No it doesn't. It doesn't point in any direction. What if 90% of people whose spouses never had affairs also trusted their partners completely? Or what if 98% of them did? If the population of persons whose spouses had affairs is statistically indistinguishable from the group whose spouses did not have affairs, then trust is irrelevant in predicting who will be affected by infidelity.



I did not say "that blindly trusting someone is a good strategy to PREVENT infidelity". That's a straw man argument. Attacking an argument that I never made is no way to shore up your own.

If you want to prove to me that "blindly trusting" a spouse is a bad idea, you would have to:

1) Define what you mean by "blindly trusting".

2) Show that "blind trust" is more prevalent in marriages where there is ultimately infidelity than in marriages where there is not, using representative samples from both groups.

3) Show that there are no confounding factors that would explain the relationship in (2).

When I say that you would have to show those things, I include your being able to cite the relevant statistics from researchers whose work has been published in peer reviewed journals. I don't mean that you personally would have had to perform the study or studies.

elspeth ... you're good ! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I was thinking this .... for ME personally ... and for no one else ... definition of "blind trust" IN MY CASE means ... when I was given clear evidence that "something is amiss in our marriage" ... I chose to blind myself from the facts ... hence "blind trust"

but I would not extrapulate MY experience into a theory and then test it with a poll given to self-selected members who have good reason NOT to trust after infidelity!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

E <~~~ like I said, you're GOOD <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Star*

I am one who did not answer your poll ... because this

" Do you think that your blind trust made infidelity more likely or less likely to occur? "

is a trick question in my opinion

answering yes or no is impossible without a crystal ball

Pep

Thanks, Pep. Praise from Caesar is praise indeed.

I understand your definition of "blind trust", and it does make sense. Thanks.

I think Star raised a really interesting and important issue. Those who haven't experienced infidelity can't imagine the pain it causes. I believed trust was enough, until infidelity ended my marriage. Who better to provide validation that trust alone doesn't protect a marriage from infidelity than people who've found that out the hard way? It doesn't mean those who trust are any more or less likely to experience A's in their marriages, it just means not to count on trust alone to prevent A's from occurring.

Before my WH's A, I didn't feel I had the right to question his behavior that made me uncomfortable because I believed that would violate the "trust" we had between us. It's important for people to understand, BEFORE they have to face the horrible pain of betrayal, that this is a FALSE belief.

I personally don't need a peer reviewed double blind study to prove this to me!

elspeth,

No it doesn't. It doesn't point in any direction.

Sure it does....it doesn't prove anything....but I see some interesting things. If all spouses begin by trusting their partners and some are cheated on, and some are not....then trust isn't enough to protect the relationship is it? Otherwise....there would be no infidelity....and yet there is. If that's true....why wouldn't I use some of the boundaries that DO protect marriages instead of blindly trusting my spouse without being able to ensure which group my marriage is going to fall into? The thread that sparked this discussion was about poor marital boundaries....and whether it was a good idea for a poster to trust his wife who had gone (without him) with an Internet group from work to Las Vegas where she had pictures of basically a drunken bacchanal and acted completely out of character. Further....he felt that she wasn't enthusiastic about him going next year. Please put this in context....that's why I mentioned the threads upfront so that folks could take a look if they wanted to know what sparked my interest.

What if 90% of people whose spouses never had affairs also trusted their partners completely? Or what if 98% of them did?

That still doesn't mean trust is innoculation against affairs....because quite probably most people trust their spouse UNTIL something happens....that's not rocket science El. The question I'm trying to get opinions on....is "should" they trust their spouse blindly? Does it help a marriage more to blindly trust....or is a healthy amount of skepticism a GOOD thing (whether cheating has occurred or not!)? I don't know the answer....only an opinion. I fully expect that those people whose spouses have never cheated or lied trust their spouses.....but what's your point?

Somewhere along the line....you've gotten the impression that I think lack of trust is the cause of affairs <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />.....when lack of boundaries is the real culprit and I've been pretty clear about stating that. Yikes....please don't put words in my mouth <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

If the population of persons whose spouses had affairs is statistically indistinguishable from the group whose spouses did not have affairs, then trust is irrelevant in predicting who will be affected by infidelity.

