It's funny, but Suzet will fail to mention that every person that has since come down on her for her "justifications" initially supported her after NC was broken. The problem came up when Suzet decided there was a good enough reasn to not inform the OMW. Then her support for her actions began eroding as she was seen to be uncaring towards a person that she wounded.
When Suzet posted her thread on the recovery board I was one of the first to respond telling her she belongs here and to hold her head high for coming clean and again beginning NC. That view changed as her rationalizations came out for not doing the right thing.

This post from 6/27/06 on Suzet's thread spells out exactly why this list was made in the first place.

If this thread...so clearly illustrates the support of the MB principle...perhaps this would be a fantastic time to talk about the EXPOSURE PRINCIPLE.

Harley ... and his INTENT OF EXPOSURE...is to POSSIBLY EXPEDITE THE END OF THE A. Directly in relation to many A ending once they hit the light of day.

It has NEVER been expressed by a Harley MB PRINCIPLE ...that exposure is to bring shame, offer repentence, or a moral obligation.

So if we're going to "defend" the MB principles... I think it's necessary to KNOW THEM.

The intent of this thread is to give new MB's a bit more information based on my opinion. If you are unhappy with that opinion, that is fine.

Suzet-
I was re-reading your POJA vs exposure thread and I was wondering if Dr. Harley ever responded to your email. What did he say? I'm really curious. Like K, I think you're very valuable here too.
Thanks-
090886

Dr. Harley
"But I am one of the very few that advocate the revelation of affairs at all costs, even when the wayward spouse has no feelings of guilt or depression to overcome. I believe that honesty is so essential to the success of marriage, that hiding past infidelity makes a marriage dishonest, preventing emotional closeness and intimacy."

In addition there are several long time MB posters here that have said that Harley directly addressed this question and that he advocated that the OMW should always be told. BIJ... perhaps you need to take this up with the Harley's.

And ignore it if you choose to... but there is a moral obligation to do the right thing when you have injured another.

Suzet,

Did you and H ever hear from Dr. Harley regardng this situation? I would remind "mkeverydaycnt" that I spent over a year in counseling with the Harleys (90% Steve), and that with regard to the situation of telling my WS's OMW---it was a 'one-sided' POJA with my wife, based on the situation between OM and his wife (in the process of a messy divorce, with her cheating). The decision was not to tell. Morally, I would have made a strong case to tell---but based on the fact that telling the wife would change little about their situation, and only add to a mounting list of resentment that my wife had built up, there was really no practical reason to tell.

So, in our case, the focus was more on the POJA. For someone who has a strong moral need to tell, one should attempt to negotiate this with their spouse first---in a respectful, genuine way. If unsuccessful, you may go ahead with exposure (or any 'moral' decision)---but you've laid the groundwork for attempting to hear your spouse's side of it, and taken their opinions under consideration (attempting to build "love" out of a bad situation).

I'm sorry that you had this relapse, Suzet. I'm quite thankful that we haven't heard from the OM in 8 years---it makes things easier.

Yes, you did…on Myrta’s thread…and afterwards I’ve corrected the inaccurate things you’ve said about me on this thread.

Further, the fact that you’ve put my name on your little list to “warn” new members against me, clearly show your continuous hostility, vindictiveness and personal vendetta against me.

Also, you’re incorrect in implying (by putting my name on the list) that I’m against the MB principles… As I’ve said in the previous post, the fact that I can’t follow the MB principles 100% in my situation at this stage (quitting my job and informing OMW) are due to personal circumstances and DOESN’T mean that I don’t agree and/or support the MB principles and can’t be of help to new members or any others.

Also, as I’ve already pointed out to you, I haven’t in all my years on these boards EVER posted advice to someone which was in conflict with MB principles or contradicted it, IN SPITE of my own situation which I agree is not good at all… And if you can find ONE post of mine where I’ve posted advice which were in conflict with the MB principles or contradicted it in ANY way…I will take my words back, disappear from these boards permanently and leave you in peace...

