Knowing that not only the wrath of the BS, but the outrage of the Christian Community? Some time ago I read an article that even used the term "safe enviroment"...as a goal for helping men break free from sexual addictions.

So if next to the Youth Group room, on Wednesday nights there was "Men's Open Forum, How to get out of your Affair quickly and Alive"

Once I heard a very worldly man brag..."any time I get tired of having a woman on the side and she threatens to tell the wife, I just stop by my jeweler and get the old woman something sparkly to show off at the Club...it is amazing how her threats to kill me stop when she sees that blue velvet box."

So maybe only those with morals are worried about the threats of betrayal?

Good to see you back on the boards MichaelinDallas....how goes it?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by dustkitty:
<strong> An additional question related to this thought...do you think this "unsafe enviroment for disclosure" could account for the high number of Christians involved in long term affairs? Knowing that not only the wrath of the BS, but the outrage of the Christian Community? ?[/i]</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think that might have something to do with the disclosure of the affair but don't see how it could have anything to do with the cause of the affair. I don't see the connection here unless you are saying that fear of disclosure somehow CAUSES one to have an affair. Is that your point? How would that work? Because disclosure and the act of the affair are entirely different matters. If anything, it seems it should scare them off from beginning an affair.

Where do you get your information that a high number of Christians have affairs? Higher than what? I knew they have a higher rate of divorce but didn't hear we have a higher rate of affairs.

<small>[ July 14, 2003, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: MelodyLane ]</small>

Here's a couple of definitions of the word 'ultimatum':

A final proposition, condition, or demand; especially : one whose rejection will end negotiations and cause a resort to force or other direct action. [Merriam-Webster Dictionary]

A final statement of terms made by one party to another. A statement, especially in diplomatic negotiations, that expresses or implies the threat of serious penalties if the terms are not accepted. [The American Heritage Dictionary]

A final demand, the rejection of which may lead to a resort to force or other compelling action by the party presenting the ultimatum.[Cambridge Dictionary of American English].

In other words an ultimatum is a final demand made without intent of negotiation.

TMCM, that is how I view it: a non-negotiable condition. A condition that must be met in order to keep Her Grace <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> on the premises.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">[qb] I think that might have something to do with the disclosure of the affair but don't see how it could have anything to do with the cause of the affair. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">No, we are talking about the elements about the disclosure of an affair...not the cause on this thread. I will do research to find the sources that say Christians are not immune from affairs. What I was pondering, if we as Christians, when an A is discovered, if there is more outrage from the Christian community than from the non-churched. Looping back to the original question.

TNCM had posed the question if mortal fear was a factor in pro-longing disclosure. Since Christians have mortal fear, wouldn't it be even more of a factor?

The Christian community...has always tried to A-proof the marriages they oversee. Why it would happen in "good" marriages has been challenged. I thought the question tossed out might shed some light on the this quandry. But I have been so wrong before!

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by dustkitty:
[QBNo, we are talking about the elements about the disclosure of an affair...not the cause on this thread. I will do research to find the sources that say Christians are not immune from affairs. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Thanks for clarifying that, dk, that makes much more sense. And I have no doubt that Christians aren't immune to affairs, we all know they aren't. I just wondered what you knew about the rates since you said it was high. I know that the divorce rates amongst Christians are higher than non-Christians.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by MelodyLane:
TMCM, that is how I view it: a non-negotiable condition. A condition that must be met in order to keep Her Grace <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> on the premises.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Or to show his a**ho**ness to the door. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />