I had to wait to read your post once I got off work, Sugar Cane, and thank you for your insightful reply. While I see what you're getting at concerning Dr. Harley's principles and teachings, I still see nothing to be gained by discussing pre-marital relationships and relations. "MB marriage" or not, some individuals still do not have the mental wiring to handle certain information, and like Gamna, they could internalize everything, only to "uncharacteristically" erupt and blow everything out of proportion. MB does not make perfect people, but it can certainly help some marriages, but Gamma went off the reservation a long time ago, and I'm surprised his wife is still putting up with his lunacy.

While honesty is the best policy, delving or attempting to delve into matters that do not involve the current relationship partner or spouse is nothing but selfish voyeurism, as evidenced by Gamma, and is asking for trouble. Going off-script from the checklists surely happens, and conversations take tangents. Unless an STD was transmitted or a violent crime occurred in a past relationship, what is to be gained? A constant mental comparison/contrast? Even without the mention of sexual details, what's to prevent a running mental commentary as to whether, hypothetically, your spouse enjoyed something with What's-His/Her-Name more? What is healthy and constructive about that? How about disclosing matters that can be used as ammunition when the proverbial crap hits the fan in the marriage (and we've all seen it happen in the forums here)? Gamma is using the LACK of disclosure against his wife! Why should she divulge anything he could remotely use as emotional and psychological warfare? This aspect reminds me of an article I read concerning the full disclosure sessions of Scientologists, who use personal admissions as leverage to subjugate straying members. What's to keep spouses from doing the same? MB principles address it, but we all have seen posts concerning members falling off the MB wagon, the damage already done. MB principles help marriages, but humans are still humans.

For Gamma to blame his "lousy sex life" on his wife's supposed premarital relations is laughable. He doesn't understand that for (most) women, intimacy and sex are linked to her emotionally, and the fact he's being a petulant, conniving child isn't helping? Then, to point to his wife's dislike for performing oral sex? If she doesn't like it, and many women DO NOT, then that is her prerogative- she is not a sex doll. There are guys who don't care for performing it, either. Does that make them less of a man? Surely not! Gamma and his wife can come to a MUTUAL agreement on what is MUTUALLY enjoyable. To fault her for not giving oral sex, or guilt her, or even possibly force her into doing it is harassment and sexual coercion, the last one actually considered rape, all valid legal complaints regardless of marital status (no, I'm not calling Gamna a rapist, just merely stating the methods partners have used to get what they want). Marriage does not offer immunity when it comes to sexual, psychological and physical harassment and assault. **EDIT** Is he forceful or rough? Is he respectful? Frankly, his mentality and devious behavior is enough of a major turn-off.

That Gamma is attempting to forge a fake relationship with his wife's former pre-marriage boyfriend is just plain sick and twisted. Surely the ex-boyfriend has to be a bit leery, correct? Since Gamma's wife did not have an affair with him, couldn't she warn him somehow of what's going on? Gamma doesn't have the right to mentally jerk around anyone for use as an intelligence or blackmail asset- Gamma isn't a CIA operative, for Pete's sake. I am not surprised his wife isn't telling him anything- he's ruthless and volatile, and goodness knows what he'd do. The information he is seeking serves no marital purpose- he's simply fixated on the fact his wife had relationships and possibly relations before their marriage, the last being particularly intense. Either Gamma is incredibly insecure or incredibly insane (perhaps a lot of both), but in either circumstance, he desperately needs help.

Gamma does not have a "MB marriage", and frankly, what do you all think he would do with that information once he got it? He's been so wrapped around the axle about his insane mission for the last several years, do you honestly believe he'll finally settle down? Highly unlikely, as he'll find another fixation. Gamma doesn't need marital advice from this site- he needs psychiatric help.

