Fair enough! In that case I would have to agree that ultimately, people can change.

Doesn't the good Dr. Harley himself say that we are all wired for infidelity - that we will all do it under the right conditions?

Doesn't he say that we shouldn't trust our spouses?

I believe people can and do change. But, I rather doubt that exposure to this thread would prevent someone from seeing help or treatment. That is an absurd exaggeration.

I agree. But no one said any such thing. If I saw his comments as a new betrayed spouse, it sure would give me serious pause, though, and cause me to have doubts. And I KNOW we have Former wayward spouses on this forum who find his comments very demoralizing. Fortunately, we have other posters who consistently refute Aphelion.

Mel, you said it. It's right in the quote. Some gibberish about you betting that if alcoholics desirous of getting help saw this thread, they would not bother to get help.

No, that is not what I said.

"Millions of alcoholics across the world lead sober lives and I bet none of them would bother if they saw this thread." I think I got that right. Who cares? I saw my dad turn it around and stop drinking. Took him a while to stop being a dry drunk.
I'd say most cheaters do not change, though. Some , apparently do.

Not that it matters, but you took it out of context:


You can call that "absurd" if you want, but what is ABSURD is the false assertion that people cannot change. What a horrible place this would be if that were true. And I am very thankful that they DO or this forum wouldn't have the numerous recovered marriages it does. Just as your dad changed, so have millions of other alcoholics, cheaters, and drug addicts.

We are beating a dead horse. But , it is clearly within context. Hyperbole , I expect, but not close to accurate. I know reading this thread or meeting someone with a diffeent opinion on the ability to change would not have dissuaded my dad from quitting.

Yes, beating a dead horse would be accurate....

Aphelion,

I don't know your sitch because I was away for a while. I'm guessing you are no longer married and don't plan to seek marriage in the future. So can I ask how it benefits you personally to post here? I'm not suggesting you shouldn't post. I'm just curious why you do. You really seem to have a passion. I'm not sure who you are trying to convince - the rest of us or yourself. Keep at it until you succeed in one or the other.

I know from my own experience the pain of infidelity but I can't imagine being able to live the rest of my life with so much negativity. It would be consuming. I do hope you can overcome it some day for your own benefit.

When I consider whether people change I would consider 4 things. 1) Needs/wants. 2) Opportunity. 3) Ability to rationalize the action. 4) Moral Code. These 4 things get rolled into a costs/benefits analysis and a go/no go decision is made.

Needs/wants have to be unfulfilled to start off the process.

Needs and wants can change within a relevent range, but they seldom change completely. Just meaning some needs and wants can change, but others are basic and fundamental. IMHO, this is at the heart of the sentiment we are all hard wired for A's. It just recognizes that people are social animals and the largest source of their happiness (fulfilling needs/wants equals happiness) is relationships.

Opportunities can be changed within a relevent range. My capabilities and environment can be changed.

Ability to rationalize the action can be a little tougher. IMHO, as adults, people don't change this all that much, absent some real consequences. In some cases, people can become more empathetic or less selfish or entitled (the backbones of rationlizing behavior), but, generally it only happens with a severe trauma (emotional or otherwise).

IMHO, moral codes can change. To me, moral codes can override the other three. This is the classic "I would never have an A", which translates into even if I want to pursue an A, I have the opportunity to have an A, and I think what I've been through justifies an A, I still won't do it because I know its wrong.

With respect to A's, I assume Aph's point of view is that none of these "really" change. If I restate what I think he is saying, it goes like this. At some point in time it's inevitable that a person is unfulfilled and odds are, since relationships are such a big part of that, A's become a real possibility. Opportunities can be minimized, but never eliminated. If a person can rationalize something once, they can always do it again. If their moral code didn't override this before, it can't be relied on to do it again. And thus inevitably, the adulterer will consider the benefits and the costs of an A. If the person does not have an A, they have still gone through this whole process, but the cost/benefits analysis at the end did not pay out.

Which would lead one to conclude that the if you are a BS, you better keep the FWS as happy possible and try to eliminate all their opportunities for an A, because they can still rationalize having one and their moral code won't stop them from considering it as a viable option.

Personally, what I think is a flaw in his assumptions is that the A is proof that FWS's always had the ability to rationalize the A and never had the moral code to reject the idea. I believe his opinion is that it was always there, just "lying dormant". The concept that A's are never an abherration of character, but rather a revelation of character. His arguement has to have it this way, else people "changed" during their A.

Now, this may very well be the case with serial cheaters.

But I do not think it is the correct POV with respect to single A's. As most BS's will attest that their FWS's "changed" in all manner of ways prior to the A. Seems reasonable to me to conclude they can "change" back, or reverse their changes.

Rpynne --

Good points....

But I'd like to throw out some food for thought on your #3.

"The ability to rationalize the action"

At what point does the affair become an affair?

In terms of rationalizing the action, maybe the actions don't seem so very dangerous or threatening. Many affairs do begin as a friendship or acquintance. So when do the actions cross a "moral code".

Is it the first phone call? Or just the first phone call kept secret? Is it meeting for coffee? Or just meeting for coffee if flirting is going on? Is it kissing? Or actual intercourse?
Where do you draw the line?

And if some of those things don't cross the line -- what happens when the WS is already addicted to the attention?

I would have been one of those who said "I would never have an affair!!" These affairs are slippery. You can find yourself in one before you really understand what is happening.

