Mel,

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Exactly what "position" does a person need to be "in" to ask a question or give an opinion around her? That whole statement is dang condescending....LOL Is there a card I'm supposed to have? Did I miss the memo?

I have as much right to ask for evidence as you do....I don't need your permission....and I answered your question about evidence. I told you that I have only logic and good sense....not evidence.....to support my opinion. It's my opinion....nobody elses....you can agree or disagree and so can anyone else.

You, on the other hand claim to be an authority, on someone else's opinion....but in spite of the mass of publicity surrounding this man....can't produce one written quote to support what you say he says "often" on the radio. If he talks about this on his show....why would he neglect to put something this important in his work? How can anyone here verify your version of his opinion? Because from the lectures and shows I've heard....I have NOT heard him express things this way....truly.

The fact that you see no relevence in the omission is your perogative....or maybe you like to dictate what's relevent to everyone else too? Your gall is only matched by your hairdo. It may frustrate the heck of you....but I'm not even a little bit "enraged"....you don't have that much power over me. I really like you....but not to the point where your opinion would hurt me. We generally agree on exposure....this endless debate over the details is boring, not upsetting And SOOOOOOoo predictable and petty.

Read belaqua's own words....not only did she feel victimized by the affair....but she felt victimized by the responses she got when she asked her question...and she left....so good job on helping her down that moral path with the straightforward talk *thumbs up*. You don't get to decide how belaqua "ought" to feel....she expressed how she felt in her own words...try reading them.

I have to run.....not ignoring anyone....can y'all argue amongst yourselves for a while? why should I be the only one providing entertainment? Tell you what....wanna put me in the stocks....call me a Harley heretic and throw some tomaters at me? Ain't happnin' <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Aphelion,


Exactly how could you make a judgement about this happening? You can not know before hand. Even most BS's here say that their reaction upon discovery of the affair was not what they expected they would do. You can't know how the other BS would react. Even if you think you can.

Again, I don't see any evidence of this apart from people warning about it and giving people an excuse to not do what is morally correct.


Always like to end on a point of agreement. BS's need to help each other - heck I tried to get OM's W here when I found this place.

pound for pound the most entertaining thread going today ... don't stop

enjoying this discussion without participating

Pep

really, how do you know it wouldn't change anything if you don't tell him.... maybe he will decide to forgive you or maybe with this information he will decide to begin his life anew with another. That decision is his and to take it from his is the ultimate in disrespectful.

Childish and rude comment SF!

My Goodness Mel - she's after your HAIR now? WOW I know I edited the above quote but the end was just so fitting for the beginning. Sigh.

Did you miss my point about your misuse of the penaltykill case, star? You used that as an example and it doesn't fit your situation. It DOES, however, serve to support my contention that Dr. Harley most certainly does advocate late term exposures.


Well, you can ask, but you won't be taken too seriously since you don't even use evidence by your own admission. However, folks can also have an opinion that your opinion is NOT based on evidence and judge it accordingly. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> But that leaves you in a place where you can't demand of others what you yourself don't even practice.


First off, unlike you, I do not claim to be an "authority" in anything. [except selling soft drinks, chere <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />] But one does not have to be an "authority" to listen to the radio, now do they? I don't claim to be none too smart, but I CAN listen to a radio! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

However, many people here do listen to his radio show and have heard him speak about 2Bnormal's case AND penaltykills case [link was provided]

Here is cc46's report [which was very accurate, by the way] about the penaltykill case: http://www.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/sho...rue#Post2942830



Just because you don't "like" it doesn't give you grounds to reject it out of hand. But, really that is much more evidence than you yourself have provided. If you doubt that he commented on any of those cases, it is up to YOU to substantiate such a doubt. But, we have already seen that evidence is not an important issue with you so you can't very well demand something you don't practice.

Of course, that doesn't address the fact that this case [penaltykill] IS NOT RELEVANT to your point, because your point is about a marriage where both spouses already know. That is NOT THE CASE in the case you cited. This case does nothing to support your point because it MISSES the point. Sorry...

But then, that begs the question, doesn't it?

If you feel Harley doesn't advocate exposure, since you don't see it in his "printed material," then WHY are you recommending it yourself? I mean, it is NOT in his "written material?" So what gives, starfish?? How can you criticize anyone for recommending exposure based on a lack of written materials, when you DO IT YOURSELF?? YIKES! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />



Well, apparently I do in order to elicit this level of defensiveness coupled by personal attacks, starfish. This is quite a reaction, and certainly not very "compassionate!" <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I think she ruint my self esteem, BigK! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

[okok, not too damn much! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />]

This is like watching a pair of Sumo wrestlers <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I can't comprehend the rules
the hair-do's are unique
the ritual is old school
there is eye-to-eye combat
no blood
brusing is possible
and you cannot tell who's winning until it's over!

heeeeya!

Pep

ARE YOU SAYING I AM FAT?? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

NAwwwwwwwwwwwww

I'm saying you & Star* look GOOD in diapers !

BWHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

BWHAAAAAAAAA


BWHHHH

*snort*

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

Mel

check your email

I sent a pix of my new boyfriend!

