Here I am with lots of opportunity to have fun and enjoy myself, and what am I doing? Getting all philosophical about this whole A mess. Oh well, getting it all out helps.. After this, I'll take the weekend off from my problems, I hope. Let me pose 3 specific questions for people to think about and respond to..<p>1. When someone goes to Plan B, I've seen many people insist that the WS should leave. Is that best in my situation? My WW works in a city about 50 miles from our apartment (I work in a city about 50 miles in the opposite direction). So, if she stays in the apartment, she is in somewhat familiar surroundings but has bad access to OM. The familiarity might work for or against me - not sure. If she goes, she'd likely move to the city she works, so then she's in an unfamiliar environment, but great access to OM (might just turn this supposed EA into PA). She might view moving to this other city as exciting, too. What do you think?<p>2. How many BS out there recall instances where the WS admits that they KNOW they're in a fog. E.g. my WW admitted that she "misses" her old self, but seems powerless about it. Said once she thinks in some ways she's just waiting for her to pull her head out of her butt. Etc. So she knows something's clearly "not right". How common is this?<p>3. In thinking about the dynamics of many A, I suspect what happens is that the WS does a bad thing - the A itself. In turn, they begin to believe that it makes them bad. But we're psychologically wired to resist this - "can't be so" - so that badness is projected - onto the BS. In doing so, it lessens their belief that what they've done is truly a bad thing, in turn lessening their own sense of badness. First, I suppose we could debate the validity of this.<p>If we accept it for a moment, where does MB principles come into play to break this chain? I think Plan A is squarely designed to reduce the amount of negativity that can be projected onto BS. Doing so means that the WS is continued to be forced to see the "badness" of their actions. Sometimes that's enough. It could often not be when the WS fully entrenches themselves in a way of thinking, then withdraw, not allowing BS a chance to show positives. For Plan B, the BS is now gone, so there's no-one around to project that negativity on to. They can do so remotely, but I don't think it's quite the same as having a punching bag on hand, so to speak. It's just harder, because reality is there, staring them in the face, and the value of BS, assuming Plan A was done well, starts to be recalled. Of course, that's usually not all that's needed - A needs to die a natural death. And that often likely happens because BS is wrestling with these issues, making the A seem less fun, more like life with BS, but probably worse now because they're dealing with an extra helping of guilt, with a side order of doubt.<p>So... a conclusion of mine... if a WS doesn't follow through and come to their senses, it's quite likely either because the A/B steps weren't effective in breaking the cycle, or they actually are selfish individuals who probably "deserve" the OP on some level. In either case, the WS suffers a much greater burden to truly "grow" out of the experience and be honestly happy, I would suspect.

J.R. - good questions. I will provide my views later today and I hope others weigh in. I'll predict that eventually you'll get some divergent opinions and I could predict from who, but I don't want to spoil the fun.<p>Later,
WAT

