To be honest, I've been at a place lately when I actually feel sorry... sad for my FWH.

His DARK TIMES seem to PAIN him so terribly these days...

He tears up when he hears a man talking about his infidelity or hears about marital breakups...

He seems to Soo regret what he has done....and is repeatedly voicing his appreciation of me...

Still a SAD, BROKEN man..needing a lot of comfort and reassurance...THAT HE IS A "GOOD PERSON"....

Lately, I've been telling him this..."You are GOOD PERSON..You've been through a lot and overcome a lot, DH".....

I think it is simple for me.

I do not judge a person by the mistakes they make. I judge them by what they do after they make a mistake.

Nobody is perfect. If there is no way for a person that had an A to be a good person then how would any M survive after that.

I hope that I am not judged by all the stupid things I have done in the past. I hope I am judged by the person I became after making those mistakes. By how I worked hard to correct the mistakes I could and mitigated the damage for the ones I couldn't.

My FWW is no different. She says she is a wonderful person that made a really bad decesion. The jury is out on that one because of what she has done after she made that decesion.

OOOPS, LA...

I'm forgetting....

MOURNING IS HEALING.....

I HOPE SO...

Silent:

My OOPs... was in reference to LA's WONDERFUL POST to NC007.....

Interesting subject. I have been one that firmly believes that "good" or "bad" arises from our actions. Therefore, I would label my W a "bad" person during the time she had the A and was lying to me.

Let me throw this out...after having read the discussion, it struck me that perhaps we can define "good" and "bad" people using a "love-bank" style philosophy. If so, we would say Mother Theresa was a "good person" because she spent a lifetime making deposits in the "good/bad account" with few withdrawals -- she had built up a large account balance. Hitler, on the other hand, did just the opposite. He spent a good bit of his life making withdrawals, although I suspect he probably helped a little old lady across the street or something like that a some point in time. Therefore, Hitler's account balance was severely in the red.

Using this philosophy, we can judge "good" or "bad" by the account balance. However, what is interesting is that each person perceives on their own the size of each deposit or withdrawal. Therefore, an example is in order:

Person A (let's call him "John Q. Public") has been married for 25 years to the same woman, his high-school sweetheart. He discovered a cure for breast cancer. He regularly volunteers at homeless shelters. He mentors blind students. He is active in trading child pornography over the internet. He has been in a long-term affair that is his 3rd affair (his first starting 1 year into the marriage).

Is John "good" or "bad". To the homeless or those suffering from breast cancer, he may be hailed as a hero. To the the parent of a child exploited in his pornographic pictures, he is Satan in the flesh. In other words, he has made both deposits and withdrawals, but the size of each is determined by the observer. Therefore, each observer will hold a different view of the account balance.

What do y'all think?

Todd

And this is my exact point, frog, I think true character is gauged, not in being perfect, but in how we HANDLE wrongdoing. That is the true gauge of one's character.

Plank,

I love your posts because they make me think. I work all day, and my job involves the analysis of thinking - I disaggregate thought, think about thinking, analyze how people think, and then teach them through their own methods of thinking how they might think in better ways. I have a very strange and difficult job that has a lot of interesting aspects to it!

You say you want a line in the sand, where there is black and white, good and bad. I think that the line exists, but that the gray exists between the two.

I think in all of us we have so much gray that we often are lost and searching, which is why we are so fallible. We all know what the black is, and what the white is. But because we are so human and weak, we wander into the very dark gray so often....or the light gray....or the pale white but not quite pure white. Don't we?

We make the comment under our breath (not quite pure white).
We tell the white lie about being late for work (a little bit gray).
We float that check just before payday and thank goodness the paycheck hits the bank before the check we wrote does (the medium gray).
We tell our parents that we are pretty busy this weekend with the kids and can't make it to see them, when we really just don't want to spend the time (pretty gray, don't you think?).

You can probably think of more gray things to put in there, can't you? Are they black? Evil? Do they go in the same category as rape, murder?

Most of the people we call "good people" do these or similar things every day. Yet they are not "honest" in the total sense of the word - but we accept them.

Gray. It is all around us because we live as gray people.

Yet, I think it is easy to say, all the gray things really are....black. Aren't they? That would make all of us bad people. Sort of depressing to think of it that way.