But it isn't irrelevant as "protection" from affairs (the way some folks on the other EN implied....that the "key" to marital success is trust....rather than boundaries....I don't agree with that). There are lots of people out there that think spouses OUGHT to just "trust" each other.....even if they have really crummy marital boundaries. That was the situation on the threads in question. If both groups used trust with different results....then as you say....trust is neither the cause....nor the prevention.

I said " Blind Trust is for Chumps" (my opinion)....I didn't say that lack of trust causes affairs....so I don't understand your argument....however, if you can show me where I confused you, I'd be glad to discuss it.

I did not say "that blindly trusting someone is a good strategy to PREVENT infidelity". That's a straw man argument. Attacking an argument that I never made is no way to shore up your own.

No of course you didn't. But then *I* didn't say that lack of trust causes affairs either, nor did I seek to prove it to you....so you're the originator of "straw man arguments" here.....and it does no good now for the "pot to call the kettle black." <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> It's like yelling "mommy she hit me BACK".

If you want to prove to me that "blindly trusting" a spouse is a bad idea, you would have to:

1) Define what you mean by "blindly trusting".

2) Show that "blind trust" is more prevalent in marriages where there is ultimately infidelity than in marriages where there is not, using representative samples from both groups.

3) Show that there are no confounding factors that would explain the relationship in (2).

Huh? What gave you the impression I wanted to prove something to you? Since I never set out to prove anything to you....or anyone else for that matter...in fact I stated clearly what my purpose was for this poll....again....what is it you want? A college paper? Get over yourself. Do you think I expect everyone to adopt my opinion because I posted a poll? What could I possibly gain by winning you over? I'm sorry El....but I think being right is way overated and my ego simply doesn't need your approval....nothing personal chere.....otherwise I really like you.

When I say that you would have to show those things, I include your being able to cite the relevant statistics from researchers whose work has been published in peer reviewed journals. I don't mean that you personally would have had to perform the study or studies.

Good, I left some quotes from people I respect and who are considered experts in marriage relationships....the kind of folks (including the founder of this site) who helped shape my "opinion". Nowhere....did I claim to possess statistics that show any such thing.....why would a do a silly poll if there was research available??? Surely you know me well enough to know I LOOKED for it!! I have no desire to impose my opinion on others....that's part of the reason that I asked for other people's opinions. I'm interested in what they have say and think....including you. However, you're not talking about what you think....I don't what you're doing.

However.....if you'd like some "proof"....perhaps you should write to Harley himself....I simple DO agree with him and believe his logic as he explains it seems sound to me....makes sense from my perspective. Maybe he's got some "better" polls.

Pep,

elspeth ... you're good !

I agree completely. Elspeth has the kind of intellect that I truly respect and admire.

I am one who did not answer your poll ... because this

" Do you think that your blind trust made infidelity more likely or less likely to occur? "

is a trick question in my opinion

answering yes or no is impossible without a crystal ball

The questions asks "do you think" (opinion) and it's really about whether someone believes that "turning a blind eye" increases the likelihood that you'll miss some cues or unknowingly enable a WS. It wasn't stated well....I already admitted I'm crummy and crafting polls....but those who did answer seemed to understand the intent. Sorry you didn't....because it was certainly NOT a trick question.

Yikes....tough crowd!! It's just a poll to help put together a good post on EN about trust ....but next time....I'll hire a professional to craft it so that it meets requirements....sheesh....maybe you gals can help me next time.

No, the opposite, I had the impression that you thought trust, not the lack of it, was the cause of affairs.


I actually was having a very hard time understanding what you were saying. However, this is what you asked:

Two of the three questions were about trust, and only one was about marital boundaries. Furthermore, in Sassy Gal's thread, you said
So that's where I got the idea that you were arguing that blind trust causes affairs . Apparently neither of us was being as clear as we thought we were. I'm sorry if I was putting words in your mouth.

As to where I got the idea that you were trying to prove something to me-I didn't think you were trying to prove something to me specifically, but it sounded as though you were trying to prove something to the group in general. I can't speak for everyone, but I can tell you what I regard as proof. It's always possible other people have my same standards.

elspeth,

No, the opposite, I had the impression that you thought trust, not the lack of it, was the cause of affairs.