I have seen you all help numerous individuals through their marriages, and you all are amazing. But we've seen several recent posts where the spouse is completely deranged and incapable of seeing their errant ways. Directing these kinds of people to Dr. Harley and MB principles are lost efforts- they want an audience and validation that they are correct in their ridiculous, if not volatile, ways. In my line of work, I see spouses and relationship partners do some dastardly and horrific, mentally warped, and irreversibly damaging things to their counterparts. Gamma still having a marriage to even speak of is incredible.

Well, you're discussing and mixing up two separate issues here. The issue of Gamma's attitude towards this past, premarital relationship, and how he intends to treat it, is a valid discussion for this thread, and should continue here. I hope Gamma will come back and discuss the points that I and others have made.

The issue of "While I see what you're getting at concerning Dr. Harley's principles and teachings, I still see nothing to be gained by discussing pre-marital relationships and relations" is a different one, and the point about it is that you should not be giving your personal disagreements with Dr H as advice on a thread.

These parts of your post are arguing against Dr Harley's advice. I will point out that he has addressed the concerns about "whether, hypothetically, your spouse enjoyed something with What's-His/Her-Name more?", and he still recommends historical honesty. It is not your place to post on somebody's thread, telling them that you disagree with him.

What you could do, if you want to discuss this, is write to Dr Harley himself and ask for a discussion on the radio show (with or without your personal appearance on the show). Dr Harley is very happy to discuss his ideas, and I would enjoy hearing him talk about the points that you raise.

As for this,

"How about disclosing matters that can be used as ammunition when the proverbial crap hits the fan in the marriage (and we've all seen it happen in the forums here)? Gamma is using the LACK of disclosure against his wife! Why should she divulge anything he could remotely use as emotional and psychological warfare? This aspect reminds me of an article I read concerning the full disclosure sessions of Scientologists, who use personal admissions as leverage to subjugate straying members. What's to keep spouses from doing the same? MB principles address it, but we all have seen posts concerning members falling off the MB wagon, the damage already done. MB principles help marriages, but humans are still humans."

The short answer to the spouse who is already, or who becomes, abusive or mentally deranged, and uses the sexual history details to punish, is that no spouse should put up with abuse or punishment. If one spouse cannot or will not control themselves, the other spouse must separate from them. This is not different from any other aspect of marriage. The fact that an MB principle can be misused is not a reason for a general abandonment of that principle - hard cases make bad law, after all.

As for the rest of your post,

I'm not quite sure why your tone sounds as if you are arguing against other posts here - for example, "frankly, what do you all think he would do with that information once he got it? He's been so wrapped around the axle about his insane mission for the last several years, do you honestly believe he'll finally settle down?"

Almost everybody who posted to Gamma this year has told him to drop this quest. Certainly that is the advice I have given him for a long time, and the same advice was given by AlienGirl, markos, Prisca, happyheart, MelodyLane, unwritten, and DidntQuit. You said, "Gamma doesn't need marital advice from this site- he needs psychiatric help", but this was just a few days after happyheart wrote "I am concerned that there is a very high risk that you are obsessed to a degree, bordering on paranoid delusion disorder", so who are you arguing against? You appear to have come here to set us straight, but why do you think that is necessary?

Your post is addressed to me. Is there something I said that was not clear on the point that Gamma should LET THIS DROP? Do I need to make another post saying what I have consistently said since this thread began, two years ago?

**EDIT**

Thank you for your response.

Would you mind reposting it on the thread in MB101? I don't know how Gamma feels about the general discussion of principles taking place on his thread.

A reminder that the purpose of this forum is to discuss Marriage Builders concepts and Dr. Harley's views. This is not a platform for personal philosophies and folk wisdom. If you are going to post here, you must abide by those rules, or kindly refrain from posting. If you disagree with Dr. Harley's views, feel free to email him directly at mbradio@marriagebuilders.com.

Unwritten,

Yes I do plan on meeting OM2 again. In a sense meeting OM2 is no different than reading a diary you happen to stumble upon or having a kind stranger tell you that you are being cheated upon.

