Gosh, WAT, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your respectful disagreement...

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> BUT - the decision to conduct an affair or, more commonly, the decision not to avoid one, is usually a LOT EASIER if little value is placed on the marriage. Marriage loses value predominantly when ENs are not being met. The marital environment has degraded and vulnerability to an affair has been increased.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Actually, I think for some WSs the thrill of the affair is in direct proportion to the value of the marriage. The more there is to lose, the more exciting / distracting / fantastic the A is - for some. How else to explain the public figures who risk their whole reputation and livelihood for a quick tryst in a dark corner?

If what the individual craves is something that is not obtainable in a marital environment (see my points earlier), the BS can sweat blood and still come up short on the EN front.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">But I'd estimate that the vast majority of affairs could have been averted had ENs been met. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Sorry, WAT, got to disagree with you on that. I might just go along with you as far as 'Many affairs could have been averted if the wandering spouse could have accepted the constrictions of marriage and family, had an accurate insight into their own ENs, and had been able to articulate those needs to the faithful spouse.' The other side, of course, is 'and if the faithful spouse, hearing the ENs clearly communicated, was willing and responsive.'

Of all the new posters who arrive here, how many affairs would you say display a slow drift apart and an act of desparation on the part of the more anxious spouse? Not that many, I'd say (obviously 10% is a personal estimate.) How many WS's immediately up and leave their value-less marriages? Surprisingly few. How many confess to sexual curiosity, mid-life rebellion, job frustration, low self-esteem? Rather a lot. What could a BS possibly do to meet those kinds of ENs?

Obviously, low EN-meeting contributes to marital poverty. But I wonder what the stats are on marital unhappiness genuinely leading to infidelity (rather than being blamed in retrospect)?

Infidelity is complex, and I think Noodle's model of poor boundaries is accurate. The EN model is saying 'I accept that your boundaries are not good enough to stop you from going outside the marriage, so I will work to minimise the opportunity for those boundaries to be tested.'

And doesn't the EN model predict that the partner with the stronger boundaries is the one who will get fewer needs met (because less needs to be done to keep them from being pressured)?

Just to throw a spanner in the works, I've gradually come to suspect that my H's behaviour was actually encouraged by the security of his marriage. I have slowly realised what a reservoir of anger had built up in him through his childhood and adolescence; anger that he suppressed out of fear of losing what little security he had. I suspect that a happy marriage gave him for the first time a safety-net, while his anger and self-hatred was worked through at a careful remove from me. He didn't want me ever to know, because 'it had nothing to do with you'. It was only when I was hurting enough to leave him, taking the safety-net with me, that his carefully-contrived arrangement fell apart.

What EN-meeting would have forestalled that one?

TA

[Smile] out of curiosity ... who's interest would this arrangement be in ... if not his own? What would you tell yourself that was different than "he has his interest at heart"?

There was nothing I could have told myself to believe it was in my best interest, only his. But it did take me a day or two to come to this realization. I'm a little slow and old habbits die hard. I have lived with him before remember, and I did a lot of rationalizing to make it okay in my mind last time. Such as help with the bills, help with my DD (she's crazy about him), getting to know each other before the wedding, blah, blah, blah. But the truth was I just wanted him with me at any cost. I now know the "cost" is too great.

When he lived here I slept in my daughters room when she was here . She is 10 now and I don't want to do that again (he knows that). I have also realized that I want the full commitment of marriage first, and I won't settle for less again. And anything less is not in my best interest, nor that of my DD's.

I lived with my DD's dad without marriage too. Told myself all the same things about why it was okay, and in my best interest. In fact back then I went so far as to even agree that marriage was not necessary, and I didn't want to get married anyway. All lies to myself to keep from facing the hard cold fact that he just didn't want to marry me, and I didn't have the confidence to hold out for it.

Hope this answers your question.

