|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
late exposure
measurably superior to
no exposure
when discussing
protection of future contact
therefore
facilitating the safety
of all concerned!
Pep
Last edited by Pepperband; 08/29/06 05:01 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
recovery efforts that omit
exposure to the other betrayed spouse
permits unnecessary vulnerability
and a known risk for future betrayals
as exampled by several "recovered" marriages here
where the other BS was not informed of the affair
and even a few years later ... NC is breached
and the BS suffers another betrayal
because the OP's spouse was not vigilant on his/her end
because he/she was deliberately left vulnerable
what a shame <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />
and
what a sham <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />
Pep
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
and
the vulnerability of a less than 100% exposed affair
continues
even
"years down the road"
it's an inconscionable position
for a FWS to recommend
less than 100% protection
for their other victim
the OP's spouse
inconscionable
<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 258
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 258 |
PEP,
You are all knowing and wise!!
Don't ever leave these boards!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
You are all knowing and wise!! I don't know about THAT! however, I am experienced and I have common sense and I have observed both what worksand what does notPep
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,035
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,035 |
Pep is a pro and he is bilingual! He speaks English and Foganian...
BH = Me 38; WW = 35; DS = 5, DD = 3, DD = 14 mo. Feb 2006 = EA/PA started May 19 & Aug. 15, 2006 = D-Days Nov. 3, 2006 = Divorce Papers - (EA/PA ongoing)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
Pep >self-exposure< is a girl!
<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Last edited by Pepperband; 08/29/06 12:25 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025 |
Exposure to OP's Spouse, even late exposure
Finally and hopefully for all time
destroys the fantasy on both ends
For without FULL exposure
The secretive, lustful, and faux passionate illusion of the affair, to SOME extent, admitted to or not, very likely remains
The unexposed spouse necessarily remains stuck in the fantasy...
The "what if" remains open ended on their end
The exposed wayward spouse unwittingly remains tempted by the illusion, even if it's only held by OP, perhaps indefinitely
It could always rear it's ugly head in the form of contact from a still deluded OP.
Regardless, the wayward remains vulnerable to the fact (whether true or not) that the illusion may STILL exists
If not, perhaps just comforted, at some level, that the fantasy may still exists.
In quiet reflection there may always be:
"If my spouse died, perhaps OP will still be there for me"
"I wonder if OP thinks about me"
"I wonder if OP still loves me"
"I wonder what would have happened if we had just run off together"
The fantasy/illusion is where the HIGH of infidelity and the actual reward of the addiction IS...OP is just the CRACKPIPE/BONG. IMO, without the fantasy, OP is NOT nearly as tempting. They can rigthfully then become...just another crackhead after exposure.
Mr. Wondering
FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering) DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered
"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 928
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 928 |
Pep... now that you've exposed yourself (hopefully not wearing one of Mel's thongs)... is your masculine side going berserk?
I can just imagine all the fog talk... "It's not PMS, you're just annoying me." "My pants shrunk...again." "I'll be ready in a minute." And so on...
BH (Me) - 38 WW - 36 Married - 16 years 2 children - 10,12 DD1 - 05/30/05 - EA suspected, W wanted space DD2 - 07/01/05 - EA/PA discovered & confronted WW DD3 - 07/21/05 - Further contact discovered and now ended. 11/07/05 - exposed to OMW... 07/01/07 - separated to give "space". recovery was not progressing. 09/04/07 - DDAY all over... new OM.
Patience with God is Faith. Patience with myself is Hope. Patience with others is Love. FAITH REQUIRES ACTION!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,435
Member
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,435 |
Pep >self-exposure< is a girl! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> No no.. now don't get NEKKID again ! You'll catch a cold from all that exposure <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> !
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
exposure works to protect marriages ...
to advocate non-exposure is to advocate an avoidable risk
just nonsense!
Pep
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464
Member
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,464 |
Thank you Pep and Mr W. Excellent posts.