So here is my perspective. I think people are mixture at any given time. We are doing things that are right and wrong every single day. I think a person is probably either basically a good person or basically a bad person. And then they might do something that is outside of their normal basic character - like have an affair. But does that completely wipe out everything they are doing and being during that timeframe? I don't think so, because we are so much more than that one thing, during that timeframe.

When I was being victimized as a child, I thought that everyone who looked at me knew I was being raped off and on. I thought that the events colored who I was. This wasn't true - not because I was the victim, but because events are closed in time. Those discreet events, those times do not define a person in total. And my rapist, by the way, was also not defined in those moments or by those acts alone either, because I don't think a person is defined by one moment in his life. We are more than one act, one moment.

You do have the point that during the discreet moments that the actual interactions with the affair partner were occurring, my FWH was a bad person. If that is your point, then I agree.

But I don't agree that during the whole timeframe of the affair he was a bad person, because even while it was happening, he had guilt, tried to do things to change himself, and struggled with internal conflicts that confused him greatly with regard to his own behavior. He is still confused and struggling with it, because he does not understand what led him to do something so uncharacteristically "bad". And also during that same timeframe, he was doing other things that were "good", such as taking care of me in other ways, helping my father who had cancer, etc.

I guess my question is: Because a person was having an affair during a certain timeframe make it impossible for him to be doing anything worthwhile or good during that same timeframe? Are all other good and moral acts and meaningful behaviors performed while the affair is ongoing effectively "canceled out" by the affair?



SB

Post deleted by Shaden

Scientists believe that the universe is infinite. This means that it goes on forever and ever, in all directions.

So, choose any point in space, as the center of the universe, and from that point, the universe goes on and on from the center, in every direction.

This means that you can be the center of the universe, and from that locality, the universe would have a certain map, with certain directionality, and certain points of view. Your universe map would have a perspective different from the map generated from the map my universe map would generate.

So it is with relationships - Mother Theresa certainly must have disappointed someone along the way. Hitler had people who loved him. True enough!

Perspectives are interesting.



This thread just keeps on giving - food for thought.

SB

Well yes, if they are BEING BAD. And when they are being GOOD, they are good. I am not sure what you mean about "time limits" because I don't see the relevance and have never asserted any such thing. What is relevant is WHAT is done, not WHEN. For example, if I molest little children for 20 years, I am being a bad person for 20 years [no matter how "foggy" I may be]. But when I stop, change my behavior, and make amends, I am being a good person. Changing oneself for the better is a sign of good character and I do believe that EVERYONE, even Hitler, is redeemable.


It is both. Having an affair is bad behavior, but changing my behavior and making AMENDS is GOOD BEHAVIOR that REDEEMS my evil act. Of course, if there is no such thing as BAD, then there is no such thing as GOOD. I can't very well claim to be GOOD, if there is no existing standard in the first place.

The reason that I bring up the Hitler and the Mother Theresa analogy is not to define WS' and BS's [which is a silly assertion that no one has made here] but to demonstrate that WE DO judge people by their behavior. Because most sane people do agree that Hitler was a bad man, because of his BEHAVIOR. And that Mother Theresa is a GOOD person because of her behavior. We have no other way to judge them other than their behavior. And thinking folks can differentiate between Hitler and Mother Theresa.

Sure, they are extreme examples, but they serve to perfectly demonstrate my point that we DO judge people by their behavior. And SHOULD. And if we judge them by a certain standard, ie: their behavior, then we must rationally judge others the same way.

Who would be silly enough to assert that "Hitler was a good guy who just made a few bad choices." Or "he was a good fella who was just a mixture of good and bad." C'mon, that is retarded. But if we use that standard for one, then we must use it for ALL. Again, if there is no such thing as BAD, then there is no GOOD.

I do agree and understand that not everyone is so easily defined. Most are closer to the middle and can't neccessarily be defined as either good or bad.

But someone who is engaged in profoundly evil, hurtful behavior that devastates the lives of the others; that is likened to such traumaa as RAPE and the DEATH OF A CHILD, is not a GOOD PERSON, by any stretch.

And pretending like they ARE, is an exercise in moral cowardice that helps no one, not the victims and not the perp. People don't ever get better by being dishonest about their behavior. Being honest is always the first step back.