TA - re-read what you have written. I think you'll see you agree with me after all. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

That said, I will agree that a lot of affairs occur despite the full EN meeting participation of the BS. The public figures you mention and other weirdos who need their "risk" fix are a special case. In fact, I believe that my WS could not have been stopped due to her needed "escape" from the loss of our son. (This doesn't mean I was perfectly meeting her ENs.)

But a lot of your explanation is about spouses who are unhappy. Why are they unhappy? The root cause - more often than not, I believe - is that they were not getting from their marriage what they desired. Accepting the "constrictions" of marriage may prevent an affair - but it does nothing to make a happy marriage.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by TogetherAlone:
<strong>Sorry, WAT, got to disagree with you on that. I might just go along with you as far as 'Many affairs could have been averted if the wandering spouse could have accepted the constrictions of marriage and family, had an accurate insight into their own ENs, and had been able to articulate those needs to the faithful spouse.' The other side, of course, is 'and if the faithful spouse, hearing the ENs clearly communicated, was willing and responsive.'

Of all the new posters who arrive here, how many affairs would you say display a slow drift apart and an act of desparation on the part of the more anxious spouse? Not that many, I'd say (obviously 10% is a personal estimate.) How many WS's immediately up and leave their value-less marriages? Surprisingly few. How many confess to sexual curiosity, mid-life rebellion, job frustration, low self-esteem? Rather a lot. What could a BS possibly do to meet those kinds of ENs?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Those are not ENs. They're the result of not having happiness, which very, very likely was, at least in part, the result of not having a happy marriage, which was the result of not having ENs met.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not arguing that the BS can reasonably meet all ENs all the time. Just that what you describe as direct ENs that a BS can fill aren't ENs at all.

Bottom line - a spouse wanders for just a few broad reasons: some personality defect or mental condition, bonafide "abuse" issues, or unhappiness with the marriage coupled with selfish/character weakness. Sure, you could subdivide these further, but you get my point, right? I won't portray that I know the distribution of these populations, but I bet a LOT more than the majority fit into the "happiness" bin.

WAT

::::reconciliation can be easier and more successful is the BS finds and fixes whatever they may have contributed to the poor marital environment preceeding the affair - however minimal it might be.

I tend to feel I would be one of the only ones who genuinely wasn't meeting my H's EN's. How could I? I was living thousands of miles away from him? In a normal marriage, EN's are never fully met by one person - that's why M is considered a partnership of give and take. The EN's aspect is a red herring to reflect blame from the guilty party in infidelity. Anyone who snuggles up to the EN's theory and nods with self satisfied comfort at the "it wasn't all my fault", is copping out of accountablity.

Even if the ENs theory has merit in some cases, it's wrong to present it as a tool to fix the M. Infidelity is so powerful that the BS almost always goes into 100% focus on WS anyway. And lets face it, isn't infidelity a rather large exercise in attention seeking? Which works a treat!

Anyone, absolutely anyone can cheat and anyone can hide beind excuses but only a coward blames it on factors outside their own selfish behavior.

In our case, my H went overseas to work for his own fulfilment. It was known that I couldn't go along full time. I was reassured by my H that we could manage the time apart. I was falsely reasured that his main EN would be satisfied by his returning to work OS. You have to take that reassurance on face value in a M. If the ENs theory is true, I should have told H he couldn't go back OS to work because he needed me with him so I could fulfil his EN's. No discussion. And in hindsight, I realise I should have said that. One careless mistake, so much harm.

Weaver, your comments were spot on.

AN

You can exercise,eat right,practice meditation,not smoke and take your vitamins but you can still get cancer.Same for Infidelity.You can do all that you think is right within the marriage but your spouse can still cheat.

And,people in marriage today have to realize that a marriage is not supposed to be everything to everyone.As Frank Pittman says,"Marriage isn't supposed to make you happy,it is supposed to make you married".We have to be more self reliant and stop counting on other's to be our saviors and problem solvers.