I will try to answer some of the longer posts later, in any event Thank You everyone who posted.

Gamma

*facepalm* Yes, it IS entirely different! She was with this man going on 30 years ago!!! Before you were married! This has nothing to do with being cheated on as you were not married!!

But the entire purpose of getting RH about former lovers is so you know who to AVOID.

If you are going to hunt down and reconnect your wife with her former boyfriends, you've put her in a position where withholding facts is the only way to have good boundaries as a married woman.

Since you know the guy is a former bf, you know enough to exclude him. You don't need more RH than that.

This entire topic thread is precisely how Not to follow MB concepts and I am amazed that it has not been locked yet, with the exception of the Very Valid Counterpoints being made in rebuttal to Gamma's intentions.

I feel Sooo sorry for you that you have not been able to let go of your Wife's former boyfriend's from prior to when you got married, even though you knew enough about them before you made your vows.

Is the ANY WAY POSSIBLE that You can find it in yourself to let go of this seemingly unwarranted obsession?

Have you sought out any counseling to relieve yourself of it, ever?

LTL

This is so illogical that I'm almost speechless (but not quite).

You have coordinated a strategy that goes back beyond the two years of this thread. It involves

• trying to make a link between this relationship from over 30 years ago and your lousy sex life through 30 years of marriage;
• attending an annual event for the sole purpose of running into this man;
• the next year, taking your wife with you to the event so that she is forced to meet this man, something to which she has not agreed, and does not know that you organised, and thus upsetting her by forcing her to meet a man whom she is embarrassed about and has never tried to contact herself;
  
• attending the event for a third year, in order to continue building the fake friendship;
  
• phoning this man in order to build the fake friendship;
  
• planning revenge on this man, once you have found out as much as you can. You say that you dealt with the man you call "OM1", also from long before you were married. You got some sort of revenge on him, which you will not tell us about. You have made it clear that you intend to pay back this man ("OM2") for dating your then girlfriend - a relationship you knew about before you got engaged.
  
• plotting to "casually" ask him about the pre-marital relationship from 30 years ago;
  
• being prepared to offer this man money for any love letters or any artefacts that he might still have (fat chance, by the way).

This strategic, purposeful trapping of this man, taking years to achieve your goal, is the polar opposite of "reading a diary you happen to stumble on or having a kind stranger tell you that you are being cheated on". The diary event happens by chance, and the stranger acts in a way that you did not invite or control. Neither event involves any prior knowledge or planned activity by you.

This campaign to extract more details of your wife's past - more than you already know about, which is the basic fact that she had a relationship with this man - is purposeful, directed, driven, harmful, obsessive and cruel. There is no similarity between this and stumbling across a diary. None at all.

Stumbling across a diary is not doing something to hurt your wife. This...is.

Gamma makes me appear 100% sane.

Gamma,
You may end up creating an affair between your wife and her ex boyfriend.
If you dont like her dishonesty now, it will be 100 times worse if you follow your plan of continued meetings with the OM

All this stuff is illegal and punishable by harassment laws, right?

This thread is like watching Memento.

JK,

You wrote, You may end up creating an affair between your wife and her ex boyfriend.

I tend to think not, my W remarked how old and decrepit OM2 had gotten, she also did not want OM2 to even see her last year. However if it did happen my course of action would be crystal clear, there is I suspect a very low probability of any interaction, OM2 appears to be internet impaired.

OM2 did show intense feeling towards my W on meeting her two years ago, at least till he noticed I was off a bit to the side. So I cannot entirely discount that OM2 might make a try.

Gamma

Have you never heard of "affairing down"? Seriously though, what on earth did you think them seeing each other would accomplish?

What is illegal? Affairs or premarital sex? Arranging meetings between former lovers? None of that is illegal.

Gamma,

We have read of hundreds of affairs that start between former lovers on this very forum.
Why play with fire?