I see. I guess his intelligence was just one of the personal qualities he used to single himself out as 'special', then. But it could have been anything, I guess - looks, a special talent, or something entirely fictional.

Alph.

Incidentally, the inability of a person to engender sympathy for his/her victims is a characteristic of psychopaths.

That would be my WW.... we are going to court today so she can argue that she needs more money, I am paying all her bills and she wants more money.

I didn't know how easy it was to subpeona an airlines for flight information, she has been going and seeing the OM once a month on her dime and now we are getting direct proof of it from the airlines

Is narcissim essentially learned behaviour?

Alph.

No one seems to be quite sure whether it is acquired as a result of conditions during upbringing or predisposed by a combination of physical factors during the early formation of the brain.

I can't really comment on the narcissism, but the idea that a higher IQ can contribute to better deception, both of the self and others is almost self evident. One of the things that became clear to me quite early on was the lack of personal integrity - and by that I mean that WSs are at odds with themselves, emotion vs. intellect, etc. - and as such the choice must be made to trust or accept one or the other (emotions vs. intellect) as true. Once this choice to accept the emotional truth has been made, the intellect accepts this truth as truth and becomes a slave to it, just as a junky believes that the only way they will survive is to get the next fix (the smarter ones are able to get more creative about getting it). Everything is viewed through a lens designed to prove that the choice made was the right one, and all sorts of tactics are used to do so.

I think this comes down to a real philosophical question about where the true self lies, but in my opinion, intellect is a tool. It can be used to understand and adapt beliefs, but it can also be used to manipulate our own reality. Different parts of the brain working towards different ends, with the part that gets the attention of the true self getting rewarded and growing, while those parts that are ignored atrophy and are lost.

As long as a person is able to keep their external reality close enough to their internal reality they can maintain whatever belief structure benefits them best. Once they realize through painful experience that their beliefs are at odds with reality, they are forced to change them. Hopefully this will provide an opportunity to approach the situation from a balanced internal position that will allow for the creation of new beliefs. Of course, this presupposes a healthy emotional and intellectual outlook, which then leads to the question: is there something in the WS that predisposes them to the kind of thinking that allows them to do what they do or is it simply human nature, luck and will power?

Vike,

I have kept up with your sitch and I want to say that I hope you wear her out in court. Keep us informed and hang in there.

This is another way of saying what Dr. Harley has claimed about people: It is easier for them to change their values than it is for them to change their behavior. The actual statement comes from a study of behavior in the early 1950s in which the finding was that, when behavior comes into conflict with values, the values are usually modified so that the behavior can continue.


This is what is supposed to happen in Plan B.

IMHO, its the ability to "devalue" another person. This is at the core of entitlement and selfishness.

FWIW, I think an A is the coming together of opportunity and an individuals ability to rationalize.

Opportunity consists of both what environments you put one's self into, as well as what enters one's environment. If you look at many of the MB principles, they focus on environment control. 15 hours a week together, avoid overnight business, no opposite sex friendships, etc. It recognizes the fact that all people have the ability to rationlize all behaviors given a certain environment.

Rationlizing behavior is a value statement. Rationalization is not per se a negative term. Neither is making a value statement. For example when two different people invite you to a party at the same time, you make a choice and you value one of the two people higher than the other. This may not be a permanent valuation, but at that moment, one is valued more than the other.

I think the rationalization can take many forms accross a broad continuem. Perhaps at the minimum, is the "I'll never get caught". This takes little devaluation of the BS, since the WS probabilty adjusts the consequences to such a small level that the BS devalution does not need to be much. Said another way, Its like a WS saying "If I knew I'd get caught, I would never have done it". At the other end of the spectrum is probably the revenge affair. This is where the BS has been devalued so much, that the rationalization assumes the BS deserves this treatment.

What creates this ability to devalue another person? My best guess is that it is a function of how often that person has felt devalued by others. Difficulties at work, childhood issues, an inattentive or absent spouse, etc.

