iam...

I think you are misunderstanding what Kiwi meant when she said if it weren't for her ex bf showing up that she wouldn't have had the affair...I don't see her as "blaming" the exbf at all...I truly understand what she is saying because my affair was also with one of my old hs bfs...I happen to also know that I would not have had an affair if he hadn't contacted me...I do NOT blame him, when I say that - I am totally responsible for having the affair - heck I hold myself more culpable even...I was very susceptible to him though - tons of history - I felt "safe" talking to him - old familiarity, etc...

See, I was and am a SAHM...I wasn't out trolling bars with girlfriends...I wasn't anywhere for me to have an affair...I don't go to chat rooms...I don't have male friends...NOTHING...Seriously there would have been no OPPORTUNITY for me to have an affair...Then he emailed me out of the blue...he got my email from classmates.com...I kept contacting him as well, so I am certainly not saying that I didn't play an equal role...

I believe that is all Jen meant...Btw, Mr. W would agree with me completely that I wouldn't have had an affair otherwise...He posts here too, so if you'd like, I can certainly have him tell you in his own words...He might be better able to explain it...

Best,

Mrs. W

Thank you Mrs W. That is EXACTLY what I meant. EXACTLY. Sheesh, I'm not blaming the ex b/f (I'm amazed that's how it read,if it did indeed read that way), I blame myself totally. I went into it with open eyes and a totally selfish heart.

I think I understand now. Iam is saying that I'm saying I thought he swept me off my feet, I wasn't responsible blah blah, he seduced me blah blah. Yes, he was the initial pursuer, he made the first contact, but once the A started it was 50/50.

I am saying exactly what you are saying, I would not have had an A if that particular OM, and that particular OM alone, hadn't shown up.

I'm sure the bank robber would not have robbed the bank if it wasn't there either.

You had affairs because you are/were capable of doing so. So capable it even happened a second time for Kiwi.

Saying you would not have if the ex-BF wasn't there is kinda like saying "I'm sorry, BUT"

You should never add a 'but' to your apologies.

Frankly, if I were your husband and you told me that, I would have been really PO'ed.

But if it makes living with yourself easier.....

"If my HS b/f hadn't shown up when he did I would not have had an A."

"I happen to also know that I would not have had an affair if he hadn't contacted me..."

Comments like this surprise me, coming from FWS's. I would like to think that a FWS would be thinking just the opposite....that it could happen with ANYONE. That you really have to shore up your boundaries and protect your marriage against OP's.

Why would you feel that you only have to protect your marriage against past acquaintances? Persons that you have a past familarity with or "feel safe" talking to?

I would suggest that a FWS that is in this frame of mind is still very vulnerable.

JMO.

Actually this thread has gotten prety hijacked into a different prospective, but at the risk of insulting AWA, I have an opinion that is only that, and opinion not backed by creditials or expertise.

I see both sides of this point of view but also see flaws. To say that if fbf didn't appear on the scene there would have been no unfaithfulness, sort of smacks of blame shifting. In my mind, and it would appear in my Fww's mind as well, the A took place with OM simply because he was there and was providing for my top emotional needs, not granted in the M.

That would be the position of many a therapist, but when faced with the same conundrum(sp) even Dr H had to did deeper to reconcile the fact that a lot of M's exist with condition, yet the spouse does not cheat.

Now we've got a dilema to solve, "why not?" Thus we have Dr H's final conclusion: " a failure to protect yourself from your own weakness."

Makes sence to me but Dr H is not so much into the why's and wherefores of why the weakness existed in the first place. I have said before, Dr H is like the ER pysician. Treat the emergency and worry about gang violence later.

Pittman, Shirley Glass(RIP), David Carder, and others are more into the "why" of your weakness and what you need to do to overcome it in the future. I think they are actually a great compliment to each other.

Mrs W and Jen, no disrespect intended, but, I think you both need to come to grips with why you were a puddle of gasolene when the spark happened back into your life, for whatever reason.

Not to presume, but I think this is what IAM is trying to convey. Old bf were simply the match, but it took a puddle of gasolene for the raging enferno to take place. Same with my FWW. I once said to her, it was not necessarily about him, it could have been anyone. In a moment of truth, she admitted that the possibility of that "could be true." Thus the puddle of gasolene, wainting for ignigtion. Or as Pittman would put it, "the wayward midset."

JMHO.

All blessings,
Jerry

ba and iam,

I disagree. Old flames can be extremely powerful temptations.

The boundary needs to be applied to them as it is to everyone else, i.e. communications with oppostite sex are done as a couple and that person is a friend of the couple and there are no secrets or meetings without the knowledge of H and W in the marriage.

But a person can certainly feel safer with an old flame since "so many years have passed. We can just be friends".

Old flames or lost loves can be much more tempting and powerful than a new person.

I can see how you would be chugging along in your marriage and following strong boundaries and then suddenly be thrown off by an old flame.