It is and always will be all about the WS regarding Infidelity.I didn't read all the posts on this last page(heading to bed) but I think the direction is still the same.

O

WAT

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Don't get me wrong - I'm not arguing that the BS can reasonably meet all ENs all the time. Just that what you describe as direct ENs that a BS can fill aren't ENs at all.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Exactly. What we're violently agreeing on here is that SOME marriages get into trouble because of unmet legitimate needs.

But I think we're also agreeing that SOME needs are not legitimate, i.e they are personal desires that cannot be met from within a marriage.

So...we could separate the needs list into Emotional Needs (Marital) and Emotional Needs (Extramarital).

As I see it, infidelity caused by failure of Marital Needs can be addressed by the Harley EN solution - working out what legitimate needs have not been met, and working honestly on those. But where infidelity is down to Extramarital Needs, no amount of marital needs-meeting will have much effect. In my view, telling people that 'if you follow this formula, you will definitely save your marriage' is cruel and misleading. Diligently working on Recreational Companionship with someone who has not solved his weakness for Asian waitresses is, frankly, pointless.

Where the main problem is Extramarital Needs, then that's where Noodle's boundaries theory comes into play. If the WS has not been pushed out of the marriage by unmet marital needs, then they've been pulled out of the marriage by unhealthy personal weakness. The personal boundaries which should have protected the marriage are either ignored or were not in place at all.

So what does the BS do about that?

TA

::::::::::::If the WS has not been pushed out of the marriage by unmet marital needs, then they've been pulled out of the marriage by unhealthy personal weakness. The personal boundaries which should have protected the marriage are either ignored or were not in place at all.

TA, I am very comfortable with your specifying the difference. I would like to repeat a question I asked on page 2 of this thread though;

***I'm still unclear what boundaries you are referring to. Don't you automatically assume there are boundaries in place in a happy M? A's come about because a S is trusting and naive, and the WS takes advantage of it. Are we suggesting that in M, we all live in a constant state of expectancy that an A will take place if we don't constantly take a 'big brother' approach to our S? How do you teach all newly weds to assume the worst and to implement boundaries that will be kept activated for the duration of 60+ yrs of M? Or is Noodle suggesting a low level surveillance and a monthly M reminder meeting of what is acceptable to both parties? I cannot see this type of arrangement working within a loving M? Because we have to assume love and committment until proved otherwise.

AN

Anyname: ***I'm still unclear what boundaries you are referring to. Don't you automatically assume there are boundaries in place in a happy M? A's come about because a S is trusting and naive, and the WS takes advantage of it. Are we suggesting that in M, we all live in a constant state of expectancy that an A will take place if we don't constantly take a 'big brother' approach to our S? How do you teach all newly weds to assume the worst and to implement boundaries that will be kept activated for the duration of 60+ yrs of M? Or is Noodle suggesting a low level surveillance and a monthly M reminder meeting of what is acceptable to both parties? I cannot see this type of arrangement working within a loving M? Because we have to assume love and committment until proved otherwise.

IMHO I think there has to be trust at the start of during the M, because as you stated you have to be proven untrustworthy. Most mature, healthy adults know right from wrong. I think it boils down to personal weakness, character in the example of Extramarital Needs. The WS chooses to have an A and most lie about it to their BS. Why do they lie, because they know its wrong. They make a conscious decision to lie, that means they are rationally choosing their desires over their vows, and the feelings of their S. If they came right out and admitted to the A then that would either: 1- could mean that they don't think anything is wrong with an A (bad moral character) 2- know that it is wrong and have extreme guilt (good moral character)

I kind of agree with Noodle in that you have to be diligent in looking out for your S. Just like you have to be diligent with kids (ie watching them when they get too close to the street) I think you should let a S get close to a fire but IF you can see the choice they are about to make before they do it then you should jump in to save them from themselves. Unfortunately I was not diligent enough for my WW to see that she was in danger. I thought she had too high of moral character, to have an A. I guess I was greatly mistaken.