This is the basis of what Dobson believes about infidelity; that it starts with a gradual loss of respect by the potentially cheating spouse for his/her mate.


Another study recently done by a west coast psychologist (I can't remember his name) concluded that the chief factor contributing to infidelity was opportunity. It was his assertion that most people who have not cheated on their spouse simply didn't have the opportunity to do so.

I don't agree with that view. I have had a number of opportunities to cheat and haven't done so.

Just a couple things to add to this: I think the "ability" to devalue another person comes from one's propensity to devalue oneself. I think the faults one blames themselves for are often seen (by themselves) as what prevents them from acheiving what other "normal" people have. This, when projected outwards puts the responsibility for the faults they see restricting themselves onto other people, facilitating their entitlement and the sense that they are powerless to acheive what they want because of other people, but it is really only an outward projection of the lack of respect they feel for themselves.

I think you hit a home run with this post.

I may be splitting hairs, but I view respect and value with subtle differences.

To me, respect has to do with the sense of worth of a quality or trait. Value has to do with what I would exchange to acquire that.

As an analogy, I can respect the quality and craftsmanship of a nice Rolex watch. I get a sense of its worth. But I wouldn't pay $5,000 for one.

To me this distinction is important because I see many BS feel like their WS does not respect what they do or have done. Certainly, sometimes this may be the case. But other times, its not that they don't respect it, its that they don't value it.

As to the point about opportunity. I wish more people would understand this. One of my work responsibilities is to eliminate fraud. We spend 99.9% of our time eliminating opportunities for fraud, because we know that if people have the opportunity, they will eventually be able to justify the action.

I see your point, but I think there's so much overlap in the two words that often they are synonimous in the context of discussions here. I think respect in a relationship means that you always look to see the value in another person's opinion and point of view (and always assume it to be there - if you don't see it, you're not looking hard enough). It's the choice to no longer value their world view that demonstrates the lack of respect, not some action that deliberately betrays or demonstrates disrespect.

Muddle -

I think a person's propensity to devalue one's self plays a part. But I view this as much more of a the individuals response to a percieved devaluation. Some what of a fight or flight response. People who accept a devaluation from others, tend to feel devalued more often and then tend to have a greater ability to devalue others. People who fight it tend to feel devalued less often.

As to projecting it on others, I'm not all the way there.

I think you said it all right here: if I act a certain way towards you you can choose to accept this as an attempt to devalue you and cooperate with the attack and internalize it or fight against it or you can choose to view my actions in a different way - trying to understand what my intentions are in a respectful way, apart from the perception that I'm trying to harm you. I think a healthy person will offer the benefit of the doubt (which I think is simply a matter of respect) to the other and will try and see the real motives and intentions from the POV of the other person rather than to choose to play out a battle over their self worth at the expense of the other person. It really becomes an externalized battle over insecurities, either hiding/defending/rationalizing insecurities or beating oneself up over them.

I think there's a predisposition to viewing people's actions as attacks when one routinely beats themself up over their own insecurities and inadequacies. They are far more likely to see the other person, especially an intimate partner, as responsible for the feelings that they themselves bring about. The feelings are created within oneself but the responsibility is passed on to someone outside for "causing" the feelings. The response becomes habitual as a result of a defense mechanism constructed to deal with conflict in a poor way and fear of accepting responsibility for problems or even admitting they exist in the first place.

This is all very near and dear to me because my WW has issues with self esteem, social anxiety disorder, and a whole host of consequences of these conditions. I have seen this in action - the worse she feels about herself as a result of her choices and decisions, the worse a person I am perceived to be. A person with self esteem issues often ends a relationship to get away from the self that they became that has been witnessed by another (therefore making it real). If they can assign responsibility for their problems to another in a way that even remotely makes sense to them, they can satisfy emotionally the idea that they are ridding themselves of real problems and can have a fresh start at a life without these problems. Sadly, if no change occurs other than rearranging the players in their life, it's only a matter of time before the same situation is played out again.