Doesn't mean I'd act on it, but I can certainly see how it would throw someone off especially if they came along at a vulnerable time in the marriage.

I don't think they blame the old flame for showing up. They're merely stating that they wouldn't have strayed if this person didn't come into the picture. It was their mistake and it was made because of an unexpected event that threw them for a loop.

Think of it as entrapment. No one forces someone to commit a crime, but sometimes people slip.

I could see my old flame from 10 years ago showing up while I was married and tempting me with friendship.

It's very easy to "remember the old times" with people like this and there is no flirting barrier to drop since the sexual history is already there.

I can't say that I would have strayed if I ran into my old flame from ten years ago, but I would certainly have wanted to talk to her. Combine the intense sexual relationship we had with the friction in my marriage and I could see a recipe where a man who had very strict attitudes about infidelity could slip.

Recognizing the boundary and the threat of an old flame is HUGE. But without that knowledge or standard a person COULD slip.

We're all vulnerable and I can understand the point Kiwi and Mrs. W are making as well as your point.

Well we need a new acronym, maybe FFWW's Fabulous Former Wayward wives.

Its a double edge sword because one they used to be WW's themselves. Not only have they recovered, they stand ready to apply 2x4 wisdom to other WW's who are
currently having a A or
thinking about having a A or
had a A.

I don't disagree with that. I understand what kiwi and mrs w are stating about prior acquaintances.

I just find it odd that they believe that it would or could not have ever happened in any other circumstance with any other person. That (to me) is a weak boundary.

As I said, jmo.

Agreed 100%.
I at least got my FWW to admit the same.

Thus once again, "the wayward midset" we would all like to deny does not, nor ever will exist. But IMHO, it did at one time for whatever reason. Only the WS can ever delve into that and figure it out. the BS remains in the dark about the real reason "why."

A continued burden and and insecurity about the future we'd like to live without, but not without a COMPLETE explanation of the "why."

All Blessings,
Jerry

Here's a quote from Larry on a different thread that is completely pertinent to this discussion:


Awesome!

All blessings,
Jerry

Hey, you'll get no argument from Mr. W or I that BOTH of our boundaries needed shoring up...FOR SURE...

I've told this many times here, but I'll tell it again...If an employee of ours that Mr. W propositioned would have said YES instead of NO, then *I* would have been the BS...You do need a WILLING PARTICIPANT to have an affair with after all - By sheer luck Mr. W did NOT have another WILLING PARTICIPANT or he would have had an affair - Now IF that employee would have said YES, would I have blamed ONLY HER for the affair? OF COURSE NOT! They BOTH would have been at fault! (Just as OM and I are) But BECAUSE she said "NO" the affair didn't happen - THANK GOD!!!

Both Mr. W and I were ripe for an affair...No question about it...

All I'm telling you is that quite literally there would have been NO OPPORTUNITY for me to have had an affair w/o OM contacting me - I had NO CONTACT with ANYONE - I had become a HERMIT - I'm not from this state - I didn't really know anyone -Aside from picking up our dd @ pre-school I wasn't leaving the house - shopped online - only went to the grocery store about once a month - I was in the midst of a MAJOR DEPRESSION - Just giving you guys the facts as they were at the time - Again, Mr. W can and will back me up here...I completely agree with Dr. Harley that we are ALL susceptible to affairs, so had the OPPORTUNITY have been there WITH someone else then I may likely have had an affair...I just KNOW that that was not the case...

I am NOT blame shifting at all...I KNOW it was my fault...I ENCOURAGED contact...EGGED IT ON...I am totally at fault...I'm not sure how much plainer I can state that...

Hopefully this makes more sense...

Mrs. W

Mrs W, eeeyore, kiwi, coachswife,

You are all FFWWes in my book.

I think there is a general acknowledgement by all that we are ALL susceptible given the right circumstances. Recognizing that and accepting it makes it far less likely one would stray. FAR less.

Thinking, as my exww did, that "I'll NEVER cheat" makes you more susceptible because you don't recognize you do have that weakness.

Think of where we would have been if all I had to overcome was my WWes desire to D and not the infidelity and betrayal. Think of how that may have influenced her to try to save things.

Crossing the line of infidelity does such tremendous damage that I often think that a wayward thinks to themselves, "Well, we crossed that line. There's no going back now. This is truly over. The damage done to the marriage is too great at this point."

Thanks much Pom!

I did want to mention something else on this now highly threadjacked thread...So sorry AWH!

People are more susceptible to old flames...I point this out because it should be one of the most iron clad boundaries that we all have - NC with old flames...It is something that I never considered pre-affair (nor did Mr. W)...

Old flames fit with what Dr. Harley explains as one reason there must be NC between APs...Just as with APs, there remains a low burning flame between ex's, one that takes very little to be reignited...Old flames are DANGEROUS territory and should be avoided at all costs...