Sorry Native <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

I'm going to have to disagree with your agreement with me <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Since you can not control your spouse, it is hardly usefull to be *vigilant* in their stead and hope to rescue them should they step too close to the fire. Be vigilant of your own boundaries..each person needs to be responsible for themselves.

What I usually see..not always..but very often, is a BS who might have better helped their WS pre A by going to plan B as an offensive/defensive tactic. How can it be both? Simple..it is direct assesment of the situation and above board confrontation with the potential WS. To make the WS aware..that you now feel the need to protect yourself and your boundaries and your standards from them. To tell them..the person you are becoming..is not someone that I can be intimate with..sorry. When someone is showing you disrespect, when someone is deceitfull, when they resist accountability, when they demonstrate preference for others..what they are demonstrating is that they already have one foot out the door. Or into an affair. And what is the common reaction to this? Paralytic fear. Come on BS..you know this song..you tip toe around them 'cause they are moody as heck..you turn up the charm only to be dismissed, you try to explain, you try to negotiate, and all that you really accomplish is making them so very comfortable in the belief that you are a given, that they have nothing to lose by continuing down this path..and also that there is no level of abuse that you will not tolerate. Who could respect such a coward? No one. And particularly not a predator, which the WS has become.

I really believe that the best medicine is prevention. The best way to prevent a person from sinking to this level is to make them acutely aware of the direction they are headed while they are yet coherant. I strongly disagree with the notion that a person needs to *hit bottom*..usually by then they have acquired so much damage they are practically unrecognizable, if they manage to survive at all. Better to address it with the full weight of your influence, should that life preserver be scoffed at, that is their choice..but they don't get to take you with them.

Sadly..not one of us here had the good sense to do this. Do you know what this suggests to me? That there was an unhealthy dynamic present in the marriage working hard against the concept of boundaries and respect far before the A. Stand still while I hit you is conditioned behavior. And that is what we did. Probably why am so consistantly frustrated with BS who continue to do it. I suspect that it is the precise behavior that assisted the descent in the first place, and to continue in that behavior is to volunteer to sink even lower.

I believe that As occur when an individual fails to guard their own boundaries..but I believe that a BS can assist this by not insisting on acceptable behavior at all times, under all conditions. If you can be respectfull to your boss even though you are in a foul mood..you can be respectfull to me. And if you can't? Then I need to protect myself..maintain my own boundaries..lest I end up in the same boat sans paddle.

More later but the siren wailing of young DS demands attention..

Noodle

Hello again Noodle my friend,

Noodle: Since you can not control your spouse, it is hardly usefull to be *vigilant* in their stead and hope to rescue them should they step too close to the fire. Be vigilant of your own boundaries..each person needs to be responsible for themselves.

Good point.

What I usually see..not always..but very often, is a BS who might have better helped their WS pre A by going to plan B as an offensive/defensive tactic. How can it be both? Simple..it is direct assesment of the situation and above board confrontation with the potential WS.

Isn't this the same thing as what I said though? In your explanation you decide to go to plan B, how did you know something was wrong without being "vigliant" of what your S is doing. By implementing a Plan B, isn't that the same as "jumping in to try and save them"? I never gave an example of how to save them, Plan B works, I think I would have done something along the same lines.

I believe that both my WW and I weren't getting our EN's met, no excuse for her actions though. This goes back to your boundaries, I had mine and didn't cross them. She chose to cross standard marital boundaries, that was her conscious choice.

Het Native..

This is entirely speculation, of course..and the actions would likely be the same..but the purposes different. I would be going to plan B to save me ..and if losing me isn't enough to change the direction that PWS [potentially wayward spouse] is heading..so long, farewell, but I'm not going along for the ride.