This is a fantastic post, Muddle.

As a FWW, I whole heartedly agree w/ all of it.

I guess it's a good thing my intellect isn't too high, otherwise, it would have been able to convince me my feelings could be trusted. LOL

Great post! Very insightful!

And I'm so sorry for your situation.

~ Marsh

This seems to imply that at some point everyone succumbs to temptation and that the only way to eliminate people from making bad choices is to take the choices away.

That's a pretty pessimistic view of human nature. Does anyone remember that ten years ago or so ABC had a show on (maybe John Stossel) where they placed a wallet with $200 in various places along the sidewalks of several different cities? The wallet had ID and the objective was to see how many people would return the wallet with the cash to the owner. If I remember correctly, Savannah, GA, had the best record with the wallet being returned 7 out of 10 times.

That's not bad when one considers the temptation of keeping the money and tossing the wallet.

Consider the rationalizations that might be used to keep the money. Here are just a few:

1. Anyone stupid enough to carry that much cash deserves to lose it.

2. Finders, keepers.

3. If I didn't really need the money I'd turn this in, but this is a tough time for me with rent being due next week.

And that is how infidelity works. You are presented with the opportunity. You are faced with a decision about what is the right thing to do versus what you want to do, and consequently some people cross their boundaries and make the bad choice, supporting it with rationalizations.

Absolutely Hiker. Not more than three years after me and my now EX WW were married I was in Las Vegas having dinner with two male co-workers when a very attractive female sitting by herself started to have a conversation with one of my co-workers. One thing led to another and she joined our table. She was disenchanted with her marriage and was dreading going home to husband and son. Some of the talk was light and other was more serious. In short I said less than my co-workers and apparently she found that and me to be the more appealing one in the group. When we left she made it clear that she wanted to drive me to our hotel in her customized van no less.

I was extremely tempted and no one would ever have really known what happened EXCEPT ME. I would have cheated on my wife whom I adored and my daughter. More importantly I would have violated everything in my being that I tout as being important. Honesty, integrity, fidelity, etc.... Now that did not change that I REALLY wanted to go with her. Did I mention that she was funny, beautiful, smart, professional and more. I could only imagine the temporary feelings (i.e. - high) I would have gotten if I had taken her up on her offer. I didn't and explained to her that we were both married and we both have responsibilities at home AND that we would both like ourselves a lot better in the morning if we said goodbye now. She pecked me on the cheek and said a simple "thank you so much" and drove away.

I am not a hero by any stretch. Heck I wanted to go with her BUT I didn't. Two things, one we do need to eliminate the possibility of temptation because while I made a good decision this time I may not next time so why chance it but two, WE DO HAVE A CHOICE no matter the situation we are placed in whether its the temptation to have an affair, to return a wallet in tact, to lie to gain favor or whatever. Your core beliefs and values and ultimately your spiritual standing with Christ will make you or break you. The more you do the right thing the easier it is to do, and the more you make bad decisions and then justify them, well guess what, the easier it is to do.

Hope:

Let's do some what if's that probably fit with what happened with my FWH.

What if you passed that woman up maybe one more, maybe even two more times but the opportunity kept presenting itself?

What if you were vulnerable for any number of reasons?

Sad about a life crisis...your wife was busy, focused on your children..didn't have time to talk to you...

How about this woman JUST CALLS you on the phone to talk about her problems and you are able to help and she is very appreciative?

Maybe she starts calling once a week..then once every other day..

What would it hurt?

Maybe you call her back SOMETIMES...

This all starts FEELING GOOD but you still have not taken that ONE STEP....

Up to now, have you maintained your honor and integrity?

I'm saying that it is typically a SLOW PROCESS in a RA....not like a ONE NIGHT STAND...