That's my thong, you silly left coaster!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Star*fish and all

I have not posted in a long time. Very few things make me want to "come out from under my rock" as Plank says. This topic is one of them.

What I wrote in the above quoted post is still very valid. I have personally spoken to Steve Harley about this topic. The bottom line is that whatever is best for each couple to recover is the best course of action. Anything that facilitates true recovery is good; usually the disclosure is the way to go.

However, some people have only one tool to apply to all their jobs. The single wooden ruler they own can not work for every measurement. For some folks this ruler is also used to smack others with. Perhaps they went to strict Catholic school and learned to use the ruler for this purpose. It is much better to have more tools in the toolbox and apply them with thought and compassion based on the job at hand (rather than an automatic narrow view application).

For those who care:
Positives to our exposure; Better communication and understanding of his needs, her needs, and MB principals.

Negatives to our exposure; Everything else.

Perhaps this makes me an exception to the rules. I guess this makes me exceptional (except to those that take exception to what I say).

To those unsure of the proper course of action-- Think!
Do what is best for recovery on an individual basis using all tools available. Do no harm. PB

ML,


Exposure IS mentioned....just not extensively or with the emphasis/interpretation that it sometimes gets here on MB. But surely you agree that it's amazingly hard to find for something so important? What isn't mentioned directly (and what we're discussing here).....is whether there is an advantage to exposing early and whether some advantage is lost (and why) when exposure is done late.

I recommend exposure for several reasons.....it works to end affairs, it gives the OPS needed information to work on their own marriage, and it increases accountability. The fact that I can see some possible disadvantages for waiting to do exposure....doesn't change how important it is to expose early. I personally think to myself...yeah I'd ALWAYS want to know about my husband cheating....but finding out years after the fact isn't nearly the advantage that finding out early would be. I would regret the years I had given to my husband in my ignorance, and would be so angry about the inability to recoup that time. I would so so prefer being told EARLY....when it would matter most to me.

It's amazing to me how something like discussing the advantages of early exposure....and some obvious (yes they seem pretty obvious to me) disadvantages of late exposure....has elicited this kind of response. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but I am surprised that it's ignited another controversy.

For instance, do you disagree that it will be harder for the OPS to prove the veracity years past the event? Does that seem obvious or logical that it would be true? I think it does. That doesn't mean you shouldn't tell the OPS....but it does mean you should be aware that your exposure is likely to be met with more skepticism and less appreciation than if you exposed early.

Do you disagree that it gives the OP more squirming room to cover their tracks or build a different story? Isn't that also obvious?

Do you disagree that early exposure creates a "common purpose" between both BSs in both marriages....and that common purpose is lost with late exposure?

Do you disagree that with late exposure the OPS wasn't given the chance to intervene in the affair that was harming their marriage and could be very bitter about that....I certainly would.

What is it that you disagree with? What is it that sounds illogical to you? And how does any of this "undermine" the idea of exposure?


This is my point ML...not that you shouldn't expose....but that you need to be prepared for some of the downside of exposing late....that the OPS might not "appreciate" it for various reasons. No where did I say you "shouldn't" expose...even late....what I DID say was that it's harder, it's probably less effective, some of the benefits could be lost. I still think that's all true.

You focussed on the morality of the issue....and that's fine but even when folks are looking at the morality issue....and I think the original poster WAS....there are more moral considerations than just "conscience building"....and I think those moral considerations "grow" as time goes on because you've denied the right of the other person to know when the information can have the most benefit. There is no time where the moral question is clearer or less complex than during discovery. Surely you agree with that much? Quite obviously, belaqua was struggling with more than one moral issue (from her perspective) than just whether the other person had a right to know. She was also worried about the other children....and there's nothing immoral about that. It's very difficult and painful to feel responsible for hurting other people....and I can empathize with that. Afterall, this is a BS who has already suffered greatly....and this last tying up of loose ends can add more pain....and I understand that. Empathy is not agreement.


No, I didn't miss your attempt to dismiss the penaltykill situation but I don't agree at all that it doesn't apply. It not only fits this situation....but it's a really rare opportunity for us to see something we generally never get to see....how the OPS in an affair situation might feel. Normally....it's the couple here on MB who both know, and the OPS in the other marriage who is still in the dark. In this case....it was the other couple who both knew and the other wife who did the "exposure"....not the poster on MB. For THAT other marriage....penaltybox (penaltykill's husband) was the uninformed OPS. Input from an OPS would be next to impossible to find here on MB...but because of the unusual circumstances....he wrote to you directly and told you exactly what it was like to find out 4 years after the fact. Some of the things he said.....most definitely support the idea early exposure has some advantages over late exposure.


ML....over the years being here on MB, in my interaction with the Harleys, and in my other experiences mentoring couples, I've seen evidence of the things I've posted here. The above statement is untrue and I've been honest about my inability to find some examples with the search engine...but that doesn't mean evidence isn't important, or that I'll stop looking through the mountain of posts on this site.

I also will certainly be very happy to take the next step and write or call Dr. Harley for some clarification on some of these issues. I think that's a good idea since the exposure has become such a hot topic. Until that time....since he hasn't addressed these things at length or in depth where most folks have access....both your interpretation and mine....which for all practical purposes are not far apart at all are not different enough to continue to muscle through the minutae....don't you agree?