Think of a boundary as the border of your own personal little kingdom <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> There is two way traffic, what you allow out [your behavior] and what you allow in [what you tolerate from others].
You did not cross your boundaries by having an affair, but you failed to enforce them by allowing her to stomp across them anytime she wanted to. If you told her that you were uncomfortable with her behavior [clubbing etc] and the response you get is essentially Too Bad I'll Do What I Want..and you accept that answer..then you are allowing the behavior to go unresisted. I did too. I think this applies to all spouses..WS and BS alike. What we accept, and what we allow, and what we choose for our lives..will play a large part in whether we are satisfied or not..but still..no one can do it for you. A person is entirely capable of refusing deposits of ENs from their spouse..waywards do it all the time..so even there..we CHOOSE who we allow to fill them..nothing accidental about it.

I just can't get around it..it's all about boundaries, all of it. Getting ENs met..is about boundaries..affair proofing..boundaries.

Hmmmm.

Noodle

Well said friend, I think both of us are dancing around the same idea/theory. Although you pointed me towards this train of thought. Your right that I allowed her actions towards me and accepted them. I guess I was willing to hold onto my love for her despite what she was doing to me and still is.

In a few weeks I will have some things that I'm going to have to talk to her about.

This thread opened my eyes!

Yes,

And the real eye opener here..is when you realize that your decision to allow this had nothing to do with love, and everything to do with fear. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

It is not loving to stand by and watch unresisting while people behave destructively toward themselves and their families..this is not an act of love..it is the what if factor that bit you [and me].

Noodle

MSCHLUTER <------ Drove his car right through WW's fence and then Ran over OM's fence and his daisy's.......

Sorry just needed to add some humor, it's all I have left these day's that is still me..

Humor is always welcome on any thread of mine.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

your welcome,

it's all i have to offer right now.....

:::I just can't get around it..it's all about boundaries, all of it. Getting ENs met..is about boundaries..affair proofing..boundaries.

Noodle, the boundaries concept is fine, if a WS is obvioulsy demonstrating a change of normal behavior. However in a busy M, we cut each other a lot of slack because we know work pressures, continuing education, children problems, sick or dying parents etc can make us rather tetchy for a few weeks. Also within the realm of a normal, healthy M, there are highs and lows of feelings towards one's S. We noticed this happen on a number of occassions over the 30 yrs prior to the A.

I was only vaguely aware of a change in my H when he was having the A. I thought we had driffed apart. But his behavior was mostly very good. The A progressed and he got into doing stuff that caused too much guilt, and then his behavior went right off. It was only a few days of it but it was very off by his standards.

He told me that he realised he was going to get caught if he kept that up, so he back peddled , back into my nice lovable H mode.

I don't think my case is that unusual. The vast majority of A succeed because the WS works out how to behave to the BS in order to keep the A secret. Someone mentioned that going into an A, was like the WS winning the lottery. They have a hard time acting normal for the excitement of it - but it seems they regroup and get on with being a WS more carefully, after some serious thoughts as to how deal with the S at home and the A and keeping the M on track.

Besides all this, BSs are not familiar with infidelity and they don't know what is happening (with the bad tempers etc) and will give the WS the benefit of the doubt rather than think of them being unfaithful. It was the last thing on my mind. Even though my H made a big fuss over some belly dancers one nite up on the stage with them, I made a scene about how inappropriate it was, because of how it made me feel. So I reminded him of my boundaries, but it didn't make any difference.

Also by the time the average WS is showing irritablity at home, it's usually gone too far anyway.

Am I reading the boundaries thing wrong - why doesn't this work in my head?

AN

AN,

I've been thinking about what you have posted, and this is what I come up with.