Me: 56 (FBS) Wife: 55 (FWW) D-Day August 2005 Married 11/1982 3 Sons 27,25,23 Empty Nesters. Fully Recovered.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
why would a FWW respect her husband when he refuses to protect her from further contact by the OM?
she wouldn't
which is why the OM feels entitled to try again and contact FWW ... years later .... because he senses the FWW's disrespect for her BH
wimpy BH are targets for further contact from OM
"wimpy" is not attractive to most women ... agree or disagree?
Pep
Last edited by Pepperband; 08/30/06 08:49 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,800
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 3,800 |
non-exposure only benefits the AFFAIR!!!!! wimpy BH are targets for further contact from OM
"wimpy" is not attractive to most women ... agree or disagree? My H used the Crowbar method to secure our future from OM. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Wimpy, not a bit, kind of hostile, but it did scare the crap out of OM and I'm guessing he will NEVER try and contact me regardless of how his end of the world is going. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> Still paying for the damage, sad reminder, but OM is out of the picture. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> I agree it is a wimpy approach to not expose, and wimpy is not attractive. I confessed my A because I needed my H's help with ending it. I was weak, and the OM was persistant, I couldn't do it alone. I needed him to help me. KY
The queen, for her part, is the unifying force of the community; if she is removed from the hive, the workers very quickly sense her absence. After a few hours, or even less, they show unmistakable signs of queenlessness. - Man and Insects
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 73 |
Have exposed to WW family, my family, WW friends. Is there a need for last exposure to WW work, OM work, OM family (if possible)? NC has not occured, minimal contact at work. I know OM still calling, it has been a month since she said she doesn't want to talk to him. I still believe that there is contact based on phone messages. WW is coming around a little, fog seems to be clearing at times. Is there a need for this added exposure or will it drive her further from me?????
Thanks
M: 3 times in the past. 2 ended because of her having affairs, last ended because of her verbal and physical abuse. Last marriage ended in 2018. K:1 son (Adult and out of home) and 1 daughter (in-home 50/50)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 977 |
DavyJones,
Yep, I would expose to everyone that may be able to help end the affair, (and your W will need to leave the job. Minimal contact is too much!).
And yes, it may drive her further from you at first ('cause she'll be ticked off that you put her secret out there in the light) but if you want to begin to heal (which you CANNOT as long as there is ANY contact)... exposure is the best weapon.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,959
Member
|
Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,959 |
My biggest regret over my W's last two A's... I DIDN"T EXPOSE TO HER FAMILY!.
I was always viewed by them as a black sheep in their midst, but after discovering the A's, I should have exposed her to her very religous family members, to have garnered their support in getting her to end the A, and to have allowed them to perceive me in a better light, having been able to forgive her and welcome her back into the marriage.
Exposure is as critical to helping end the A, as NC is to ensuring Recovery has a chance.
JMHO SD
BH - me 53, ONS 1979 FWW - 51, 2 EA's, 1 PA Last D-Day, Sep. 30, 2003 Last Contact/recovery began 2-26-04
***You can do anything with time and money...but remember...money won't buy you time!***
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 73
Member
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 73 |
Ok, I found out tonight there is still contact for sure. Some initiated by her. Should I confront her with this, expose and continue with plan A? Please help, at a critical point here.
Thanks to all
M: 3 times in the past. 2 ended because of her having affairs, last ended because of her verbal and physical abuse. Last marriage ended in 2018. K:1 son (Adult and out of home) and 1 daughter (in-home 50/50)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
recovery efforts that omit
exposure to the other betrayed spouse
permits unnecessary vulnerability
and a known risk for future betrayals Pep, I have a feeling you're talking about me (and others) here. You do realise that my H exposed fully to the OM's W about 6 months after D-day (when the A had been over nearly a year) don't you? It stopped any risk of contact again. The first meeting of recent contact was purely accidental but, yes indeed, was an A waiting to happen again. By the time Mel exposed to my H, there was NC back in place anyway. My H tried to phone the OM's W a few times but couldn't get through.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,297 |
And I object VERY strongly to my wonderful H being called a wimp.
He is a strong, sensitive and wonderful man and could show most men a thing or two about being a real man.
|
|
|
0 members (),
250
guests, and
64
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums67
Topics133,618
Posts2,323,473
Members71,916
|
Most Online3,185 Jan 27th, 2020
|
|
|
|