I kind of agree with startin over. Although I admit at times I have been a very bad person, I really lived my life trying to be a good person. Through the grace of God, I was able to turn things around, confess, and make amends for most of my sins.

My WH, on the other hand, has always been a good person. Even before I knew him, I knew of him. Everyone thought of him as a good man. He raised his children by himself before I met him, coaching their sports, cooking for them, helping them with school.

He was involved in church for 20 years, doing a prison ministry, a homeless outreach, working with veterans, helping others on a daily basis. What I first loved about him is that he would treat the worst drug addict the same as he would treat the Queen of England.

During his affair, he continued going to another church. continued helping his children, was the chaplain of our motorcycle group, the chaplain of the DAV he belongs to, continued telling people about God, and helping others.

During his affair, he treated me horribly. He told thousands of lies, was cruel, heartless, and seemed to have no conscience. He spent our savings, grabbed everything in the house that had value, and basically disappeared from my life.

I always tell people he is a good person. But obviously there is a very dark side of his heart.

"By their fruits you shall know them."

In other words, while it is not our job to judge eternal destinies, or to predict whether someone will stay bad or good, we can judge their actions, and whether the place they are right now is good or bad.

HAHA! Good one! You got me, Melody. Therein lies an interesting paradox of reality. Your perception of reality is just as valid as mine or anyone else's. Does that mean that any and all views of reality are, in essence, correct? It's fascinating to stop and think about that for a moment. Especially when you are analyzing modern monotheistic religions, trying to contemplate a being as vast and infinite as the God of the Abrahamic Faiths.


believer, you put too little faith in yourself. God only gave you a path to follow... a path that was always there. It was still your decision to take it. You make it sound as if it was because of God that you were saved, when in reality, it was because of you. You saved yourself. God was merely waiting for you to turn around.

Heh.. I bet all of this 'God' talk sounds strange coming from an Agnostic, doesn't it? :P

Schoolbus,

Your mentioning of the grayness in human behavior is important.

It is that same grayness that we all have tread through that allows us to move boundaries further and further away from that place where we know they should be.

It’s not really a conscious effort to move them is it? This occurs over the course of years a lot of times. But the end result is that by the time we have rationalized their movement over and over again, knowing they should be in Florida, they end up in Texas (which is where none of us want to be). Ha!

You have taught me a lot of things Schoolbus. I read your posts very carefully and have figured out some things for myself through your insightful writings. I thank you very much for that.

I have done some really stupid things in my life that have been hurtful. I’m an alcoholic. I have been neglectful to my family by working too much. I have been less helpful on occasions to those people close to me that were in need. But I have never had a PA. This is not an effort at self glorification, it’s an attempt at reconciling the reality in my life.

I believe in the human spirit. I am God fearing and devout in my Christian beliefs. So, I KNOW in my heart that people have the ability to right horrible wrongs that they have inflicted on others in life. This is the repentance and forgiveness concepts that we use as vehicles to find balance in our lives again.

I believe that each and every one of the FWS’s in the world have the ability to embrace goodness and restore balance to their marriages. Weather they are forgiven or not is not the important part. It is their part to do what they can and let the chips fall where they may.

Good people will do the right thing no matter what the outcome of their efforts. Offenders of good reconcile for reasons that are based upon civilized concepts of compassion, love, humanity, selflessness, maturity, and self respect.

As the pendulum has swung from side to side in our personal recovery we have seen the whole gambit of emotions. I have heard things come from my W’s lips that nearly extinguished the flame in my heart that fortifies my will to live. But I choose a to forgive her everyday in a balanced way that is in large part determined by her behavior.

I want you to understand that in no way do I think that most human beings are unredeemable for evil acts. The offense and the redemption should be something that are equitable IMO.

People KNOW what they have done in their life that are good and bad. They KNOW when they were *ssholes in their life or not. They understand the stages that they might have gone through where they were selfish or damaging to others. We don’t have a problem applying those concepts to ourselves right?

Then why is it so difficult to assess the actions of another? Why is it so complicated to read their written accountings and let the facts speak for themselves?

This is a very interesting statement, Plank, that got me to thinking further about this whole topic.

When I first responded to this thread, it was with my usual thought pattern... I didn't know if I was right...just giving my opinion. When my opinion was questioned, I became defensive and attacked in return... not clearly thinking things through...just trying to justify my thoughts. Yep, I've been here before, so I ain't learnin' fast enough.