If you can’t agree or have understanding for my situation mkeverydaycnt and why I can’t (at this stage) do what you would like me to do, I can certainly understand…really…and that’s OKAY…I don’t have a problem if you disagree with me and don’t have any understanding for my situation, but clearly things have gone MUCH further than just a “disagreement” from you...you've started to make it PERSONAL. Maybe I’m wrong, but I can literally “FEEL” you resentment towards me...and this thread of yours (where you’ve put my name on your list) is further proof of this.

I understand what you’re saying and I can understand your concern (of new posters reading about my situation and coming up with their own “legitimate” reasons), but I don’t want to go in depth about my specific situation again…that horse was “beaten to death” on my other two threads of 1 and a half months ago. I can just assure you that I'm not in a fog and doesn't "rationalize" or "justify" anything as far as my situation is concerned. But again, you don’t have to agree with me on this.

Suzet... I will disagree..and it is not personal to you... it can't be... I don't know you...only your actions which I offered an opinion on.
I don't think I said anything in error on the other thread... but again, we will need to agree to disagree. There are many MB vets that share this view and have distanced themselves from you until you do the right thing (in their opinion).
And again, Suzet, this is all opinion here.

I've not yet send Dr Harley an e-mail, but I still plan to (just to get clarity for myself and others on this).

And the shame of it is you still need someone else to tell you what you already know. That OMW should not be kept in the dark... by you. But your conscience knows this already...it just isn't convenient for you right now.
As I said on another post... I need no one, no matter how many letters appear after their name... to convince me to do the moral thing. My conscience drives that. If you are okay with yourself and knowing that you have harmed another without apology or informing her, that is for you to live with. It is not my call.

Thanks for clarifying. I respect your opinion. However, I also agree to disagree.

Peace to you,
Suzet

Peace to you too Suzet. I truly hope things work out for you and your H.

Thanks mkeverydaycnt, it’s nice that we could interact “respectfully” with each other for a change… <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> however, it still bothers me that you have inaccurate assumptions and personal opinions about me... I want to point out to you that sometimes there is much more going on than you can see “on the surface”...things are not always so “simple” as it might appear to you personally...and the same goes for opinions & judgments about others...

Please know that I mean what I have said above sincerely and in the best possible way… I hope you will take what I've said in a positive way... (And I know I need to remember those exact same words for myself sometimes).

Anyway, thanks for you good wishes...I wish the same to you. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
Suzet

I truly do understand the horror and pain that some BSs feel when it comes to issues like exposure and A marriages. I hate the idea that anybody would feel "re-victimized" by some of the situations that arise here. Any empathetic person....can imagine how awful it is to be reminded and assaulted by the very things that tore their lives apart....and yes, sometimes *I* am reminded.

I understand the desire to create some "pure MB state".....I just do not see how that is attainable.....human relationships and infidelity are a messy businesses....they defy absolute prediction and categorization. And MB is as "flawed" as the rest of the world in the sense that it contains every manner of person in this tangled web. There is no way to achieve a MB utopia where only "certain" people can post or be helped....first of all....whose standard would be used? Who would enforce it? How could we prevent abuse of that kind of power?

The world resists "santizing" and MB is no different. There is no way to exclude certain posters unless the adminstrators of the board decide to do so and if history is any indication....that will not happen. Attempts to get a general consensus from members about banishing certain posters or POVs is impossible....the membership is constantly changing. Even a consensus of older members is impossible....because the longer you stay here...the more you see that even the foggiest thinkers sometimes come around and that even in the darkest hearts....there is hope. Some of my best moments here have been when the smoke clears....and someone has a wonderful epiphany....especially someone I'd given up on.

We have all sorts of people here....some who seemed damned and find grace....some who seem graceful and are revealed to be ethically rotten. Time is the ingredient that reveals the truth about individuals.....not some sort of list of folks to be avoided.

If MB priniciples were going to be "poluted" by unsavor/opposing POVs....it would have happened long ago because we have had every manner of fogged folk on these boards. *A* marriages are not in danger of gaining exceptance here...or any sort of normalization....the events of the past few days have certainly proved that. The consequences of entering a marriage that began as an affair....are built right into that situation. Newbies are not sheep so easily led....they have brains and are capable of distinguishing whose fogged and who isn't.