Native and I are the BS from what appears to be the same subcategory of A. The partying spouse, if you will. We and others that share this element, will notice a lot of similarities. Your situation falls into another subcategory entirely. I label this one the "Dark Fantasy" affair. I think that these may be the most difficult of all to pick up on in an empathic manner bcause of the level of awareness involved for the WS. I really think..based on what you have posted about the idea being proffered years in advance..that your H had a better than average consciousness of what he was doing. The A was never about love..or soul mate..or even environment..it was basically about using another human being specifically with the intent of taking advantage of their situation. How fitting..seems OW had the same MO. She was probably not a person to him..but a profile..a profile that offered the opportunity on a silver platter. She was low class, fit the physical ideal he was seeking..and knew how to approach him in such a way that he could juuuuust eek around his conscience and enter a suspension of disbelief long enough to be deeply into the game.

He knew what he was doing..and as such, he knew to keep up appearances, because he was never going to leave you for her..he was going to play with the fantasy until he was full and then discard.

So what EN did you not meet? He had a desire that was incompatible with marriage. He acted on it. I doubt you were ever in the equation except as a hinderance.

It probably didn't help that you were away for so long..true..but more likely as a reality check than anything else. Left all alone with nothing but his fantasy and opportunity beating down the door..the rest is history. You also may have had better opportunity to pick up on the inconsistencies with more exposure to him. Tiny things..all by themselves..not worth consideration..but 100 a day every day and you may have an elevated awareness come to surface. Even over a great distance you knew something wasn't right..you just trusted him beyond all logic and reason <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> and so dismissed the enormity of the possibilities.

And your reason for being away? Taking care of an ill parent. Not meeting any ENs, and yes..we all go through times such as this. grace does need to be extended..as life is unpredictable..illness will happen..job burnout..PMS..demands of parenthood..life. My suggestion about protection was pretty much directly aimed at situations where poor treatment has become the rule and not the exception. Where it has become the norm. Just as you had very legitimate need to be away for a long period of time..so others may equally not be able to hold their tongue at every single moment they ought..they may not meet one need or another because for one reason or another at that moment they are unable to. It happens. The difference is that even when we are not meeting needs perfectly..we want to, are sorry that we sometimes fail, and seek to improve. This is a spouse that is fully invested in the marriage. The direct opposite of the spouse who says to themself..what minimum do I need to meet in order to keep them ignorant or pacified and out of my way. Polar opposites. I think we can all agree that what an actively WS thinks the minimum is falls far beneath what any sane person would accept. Unless they are in your situation...in which case the WS might need to take out a full page ad to announce their retreat from the M into the abyss.

You realize of course..that in order to extend the benefit of the doubt..there was doubt. Things that swirled around in your brain..introduced themselves to each other..and formed a thought you didn't wish to entertain..and so it was dismissed. You felt it though. With his attention to the belly dancers. It made you feel something, and there was a reason why. What your benefit of the doubt was actually? I think denial. Not denial of the specifics necessarily..but...something was bothering you..enough that you still remember the feeling..the place you felt it..and what he was doing that caused it [oggling belly dancers is quite close to his Dark Fantasy if you just think about it for a minute]

As for boundaries..why it doesn't fit for you? I don't know. I don't really have an answer for that. Maybe I'm wrong and it is glaringly obvious to everyone but me. Maybe I'm explaining it badly. Right now I am still refining the thought..but it makes sense to me and I plan to follow through until I get to the bottom, or until it unravels and I abandon it.

The closest possibile explanation I can offer to you..is that you seem to be confusing external boundaries with internal ones..and right now I am looking at internal boundaries. Things you ought to be able to expect from your spouse based upon the agreements you have come to in your marriage [such as slack during rough patches] would be an example of an external boundary. A consrtuct designed by the two of you so that everyone is on the same page. True..this is crossed with an A..but I do not think it is a participant..more of a helpless bystander. It is the internal boundaries being trampled that is at play here. Things like what I will do..and not..things I will accept...and not. His boundaries shifting as his personal standards lower. Your boundaries were crossed by his attention to the belly dancers...you noticed the change of position...where did your reaction to this fit? Did you feel satisfied by it? Do you now? Did you bring the world to a crashing halt while this issue was addressed?