* * * *

And to address the overall topic -- if we are going to say people never change, then I guess we have to address the fact that Plan A is a scam.

BS's can't really "change" to meet their spouses needs then, can they?

Interesting............

I'm thinking only of serial cheating or long term affairs. I think the BS has the right to do a cost/benefit analysis too. And it can be like a get out of jail free card.

Allow me to quote myself. Mel, in particular, always ignores these posts:

“I know approximately two dozen real-life adulterers personally, or I did until I cut them out of my life. Not one, nada, none, are truly remorseful. And further, about one-quarter of them are repeat adulterers. This is real life personal knowledge, not anecdotes. Real life, real people, genuine personal interactions. I have seen in first person singular over time their (what they believe is hidden) lack of remorse.

Oh, they all talked a very good game. Every last one of them. They cried, they said they felt sick over what they did. They moaned and groaned and gnashed their teeth with the best of us sinners. But, they all admitted at one time or another, and I do mean all of them, male and female, the adultery was wonderful while it lasted and they would do it again if they could.

Further, they all have character defects that make it obvious to the most casual observer they were going to commit adultery eventually. Proof of Dr H’s claim we all would do it at the drop of a hat if we could? Anyway, those I still must occasionally interact with still have these character flaws. They really would do it again if they could get away with it.”

“I have posted before I make an exception for certain limited adultery cases. Outliers in the statistics:

A one time, first and only time, drunken ONS.

A one and only very short adultery stopped almost immediately by the WS and confessed almost immediately, without a hint of justification.

There are a very, very small minority of genuine mistakes, tripping and falling (and picking themselves up) when least expected. No lying, no hiding, no false recoveries, no justifications, no complaining, no comparing, no withdrawal, no blaming (during any phase of the adultery or the recovery) of the BS, no nothing but complete confession, remorse and total humble acceptance of consequences. It’s obvious the WS didn’t even want to be in the A, in most cases and got the he11 out almost immediately.

But these tiny few are limited exceptions that prove the rule. All the rest are who they are.”

So, we are seeing maybe two or three percent adulters who do not do it again, or do not dearly wish they could do it again.


Do any of you see the real issue here: Define change.

Pio,

I promise I will refrain from saying I told you so when your wife does it again a few years from now.

Lexxxy,

The most astute comment yet:

“And to address the overall topic -- if we are going to say people never change, then I guess we have to address the fact that Plan A is a scam.

BS's can't really "change" to meet their spouses needs then, can they?”

Depends on why the WS felt their needs were not met. In the first place not all infidelity experts agree it’s missing needs cause adultery. The EN theory of affairs is primarily a face saving device so the WS may come back more easily, IMO. In fact, even the Harleys say it is a character defect, not missing needs, causes adultery in the end.

Also, most BS thought they were meeting WS ENs. They always wanted to meet WS ENs. They just had bad aim, or perhaps the WS was faking it all along. The typical non-abusive BS has no fundamental changes in personality to make. They just need to hear from the WS what ENs need to be met in what way. It’s tactics, not change of personality called for. Further any BS that must live in fear of missing a need or another affair is foredoomed is mistaken, according to the Harley’s own words. No BS can or should live that way.

So, most BS do not have to change, they simply have to acquire a certain unique skill.

This is where I get stuck. I was in an M in which my needs were not met, I had plenty of opportunity and I'm clever enough to rationalize just about anything (ask me about quitting smoking if you want some doozies). There was no conscious decision to NOT have an A. It was simply inconceivable. So much so that when I got the ILYBNILWY speech and told my best friend, I spent the next hour defending WstbxH that it was impossible for him to cheat. It's actually why I keep reading here - because I just can't comprehend how it is someone does this.

It's like shoplifting. I don't do that even though I have the opportunity every time I walk into a store, which is a pretty common occurance. There's no mental anguish or rationalization happening, it's just wrong. It takes absolutely no effort to resist, regardless of what "tempting" item is on display.

What makes adultery different than stealing, from a moral standpoint? How is it "rationalizable"? It's not.

I am starting to believe adulterers have an actual disease. They all show the same symptoms. Most start out as regular people, like myself, who wouldn't even consider shoplifting or any other crime. Then they turn into a complete stranger to all who know and love them. Some day, they may even identify the faulty neurotransmitter or pathway that causes it and find a drug to cure it. Someday.

As such, I understand cynicism about this topic. Do cheaters heal? Perhaps the odd one truly does, but I suspect most simply learn not to shoplift, or at least not to get caught.

Aphelion,

You and I got off to a very bad start. I took one piece of information about you (that I couldn't comprehend) and made an assumption that you were "blinded" to your situation by other factors.

I now see a deeper side of you. While I still don't understand what makes you "tick" ... I understand that you are far from "blinded" by the situation.

I judged you too quickly and harshly, and I would like to extend an apology for that mistake in judgment.

FWIW, I agree with nearly every word you've posted on this thread, especially your examples of exceptions to the WW rules.

My grandfather saw this very thing happen with his own father. His father and his uncle were both weekend drunks.

His uncle died from drinking...and the day of the funeral his father had a bottle--threw it away and never touched another drop.

People CAN change. Sometimes it requires help from others (as with the Plan A/B stuff or the Al-Anon).

Sometimes a good shock (Plan B?) is what it takes...