But even beyond that....MB is not applied (by the Harleys) in the absolute context that is often interpreted on this board. The Harley's do most certainly look at individual circumstances when advising exposure, Plan B....and like it or not...do counsel folks who are "legally" married despite the fact that their marriage may have begun as an affair. If there's going to be a campaign to discredit....then the Harley's are not going to hold up any better than some of the posters here I'm afraid.

You might have noticed that on the main site...and in SAA....exposure isn't even mentioned. You can't search the word "exposure" on the main site....it doesn't appear. That does NOT mean the Harley's don't support exposure....those listening to WH's radio show have heard him recommend it....but all the rules, distinctions, absolutes and moralization about exposure....are a creation of this board. The Harley's apply these concepts on an individual basis....so anybody who has a beef with that....should probably go to the source to sort it out.

mk....I understand your desire to protect MB from a "diluting" of basic concepts, but making a "list" is not going to accomplish your goal. Fight the fight....argue the validity of your position, and discredit the other postion with logic....instead of trying to discredit "people". You'll never get a consensus if you attack a person rather than a problem.

I thank you for you considerate and thoughtful response to my thread. I have been impressed by your willingness to understand situations. However, this thread was started after much thought and discussion with other veteran MBers that have seen a drastic change in recent months.
I have merely offered a view that seeks to protect new members from what I consider to be "worng" thinking. It is my opinion that had I encountered some of these things when I first came here, rather than the caring and supportive crowd that took me under their wing, that I would have been driven from these boards.
While I appreciate your view point and opinion concerning this thread... it was well thought out... discussed objectively with others here that I trust and care about... and decided that this is the course I decided to take.
I do find that I am "attacking" the problem and not a person. My views are blind to the person... I see only the matters at hand. The theme of the thread necessitated that I brought names up.
Thank you for your kind input.

MEDC

Great post Star!!!!!!

But even beyond that....MB is not applied (by the Harleys) in the absolute context that is often interpreted on this board. The Harley's do most certainly look at individual circumstances when advising exposure, Plan B....and like it or not...do counsel folks who are "legally" married despite the fact that their marriage may have begun as an affair. If there's going to be a campaign to discredit....then the Harley's are not going to hold up any better than some of the posters here I'm afraid.

You might have noticed that on the main site...and in SAA....exposure isn't even mentioned. You can't search the word "exposure" on the main site....it doesn't appear. That does NOT mean the Harley's don't support exposure....those listening to WH's radio show have heard him recommend it....but all the rules, distinctions, absolutes and moralization about exposure....are a creation of this board. The Harley's apply these concepts on an individual basis....so anybody who has a beef with that....should probably go to the source to sort it out.

However, this thread was started after much thought and discussion with other veteran MBers that have seen a drastic change in recent months

So MEDC based on the above italicized statement, am I correct in assuming that there is an actual group of posters who are aligned elsewhere to promote a distinction that is not part and parcel of Marriage Builders as per the Harleys?

if you say so.

Tempest posted:


Hmmm...so would it be considered "patronizingly superior" to post a list of people that YOU feel newcomers should ignore because YOU disagree with their point of view?

Is it respectful to say/infer that posts by 'these' people should be ignored because I don't agree with what they say?

I agree with Tempest on this...it's fine to have your own opinion. But HOW you voice that opinion matters greatly.

Reading your post gives me the impression that you feel that YOUR opinion, (and those of others here) IS/ARE superior to others here.

Isn't that directly contrary to what Tempest posted as guidlines on this site?

Tempest/Justuss...care to weigh in on this with a little guidance?

Wow Owl, that certainly wasn't a very respectful post that you just made to MEDC...Do you have a set of standards for what is and what isn't respectful that you use when posting? How did what you said to MEDC fit your criteria?

Mrs. W

I didn't realize you had to follow MB principles to a T to be a member of this board.

Also, this isn't the first post I've seen recently where someone is upset at MEDC for calling them to the carpet.

You really need to brush up on your communication skills MEDC if you want anyone to listen to you.

I agree that the MB principles are good, but you have to realize life is not one size fits all. Not everyone here is going to do all of them exactly the way they should. Why get yourself so freakin' riled up about it? That's what I don't understand.