Mrs. W

I'm dating a woman that was my GF 17 years ago.


Funny I hadn't heard from her in 15 years and when I was in the hospital she calls me out of the blue, my twin brother gave her my number.

Well good for you Pariah! I wish you all the best with that relationship!

You are not married, and I presume that your old gf isn't either, therefore, it was not someone like you that I was referring to when I said that old flames must be avoided at all costs...However, for those of us married folks, old flames are off limits...

Mrs. W

Thanks Pom and I can only reiterate what Mrs W said.

Iam, you say "if it makes it easier to live with yourself", which shows you still don't understand the boundaries I set myself all my married life. I've worked with men all my working life and not once was I even slightly tempted to have A's with them. It just wasn't something I needed to think about. The boundaries were just there. I was happily married - why would I ever think about A's or the likelihood of an A. A's happened to other people. (Edited to add: I'll leave this here because it's already written but by the time I got to the end of my post, the penny had dropped about what Iam is saying).

I don't deny that A's can happen to anyone. Mrs W and I are only speaking from our own experience.

I do understand what you mean by the bank analogy. I take it that you mean that 50 former boyfriends could have turned up and I still didn't have to have A's with them. I know and understand that it was my choice and my choice alone. I understand that you mean that I was an A ready to happen and that the ex b/f was the catalyst for that because he was in the right place at the right time. I understand that you are saying I don't seem to have recognised that I need boundaries. But I do recognise that.

I take it that you are asking if the old b/f showed up again, have I learned anything? The answer is yes, I have. I think you are saying that if I don't accept that I gave myself permission to have an A, old flame or Joe Schmo, I've learned nothing. Obviously I didn't learn anything. The fact that I reconnected with the same OM is not the important thing - the important thing is I had learned nothing. The fact that it was only for a very short time, the second time, and that it wasn't physical means nothing. It is all about my boundaries and what I'd learned.

By George, I think I've got it.

lol, Iam there was no need to be rude to me - it may take a while but I do think things through in depth eventually when I drop the defensive attitude and the sarcasm.

ETA more: Now I see what you meant about wayward mindset. As long as I was saying "oh, but it was because he was the old flame - otherwise it wouldn't have happened" and not taking responsibility for the fact I chose to have an A, it was definitely a wayward mindset.

**EDIT**

FWIW, I'm like a terrier about this. I'm not going to let it go till I've cleared up some things.

****edit****

You said you aren't a ****edit****. FWIW, I don't think you are. I was tempted to come back and say I agreed wholeheartedly with you and you are a ****edit****, but I'm all for communication and I don't do abuse. Sarcasm, yes. Defensiveness, yes.

Next you said I tweaked you because I didn't seem remorseful. I am still on infidelity boards because I think I can still help. The events we are talking about happened two and half years ago. My H and I have been to hell and back because of me and he has seen my remorse. He knows what I'm like now. I don't have to beat myself up every day on MB just because you would like to see it.

You said I "psychoanalysed" you. What I actually did was try to understand what your particular objection to me was. I made the natural human assumption it was because I was an adulterer and you hate adulterers because your FWW was one. I wondered how you felt when you abused me. That's all. Not a psychoanalysis, just an attempt at understanding. Not my *super ego* just an attempt at understanding.

Well, I got it wrong. You don't like me because you don't like me. That's fine. I can live with that.

You say that "it's all about me". When I said I was the only one speaking here, you misunderstood that to mean that I was the only one with anything to say who was speaking here. All I meant was that *I* am on this forum so *I* am going to speak for myself about my experiences. Sheesh, I'm not the only person here who does that.

Anyway, this has probably fallen on deaf ears, yet again (oops, sarcasm) but I believe communication is the key to all relationships. Even anonymous ones on forums.

awh and intro and gack,

We threadjacked. This thing has gotten way off your original post.

Have we said anything to give you any ideas or thoughts?

There's one thing to keep in mind when reading someone else's post: words do not adequately convey tone.

Sometimes the way something is written isn't how it was intended to come out and comes off as defensive when put to words.

Like my posts were aparently being interpretted as "my way or the highway" thinking, when that is never what I intended.

I think we've cleared that up, hopefully, and think we should all just take a breath and get back to helping awh, intro, and gack.

Intro, catch us up. What's your sitch? Is WW with OM still? Are you drained by her LBs?

Thanks for getting this back on track POMD.
(I wasn't about to jump into that other mess!)

But I did have a point I wanted to make about the original question.

Many times I advise a childless person to cut and run.
And do you know why? Because they WANT to have children. And often they want children SOON.

If they are dealing with an active wayward it can take YEARS to get that marriage back on track, with no guarantee that it is recoverable. They should NOT bring children into the mess of an affair-stricken marriage.

At that point, I think their better bet is to divorce -- and find a person who is marriage and family material.

Its my personal opinion that they should seek a new relationship without the intense baggage of adultery -- before bringing children into this world.