I wish that I had. I accepted answers meant to pacify me..and at some level I suspected that was precisely what they were. I know that feeling you speak of. I had it. I too attempted to casually address it. I remember like it was yesterday. We were eating at a company party at Hooters [that was a big red flag] as embarrassed as I was..H seemed right at home. He also sat on the other side of the table from me..not next to me. I noticed that as well. A few days later I tried to start a conversation about basically the objectification of women and received no resistance..and no input either..just a bland agreement clearly designed to throw me off. I ought to have dug..but I didn't want to face what was clearly happening. Since I didn't face it then..I get to face it now. Regret, thy name is Noodle <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> .

Noodle, Your reply really knocked me for six. I feel I've waited a long time on MBs for someone to understand exactly what I've felt. I've waded thru a lot of information that hasn't felt vaguely applicable to me - and finally, someone gets it. Someone comprehends and takes the trouble to tell me so. I wonder whether our thoughts crossed, because last nite I tried to get my head around what happened to you (though still can't work out the delayed grieving - give me time though). I tried to figure out how I'd feel if I had your hand to play. The only thing you have over many here is that your H confessed. I'm not sure how useful that is in reality - but for those of us with few crumbs to feed on, we imagine it must help. Did it? Does it?

Because my case is different, I think the boundaries concept is less applicable, but on furthter reflection, I think it does apply in a broader application, to include many years of behavioral patterns that allowed my WS to feel more special than he actually was.

I would like to come back to you on this, at a later date. I hope to refer back to some of your post if you are agreeable. I know you wrote a long post a while back more or less referring to the boundries concept - and at that time I thought of myself as being too there, too dependable, too admiring, too cheap to run, too eager to let him do/have what makes him feel good. Maybe something along the lines of spoiling the child. And the spoilt child didn't know where to stop in the end. Maybe I'm rambling. I will share more when I'm not so tired and more resiliant than I feel tonight.

Many thanx for giving me your feedback.

AN

I have enjoyed this discussion and wanted to throw another idea in there...
This is what I posted on another thread...

I may get many comments about this, but oh well, it is what I believe.

This is a conversation FWH and I had shortly after receovery (or rather false recovery) it was important to me, and I think important to him...

Me: Do you trust me, trust that I'll never have an A?

Him: Yes.

Me: Never?

Him: Yes.

Me: Then you are a fool, because given the right circumstance I think I could have an A too.

Him: (slightly surprised look)

Me: So, I will never trust you 100%, but you should never trust me 100% either.


And this is what I believe, given the right situtaion, ANYONE could have an A. It's not a matter of character, it's a matter of circumstance, and not putting ourselves in that circumstance. If you were miserable, lonely, or just bored, and an opposite sex friend began gushing over you and talking intimately about your life...how many years would it take for you to begin to justify that maybe you picked the wrong person and this person would have been a better match. Dr. Harley is VERY clear about this...you fall in love with the person that fulfills your EN's.

What has kept me from an A is knowing how easy it would be for me, and maintaining boundaries with people of the opposite sex. Something I've intuitively known to do since I was M. My H did not have these boundaries and was taught from the men in his life that it was OK to oggle, chase, flirt, and cheat with other women. It took our experience with an A for him to know how wrong I thought it was, and what my boundaries were. It also took this A for me to find this site, for me to change the dastardly LB's I was habitually locked into and felt I couldn't change, and to do my part to creat a better M.

Strange but true, the A was GOOD for our M. It took this turmoil for us to work out some MAJOR issues in our lives...trial by fire.


...I have read on here many a BS that writes, "How dare they cheat on me, I would NEVER do that to them..." And I would like to argue with that, never say never, the situation had never arisen...and maybe never would have. But can you think of situations where you were tempted and what else needed to happen for you to say "Yes"? What would have happened if this OP had chased you?