Well, I don't think "trust" causes affairs.....at all. And I don't think that lack of trust causes affairs either. I think that blind trust can sometimes make it easier for a spouse who decides to stray because it's much easier to fly under the radar....besides all of us want so badly to completely trust our spouse and deny any possibility that we are at risk....it's very scary to even think about. Can blind trust be a form of denial? I don't know....maybe.

I believe that a healthy level of skepticism and mistrust.... based on what we do know about human nature (we're wired for procreation and multiple partners....and that HAS been researched) CAN help to protect marriages by encouraging folks to put strong marital boundaries in place that add an extra level of safety in the dangerous society we currently live in....where infidelity is epidemic now that men and women are working side by side in the work force and the Internet makes it so easy.

I believe that there is a balance to be found between trusting too much and trusting too little.....a balance between being so insecure and controlling that your spouse can't have any friends or go anywhere without you....and giving into a spouse who wants to cruise bars until 4 AM or go to Las Vegas with people you don't know just to prove you trust completely. Those were the situations on those two threads.....and I think my comments within that context are pretty understandable.

I posted the poll here on the "infidelity board" for reasons that I previously stated.....I wanted feedback from people who felt "burned" by trusting "too much" rather than only feedback from EN where most folks still feel safe enough not to question fidelity.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think that if you've never had trust challenged that you're as likely to look at trust the same way....or to see as much value in good boundaries? The poll (for me)....was to explore the difference between what I was hearing about trust from people who still trust their spouse completely....and what I thought I might be more likely to hear on the Infidelity board from folks who have had trust tested. I was exploring if a respectful level of "mistrust" may also have value since trust is valued so highly.

Anyway....sorry for confusing you or not expressing myself clearly.

Thank you Let's Try....we were posting simultaneously....and you obviously did understand what I was saying. I was hoping to give folks on the EN board another perspective because it's not an issue many have faced and may look at "trust" as always good....and "mistrust" as always bad. A good parallel exists with the "giver and the taker". The expectation is that our giver is always good....but they can destroy a marriage. The expectation is that the taker is always bad....but they can save a marriage. The same can be said about trust and mistrust I think.

Let's try....This is a really interesting statement. That dynamic where you didn't think you had the "right to question his behavior" because it would violate the "trust" between you....is a big part of what I was sensing from some of the folks who were discussing this issue on EN too. They felt badly about any mistrust....even though in both cases their were redflags all over the place and plenty of reasons to question what was going on....yet still, they questioned their own instincts that told that mistrust might be warranted. Did you feel "guilty" for suspecting him of some level of inpropriety? Did he try to convince you that you were just jealous, suspicious or crazy....or perhaps even accuse you of lack of trust?

Star,

This was it for me...and I also remember one time Penny posting that a lot of women feel this way. They simply do not have a healthy sense of entitlement (and I'm not talking the kind that leads to affair).

Never feeling as though you have the "right" to question anything.

How sad is that.

It's always a shame to see anyone use such bad judgment. I see it with both men and women, so I don't think it's just women who CHOOSE to ignore red flags. Yes, it is sad to see someone CHOOSE to act like that.

There are a lot of different things and factors we could have changed before the affair that would have made an affair much less likely.

BUT, that is water under the bridge and hindsight is always 20/20.

The people that have not been blindsided by an affair yet are not considering this topic or thinking they have any reason to.

weaver,

I think it's a natural thing to believe that "mistrust" is a bad thing and feel some guilt about even thinking things we may only suspect but can't yet prove. I think you may be right about women....I too see some evidence on this board that women struggle with this issue a little more. However, if we wait for clear proof, ignore our instincts because of guilt, or fail to see any value in a healthy amount of mistrust....we often lose the ability to intervene while we might still avoid trouble or escalation of an affair.

In a response to a letter about rebuilding trust after an affair, Dr. Harley says this:


I may have stated this more bluntly ("blind trust is for chumps")....but the meaning is the same. This isn't my "theory" that I'm attempting to prove....but I agree with this theory and certainly see some value in a precautionary level of mistrust.

I'm not suggesting that people become paranoid or controlling!!! I just think being realistic....knowing the predisposition that human beings have for multiple partners....that we need to be aware that there is no shame in some mistrust and use good marital boundaries (Radical Honesty, POJA) which will help protect marriages.