The idea that behaviors indicate your heart and soul is not something I've sat down and thought about 'til now. It does make sense, but there are still questions. To this point, I always believed we were not good nor bad, or a combination of both. That only God judges this... which, now that I think of it, would indicate that we ARE either good or bad... but only judged by God. If I don't judge the person, then I do not determine if they are good or bad regardless of their behaviors. However, if we are to decide who we should pattern ourselves after, or spend time with, their behaviors are what we have to determine if they are someone "worthy" of teaching us or of our time.

Someone asked earlier on here... if a person is behaving in many good ways, but a portion of their life is poor behavior...i.e. having an A... are they still "bad" at that point in time? or partly bad?

Is the A their true character and all the other good behaviors are smokescreens?

I had come to believe that many that are in A's go to great lengths to hide from themselves that they are hurting others... I'm certain that if they really thought about it, they would know... and on a certain level, they behaviors show they know... which is why all the secrecy. Certainly they are not proud of their behavior. Entitlement is in effect. They may think they are due because of how they have been treated or because the world describes life as a strive for happiness on a very shallow level.

But we describe an Adulterer as being alien... in a fog. By our own description, we are saying that they are not the person we knew them to be. Does this mean they have become bad people...foreign to their nature, or does it mean that something has transpired in their brain to change their reality and perceptions?

My W has had 3 different types of A's and I now see her differently than what I did as the first one was years ago before we had time to distance in our marriage... we were only engaged. But many aspects of her behavior over the years have been good. How she is with her kids, friends, extended family, co-workers, etc...

There are factors from her past which I believe helped to affect her choices. Are we saying that she has a need... an addiction... or a weakness that sometimes takes hold of her and will always be a part of her? Was she just bad during those moments or months of A. Is the good behavior just to hide her true nature?

I guess I have a problem identifying her as a bad person at any point...yes foggy, and weak-willed at times. This is a scary thought for me. Based upon her history and the fact that she is not trying 100% to repair this part of her/our lives...atleast to my expectations... then I should be running far, far away. I have held on to the idea that she is a good person who made some poor choices. It wasn't who she was, just what she did. But if this is who she is, I don't know if I want any part of it in the future.

Going back to Plank's quote... her behavior now, although not "bad"... is not showing me the full remorse described by others here and not showing love for me. Maybe I am trying too hard to forgive without waiting for the balance of actions.

Shaden

I believe a person that slips up once and has an affair can be still classified as a decent individual to an extent.

But, if someone has multiple affairs, I do not like to hear....."they were in a fog"......"they were not the person I married at the time". That is just hogwash to me. It lets the other person totally off the hook for their actions. Its like you are saying they had no idea what they were doing, or did. Those waywards MADE conscious decisions and IMHO are not very good people at all. I consider them jerks.

what if they didn't have the opportunity to learn from their mistakes... ie. no consequences?

I know it sounds like I am grasping for hope... but when someone gets away with something without consequences, they don't learn how their actions hurt others.

In my case, My W's first A was completely covered up by her until years later when we were dealing with the latest. It was a ONS and she saw no physical consequences... she figured that she married me and everything was fine. I'm sure there were psychological and emotional consequences, though.

The second was an EA and neither of us saw this as an A at the time. We didn't get any help for it and there wasn't any real consequences.

The final one, the PA, is where all the consequences are happening.

Do these facts change anything? Or is she still a jerk to get away from fast?

Shaden

Okay Shaden I'll bite....

YES SHE'S A JERK, SELFISH, SELF INDULGENT, SPOILED, CHILD WHO HAS YET TO TRULY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR HER 'BAD' ACTIONS AT ANY TIME IN HER LIFE.

We all have to quit making excuses for people. I loved my now EX WW but she has become someone that I would not give the time of day to. Is is temporary, is it related to the affair she's in, is she psychotic, does she have mental issues (probably yes to all of these)? I don't care. She is and has chosen to be who she is TODAY. And as of today I really have no intention of conversing with her or being her friend or anything else. She is who she is. I have to accept that. This may be who she really wants to be and she was only able to cover it up for 8 years or so before the true her came out? I don't know but it doesn't matter because she is who she is today. That's all I need to know to make my decisions.

Here's a prime example of the projection I referred to elsewhere.