Hopefully, we're both too "seasoned" to get really defensive, right? I'm interpreting that commnet as a "tease" because I think it was meant that way. But I reserve the right to tease you about your big hair and aqua net and I'll let you call me a [email][censored]@ss[/email], chere or laugh at my accent if you want.


Guilty as charged....except for the fat. I was actually thinking some of the GORGEOUS female mud wrasslers!


hahahahahah

pb, I am glad that you are seeing some positives as a result of your exposure. I agree that the tools should be used with compassion, however, the best course of action is always the truth. Honesty is the solution to infidelity, not more lies. Dr. Harley doesnt say that "usually" disclosure is best, but rather "always" disclosure is best. And that is because a marriage cannot be built on lies and deceit.

Anyway, I apologize for using you as an example when you weren't here, however, it was a case in which Dr. Harley actually read the thread and commented on it on his radio show. I thought it was very important for others to see Dr. Harley's - paraphrased - words on the subject.

I hope you are both doing well. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Starfish, when you do this remember that this has been done before by other members of this forum. They've emailed, they've called into the radio show, etc...

And every time that they come back with any answer that doesn't exactly match with the "preferred view" of the posters on this board, the quote is either picked apart and individual phrases are used out of context of the entire conversation to support the "preferred view", or the person asking the questions is summarily accused of "steering" the conversation to get the answers that they "wanted".

My only suggestion to solve this problem would be to have Dr H, HIMSELF, come here and post a response on this board so that his view is unmistakably heard by all. It would be interesting to see how THAT post gets picked apart and piece-parted together to match the specific views of those that read it.

I admire you for continuing this fight. I've given up. I completely agree with every single thing you've said, but I now realize it's a fight you can't win. It's impossible to try to get someone to see something that they refuse to see. Unfortunately, it's the others that come here looking for help that truly miss out, because they receive "help" completely untempered by compassion from some of the posters on this board. Not all, but enough that it convinces many to leave before they get the chance to truly hear what they needed to hear.

penaltybox,

I appreciate you posting and I hope you don't mind that I used your situation as an example. You have the distinction of knowing exactly what it feels like to find out long after the affair was over because the other wife decided to expose to you (the unknowing OPS in her marriage) 4 years later....and that makes your post particularly relevent to this discussion. If I may....can I ask you if you felt you lost some advantages by learning so late? Do you think the benefits are the same in both early and late exposure? Thanks for dropping by. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Owl,

Then that's what I'll ask for!! And I'd really love some input from folks about what questions they'd like me to ask.

Like you, I'm a betrayed spouse. I'm not some fogged BS looking for a reason to save my own butt by limiting exposure. If "K" who has been here longer than any of us, has counseled with all the Harleys, and has more contact with any of them than anybody else on the board today, and who has gone round and round with this issue with other posters....can't make progress on this issue....I have no delusions that *I* can LOL. I think you're right....the only way to get any closure....is to encourage the man himself to clarify the details. So I guess I need to collect some questions....and I'll start a new thread so that folks can have a voice in what they need/would like some clarification about.

starfish, I dont disagree with any of the exposure points you made. What I do disagree with is the notion that any of those alleged impediments should be used as an excuse to NOT expose. Sure, there will be obstacles, but there are obstacles in ALL CASES no matter what. There are FRESH cases where there is no evidence, that does not preclude exposure. Exposure is never easy, never clean and always leaves devastation. But it is not the exposure that devastates, but the AFFAIR. Exposure is cleansing and purifying because it brings the wound out in the open where it CAN heal.



He didn't say that because a lack of appreciation is more likely in late term exposures, but because the BS, penaltybox, IN THIS CASE, was not appreciative. He claimed he DID NOT WANT TO KNOW. I don't think that a lack of appreciation can be assumed in late term exposures any more than it is in fresh exposures. It can be the case in ANY exposure. We have other members here who DID appreciate it very much. However, the "appreciation" or lack thereof can't be a consideration because one doesn't know until the affair is exposed.


Adultery *IS* a moral issue, they are not SEPERATE issues and cannot be compartmentalized, so I don't know what you are talking about here. One does not check their morals at the door, but uses them as a GUIDE in all aspects of decision making. If one has morals, they can no more compartmentalize them than they could compartmentalize their personality. The moral "question" is pretty much ALWAYS clear in the case of adultery, whether it be a late term or early exposure. The moral is CLEAR at all times, what is sometimes fuzzy is the application of morals to hard situations.


I think you are still missing the point. This case does not serve to support your case, because he would have been devastated had he found out 4 years ago or today. We already know very well that discovery of an affair is devastating, that is not news; we see it here EVERY DAY. He is devastated because of the adultery and years of lying, not because of the exposure. And the the discussion is about the effect of EXPOSURE to the other BS on the marriage where both partners already know of the affair.

Anyway, I think that we do agree on many points, most importantly that exposure is a very effective affair fighting tool that I will continue to express to newcomers.

p.s. I think Pep needs an [censored] whooping! Hopefully we can agree on that! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />