Actually, none of this is true for people trying to have MB marriages. We have talked about this on the thread before, but it's worth discussing again.

When people enrol on Dr H's online (or home study) programme, one of the questionnaires he requires them to complete is the Personal History Questionnaire. In this, each spouse is required to give a very detailed history of their sexual past. The questionnaire asks about the earliest sexual experiences and what they consisted of, and each spouse is required to tell the other about all their sexual partners.

The point of this is for each spouse to know the other thoroughly, and to learn about the other's weaknesses and tendencies. These need to be guarded against in the marriage that is being rebuilt. This does not apply only to those who have had affair but to everybody on the programme.

The point of this is NOT to enable a spouse to retrospectively judge the other and punish them in their continuing daily lives. And since the purpose of the MB programme is to overcome problems and build a better marriage, the purpose is not to find a reason to divorce the spouse.

The statement "There is no need to introduce baggage" goes entirely against Dr Harley's encouragement for us to know our spouses as well as they know themselves. There should be no area of the spouse's mind or life that is off-limits, and that includes the past. The kind of openness and honesty that the MB programme encourages is about letting our spouse know the essence of who we are, not just about confessing our sins.

"If WW dated this guy before you it is none of your business. Prior BF's and who she had sex with is her business."

How is a spouse supposed to know that his (now) wife was involved with a particular man, and that this man should not be a friend because of the risk from old boyfriends and sex partners? How does he protect his marriage from her old boyfriends if he does not know who they are?

"Now a guy may not want to date and marry a girl for many reasons. He may only want to marry a virgin. Then he needs to know if she is or is not. Details are not needed. And, I hope that if she has to be Show room fresh that he is in like condition as well.

Or if a guy can not handle that his wife had a higher number then him. Again once the number is out there. There is no need to question further.

No need to introduce baggage."

Are those the only exceptions? What about a man who wants to know if his wife ever had an abortion? If she ever got involved (while single) with a married man? If she's ever had a same-sex relationship? If she's ever been sexually abused? If she had a relationship with her teacher, or with a much older man who exploited her? If she ever had sex with her sister or friend's boyfriend?

In fact, do we all know what our exceptions are? All of them? The only way we could know, before marriage, whether we would marry someone despite their past is to know all about their past. In an ideal world, people would explore each other's personal histories fully before getting engaged, and certainly before marrying. However, hardly anyone in the world has an MB pre-marital relationship. Sadly, we only find out about MB usually when we are married and struggling.

As I said, the goal of using the PHQ after marriage is not to find a reason to divorce, but to understand the others' weaknesses and tendencies in order better to overcome them.

If you consider it "baggage" that you'd rather not know about, TR, that's fine for you to make that choice for yourself, but there is much support for Gamma's desire to know in Dr H's programme. What there is absolutely NOT support for is using the past - which Gamma knew about to some extent because his wife told him before she married that she had been involved with this man, had fallen in love and had been dumped and used (I believe) - to threaten his wife wife. Gamma makes it quite clear that he intends to divorce his wife if it turns out that this pre-marital relationship - which took place at the time he was dating her and so was indeed "cheating" - is the reason why their sex life has been mediocre since the day they married. He also makes it clear that he intends to "go after" this man that he calls OM (although, remember, this was before the marriage) and give him what he is due.

It may be that he has never conveyed these precise words to his wife, but it's my guess that she worried about both those things - divorce, and revenge against OM, and that is what she is frightened of. Gamma is totally obscure about what form this revenge will take, so perhaps his wife imagines the worst; a beating that could land Gamma in court, exposure that will damage her reputation (remember, she wasn't married, but would she want their son to know what a fool she was before she married Gamma?), or some other action that could get out of hand and end up hurting their family.

If there is a threat of punishment for honesty, then of course she is going to avoid honesty with all her might.

Gamma is never going to get the better marriage he desires by holding the threat of his wife's past over her head as he does. He married her knowing that she had had a year-long involvement with this man, and now 20 years later he is threatening her over it, and allowing his obsession with it to make their marriage worse, not better.

Theroad,

He may only want to marry a virgin. Then he needs to know if she is or is not. Details are not needed. And, I hope that if she has to be Show room fresh that he is in like condition as well.

As long as there is no dishonesty than the man can be a virgin and the woman the town tramp as long as the details are discussed to the satisfaction of both spouses before they are married. This holds for the opposite case.

I recall that when Dr H read your letter on his radio show, he said your WW should tell you the truth if only because there should be no secrets in a married couple.

No need to introduce baggage.

Baggage looks neat like a suitcase until it is opened, and then surprise.

God Bless
Gamma

Blairbluefin,


I think what Gamma is saying is his spouse with-held information, and that he feel robbed of the complete information that he would have used in making the decision to marry his spouse. Is this correct?

Yes, it's the sort of information that would prompt you to get an annulment rather than a divorce.

God Bless
Gamma

SugarCane,

Are those the only exceptions? What about a man who wants to know if his wife ever had an abortion? If she ever got involved (while single) with a married man? If she's ever had a same-sex relationship? If she's ever been sexually abused? If she had a relationship with her teacher, or with a much older man who exploited her? If she ever had sex with her sister or friend's boyfriend?

I believe Dr H. would say that hiding any of the above very serious moral breaches would allow the deceptive partner to maintain a love bank balance in those areas.

As I said, the goal of using the PHQ after marriage is not to find a reason to divorce, but to understand the others' weaknesses and tendencies in order better to overcome them.

This is true about how I feel about OM2, my W considered OM2 very handsome and was physically very different from me. If it is true that I am not my W "type or tendency as you put it" I would like to know.

God Bless
Gamma

SugarCane,

Since your very well written and thought out post had 2 parts I responded to each.

but there is much support for Gamma's desire to know in Dr H's programme. What there is absolutely NOT support for is using the past - which Gamma knew about to some extent because his wife told him before she married that she had been involved with this man, had fallen in love and had been dumped and used (I believe) - to threaten his wife.

I believe it would also be supported to know such information when it would help you decide to divorce based on what happened, or perhaps not divorce based on the wayward spouse coming clean.

Gamma makes it quite clear that he intends to divorce his wife if it turns out that this pre-marital relationship - ...- is the reason why their sex life has been mediocre since the day they married. He also makes it clear that he intends to "go after" this man that he calls OM (although, remember, this was before the marriage) and give him what he is due.

This is true, however as has been true of other posters, our sex life might become better than mediocre once this stain is removed.

It may be that he has never conveyed these precise words to his wife, but it's my guess that she worried about both those things - divorce,

Yes she has said that I would never forgive her for cheating on me and that she would never tell me, and that the sexual details would never never be told.

....and revenge against OM, and that is what she is frightened of. Gamma is totally obscure about what form this revenge will take, so perhaps his wife imagines the worst; a beating that could land Gamma in court,

Since my W had a good opinion of OM, at least a few years, ago this is likely true. W is also concerned for OMs family.

... exposure that will damage her reputation (remember, she wasn't married, but would she want their son to know what a fool she was before she married Gamma?), or some other action that could get out of hand and end up hurting their family.

W is very very concerned with her reputation, she goes very far out of her way to make herself likeable, to the degree that many consider her a saint. She is quite aware of others feelings and takes great care in avoiding causing anyone else distress and serving them where best needed. Privately she is caustic and critical, although much less since she became a Christian.

If there is a threat of punishment for honesty, then of course she is going to avoid honesty with all her might.

So we have an impasse, I thought of promising no retaliation, but have backed off on that since I would have to keep my word.

God Bless
Gamma

Why can't you promise that and keep your word?

SugarCane,

Why can't you promise that and keep your word?

One reason is that I can't prescribe the medicine before I find out how bad the disease is, another reason is who OM2 is, another reason is there is a second probable OM from the same workplace, even worse than OM2.

God Bless
Gamma

Are you saying that you definitely do not want to be married to her if you find out that theirs was a deep involvement?

In principle, I can understand that a person might not want to remain married to their spouse if they found out something terrible from 20 years ago; if a woman found out that her H had committed acts of sexual abuse, for example (One could substitute examples for a woman's secret past, but I can relate to the example I gave.) In principle I have sympathy for your plight.

In your specific case, though, I think it's terribly sad that you would end your marriage to someone that you describe as good and kind (in the post a couple up) over unwise sexual behaviour before she married you, especially since you knew something about the other relationship when you married her. I don't think that what she did could amount to something that would cause decent people to shun her; something that is commonly agreed to be unacceptable.

It's unacceptable to you, and that's what counts, I agree, but it's a shame that this woman who is good to you now, and who seems to be investing in your marriage, can be thrown away like that.

Do you think you'll be happy when you've divorced her?

In general the past before you came on the scene should be left in the past.

However there are always going to be exceptions. As you pointed out info must be revealed to keep NC with all pasts lovers.

If there are potential deal breakers then those questions need to be asked. Things that need to be revealed are the deal breakers.

Deal breakers can be alcoholic, drug use, extremes, example unusually high number of sex partners. Everyone knows which things are deal breakers. They are the things they willing did. Though do not willingly admit.

Though I dated John for a year. This was I before you and we had sex more times and ways then I can remember. There can be no benefit to Joe hearing. Because it will only lead Joe to comeback with questions.

If Dr Harley says a BH sound not be taking about the affair then all this confessing that you advocate is just going to fill Joes head with a bunch of questions that he will not be able to get answers. And if he does then he has to deal with mind movies and triggers.

Joe and Jane are never going to see John again so there is no benefit for Joe to have to forget the fact that Jane and John banged every chance the could every way they could think of.

Now years later if Joe and Jane go to open school night an Johns kid is in the same class. Joan should tell Joe that John was a past lover. Joe needs the info to protect himself. Joan and John should not be allowed to have their little secret.

The difference is my situation and with affairs in general is that he says the WS should answer the questions about the affair. That is during the marriage.

I see what happened before the marriage as different. You were not known. So your wife could not be unfaithful to you then.

Gamma, some people met in grade school and became HS sweet hearts. Married 50+ years.

Some have 2 relationship's before they marry. Some 5, or 10. Some a few though they also just dated a lot because the did not want to be serious.

Thing is odds are the farther people move away from 18 to 30 they are going to have more partners. Because they dated someone/others before you is normal. They sampled and chose you.

This is why pasting dating generally should not be important.

"All this confessing that you advocate" - I'm not advocating anything. It isn't my place to advocate anything on this forum. I'm only discussing what Dr Harley advises to spouses using the MB programme. When spouses complete the home study or online courses, they are encouraged to tell each other about their sexual histories. I explained why above.

Dr H does not advise that "in general the past before you came on the scene should be left in the past" - not in the sense of keeping quiet about past lovers and sexual experiences. That is your advice, TR, but it is in direct contrast to Dr H's advice. He advises couples to reveal their sexual pasts, even after many years of marriage.

You are distorting what Dr H says about not talking about an affair, but I'm sure you know that. He did not advise you and your wife not to talk about her affair when you were on the radio show. In fact, he advised her (in her absence) to talk to you and give you the information you have been seeking for years. He does advise talking about the affair so that the BS knows what went on during it. Only once the main details are known does he say that the couple should not bring it up again.

He does not focus on "banging", either after an affair or when the Personal History Questionnaire is completed. He does not advise talking about sexual positions and such, but he does advise revealing the broad parameters: that sexual intercourse, or fondling or kissing took place.

You focus on "banging" in many of your posts. It's somewhat of an obsession. However, Dr Harley focuses on openness and honesty between spouses so that they know and understand each other completely.

TR, we have discussed this so much on this thread. Have you forgotten?

When Gamma was engaged to his now wife, she had a relationship with the man Gamma calls OM2. She did know Gamma - she was engaged to him.

But Dr Harley does feel it is important, hence the Personal History questionnaire.

He advises that spouses should know all about each other's histories before they met.

To clarify did gamma's wife date the OM before gamma or did she date the OM while engaged to gamma?

If the wife dated the OM while engaged to gamma, did gamma find out before he married his wife or after the marriage?

I think she dated him while engaged and he is trying to find out some particulars of it, or trying to find out for sure.

TheRoad,

Quick timeline.

1) I Dated future W for a number of years
2) I worked at company X for a few years OM2 was my coworker
3) Future W started working with me and OM2 at company X
4) I left company X to work at company Y
5) W and OM2 working together without me at company X, OM2 and W had affair.
6) W and I got married.
7) W continued to work at company X with OM2 for about 6 or so months after we were married.

God Bless
Gamma

And when did you find out she slept with him? Before you were married or after you were married?

SugarCane,

Are you saying that you definitely do not want to be married to her if you find out that theirs was a deep involvement?

There is a good chance, depending on the sexual details.
The sexual details are what my W fears most about revealing. For example, it took 20+ years for her to tell me that a guy fondled her chest a few years before she knew me, when we dated the story was that they only kissed, and note this is a relationship I don't care about, how much less does my W want to tell me about what went on with OM2.

In your specific case, though, I think it's terribly sad that you would end your marriage to someone that you describe as good and kind (in the post a couple up) over unwise sexual behaviour before she married you, especially since you knew something about the other relationship when you married her.

Of course I'm conflicted about this, W meets many of my needs and is as you say good and kind for the most part.

At the same time how does one get just compensation when the affair has been lied about for so many years. Before MB I might have said that going to a prostitute or starting a revenge affair would even the score.

How does one make up for lost years?

I don't think that what she did could amount to something that would cause decent people to shun her; something that is commonly agreed to be unacceptable.

I agree, it's not shun worthy from a societal level, only a personal level. Although my W would feel great shame.

It's unacceptable to you, and that's what counts, I agree, but it's a shame that this woman who is good to you now, and who seems to be investing in your marriage, can be thrown away like that....Do you think you'll be happy when you've divorced her?

Possibly I could find a new W who could meet my sexual needs, but most of the other needs would be better met by my W, divorce would not bring immediate happiness.

God Bless
Gamma

You left out of your timeline when you found out about this relationship that your wife had. Was that before you married her or after?