We've learned that good marriages are based on trust....it's a mainstay of marital discussions....those about "trust". But does that mean you have a bad marriage because you sometimes don't trust? Or you trust your own instincts instead of blinding believing what you're told? Maybe good marriages have both trust[/b] AND[/b] mistrust.....I think that's what Harley is suggesting.

"This isn't my "theory" that I'm attempting to prove....but I agree with this theory and certainly see some value in a precautionary level of mistrust."

One minor quibble. What you have presented here isn't a theory, it is an opinion. Theories, generally, deal with assumptions about a set of facts, or better yet, are the analysis of a set of facts in relation to one another.
Theories are testable. I don't think that this argument is any of these.

I think it is foolish to believe that another person will always act in YOUR best interest. Maybe this is what people with "blind trust" think? I think that most people, more often than not, do things in their own best interest. I think trying to make your marriage enjoyable for your partner (and you of course) is in your own best interest.

Do I trust my wife? It depends. Trust her with what exactly? Do I trust her to not hurt the kids . . . to feed and clothe them whist I'm away on business . . .? Yes. I have blind trust that she will do these things.

Do I trust her to go to the mall and not come home with bags of bobbles and whatnot? Not at all. She doesn't have a good track-record of spending money wisely and she is acquisitive by nature (or nurture?).

Do I trust my wife to not have an affair? No. Under the right circumstances I'm sure she could. I try to make the marriage a place where she feels valued and loved. I try to make it a safe place for her. I try to make her choice to have an affair less desirable than to not have one and have a satisfying marriage. That is all that I can really do. If she is he!!-bent on having an affair . . . well she is going to do it regardless if I trust her not to or have her trailed by a PI.

Lastly, I don't know if trust and infidelity are even casually related. I think it even more murky if a link to causality is trying to be established.

Yo seastar -

(caveat: I haven't read all the replys on this thread, so I may plow old ground, or reveal my ignorance.)

"Do you believe that blind trust makes infidelity more likely to happen?"

I'm one of the few who voted "no."

My logic was that the decision to be unfaithful rests squarely with the WS and can be made easier by lack of something he/she needs in the marriage. I don't particularly see too much trust as something lacking. That said, I can see too much trust as helping to create a condition/environment that a predispositioned WS feels he/she can exploit.

I'm reminded of a pet peeve I have in the industry I work in: a frequently cited "cause" for human errors is "lack of management oversight." I cringe everytime I see or hear this. Lack of management oversight could not POSSIBLY cause a human error - at most it may have prevented some. I see a parallel with the trust and infidelity association.

I'm also reminded of a weather report I heard on the radio recently. The announcer said that the calm wind over the Bay was creating fog. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

WAT
---------------
Embrace your inner fish.

Lack of management oversite is one example of human error.

Of course I was referring to the direct "human error." And it's "oversight." <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

WAT

LOL....no WAT, I can honestly say that no one has covered the same ground as you have in quite the same way!!

There was several discussions about that second question along the way (and you may have missed that)....and I admit that it was poorly worded....you aren't the only one who disagreed.

It's my understanding....and I'm no expert on business....that "management oversight" is about guaranteeing the integrity of management systems. I am wondering with that second question if questioning the integrity of marriage....rather than blindly trusting...could have a positive effect on safeguarding marriages against infidelity.....but as you and others pointed out....the question was flawed.

Me craft another poll? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> nooooo I suck at it !

Here's how my mind worked (yesterday)

I read this:



" Do you think that your blind trust made infidelity more likely or less likely to occur? "


and I substituted another common marital behavior >> unprotected sex .... so it read (in my mind)

"Do you think that unprotected sex made infidelity more likely or less likely to occur? "

and the question made no sense to me ...

trust and sex are both desirable occurances in a marriage

BUT

do BLIND trust and UNPROTECTED sex in and of themselves leave a marriage more vulnerable to infidelity ????

it seemes (still) like an UNanserable question to me (the term "trick question" was not a good choice, sorry, UNanserable is better

Star* .... I found that crafting a poll that asked questions in a way that would provide information that I was looking for is REALLY REALLY difficult .... I suppose if one crafted polls frequently, the skill level would increase .... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> ... even for me 'chere !!!

LOL


Pep