OK, J.R., here goes:<p>J.R.: When someone goes to Plan B, I've seen many people insist that the WS should leave. Is that best in my situation? My WW works in a city about 50 miles from our apartment (I work in a city about 50 miles in the opposite direction). So, if she stays in the apartment, she is in somewhat familiar surroundings but has bad access to OM. The familiarity might work for or against me - not sure. If she goes, she'd likely move to the city she works, so then she's in an unfamiliar environment, but great access to OM (might just turn this supposed EA into PA). She might view moving to this other city as exciting, too. What do you think?<p>WAT: Well, the intent of Plan B regarding the WS is to remove whatever ENs are being met by the BS - thus requiring these needs to be satisfied elsewhere, presumably with the OP. (Remember, the primary reason for plan B is to protect the BS.) So, your separation decision, made less complicated because you have no children, should be to make the best decision for YOU without much, if any, consideration for what your W might do. <p>J.R.: How many BS out there recall instances where the WS admits that they KNOW they're in a fog. E.g. my WW admitted that she "misses" her old self, but seems powerless about it. Said once she thinks in some ways she's just waiting for her to pull her head out of her butt. Etc. So she knows something's clearly "not right". How common is this?<p>WAT: My WS has done none of this. She is, at least by appearances, 100%, absolutely, no-question-about-it, sure of herself and her decisions. So is Gary Condit. My impression of reading others? stories here is that your W's introspection is rare and my W's lack of it is fairly common. The majority seem to be fence sitters who can't make up their mind - especially if they haven't separated.<p>J.R.: In thinking about the dynamics of many A, I suspect what happens is that the WS does a bad thing - the A itself. In turn, they begin to believe that it makes them bad. But we're psychologically wired to resist this - "can't be so" - so that badness is projected - onto the BS. In doing so, it lessens their belief that what they've done is truly a bad thing, in turn lessening their own sense of badness. First, I suppose we could debate the validity of this.<p>WAT: I happen to agree with this, but also can see some variations. I remember my W defending herself - "I'm not a bad person." - even in the absence of anyone accusing her of this. The projection of blame seems universal. I am "evil". Hard core WSs have painted over all the mirrors in their lives. They cannot be self critical. This is why, IMHO, it's so easy for them to be hypocrites. They can't see how absurd they have become. Recently, my wife remarked about our 13 year old son to his counselor: "He is not ready yet, perhaps, to see that he has to be more responsible for his decisions and can't always blame others for things that don't go his way." [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img] <p>J.R.: If we accept it for a moment, where does MB principles come into play to break this chain? I think Plan A is squarely designed to reduce the amount of negativity that can be projected onto BS. Doing so means that the WS is continued to be forced to see the "badness" of their actions. Sometimes that's enough. It could often not be when the WS fully entrenches themselves in a way of thinking, then withdraw, not allowing BS a chance to show positives. For Plan B, the BS is now gone, so there's no-one around to project that negativity on to. They can do so remotely, but I don't think it's quite the same as having a punching bag on hand, so to speak. It's just harder, because reality is there, staring them in the face, and the value of BS, assuming Plan A was done well, starts to be recalled. Of course, that's usually not all that's needed - A needs to die a natural death. And that often likely happens because WS is wrestling with these issues, making the A seem less fun, more like life with BS, but probably worse now because they're dealing with an extra helping of guilt, with a side order of doubt.<p>WAT: I do not fully agree. I think a better description of Plan A is that it's designed for the BS to be self critical and make improvements. If successful, the BS eliminates the WS's excuses for the affair - at least the ones within the BS's control. Remember, the BS cannot force the WS to do ANYTHING, with the exception of forcing them to have ALL their needs met elsewhere in Plan B. Believe me, Plan B DOES NOT affect the blame shifting. But hopefully, emotional outbursts and LBs in general then get directed at the OP - your punching bag analogy. The BS will likely remain the root of all problems until the excitement of the affair starts to fade. <p>J.R.: So... a conclusion of mine... if a WS doesn't follow through and come to their senses, it's quite likely either because the A/B steps weren't effective in breaking the cycle, or they actually are selfish individuals who probably "deserve" the OP on some level. In either case, the WS suffers a much greater burden to truly "grow" out of the experience and be honestly happy, I would suspect.<p>WAT: I disagree in part. Plan A/B are not intended to "break the cycle." The premise of Plan A/B is that the BS can do NOTHING to affect the course of the affair. Rather, the affair will likely end on its own. To hasten its end, the BS should not interfere with it. Plan A/B, if successful, can only make the BS an attractive alternative to the OP as the affair dies, enabling recovery.<p>WAT<p>[ December 08, 2001: Message edited by: worthatry ]</p>

WAT: My impression of reading others? stories here is that your W's introspection is rare and my W's lack of it is fairly common. The majority seem to be fence sitters who can't make up their mind - especially if they haven't separated.<p>JR: I really don't know what to make of her mental state, largely because of this fact. On one hand, she seems "textbook" - excellent command of fogese, etc. On the other hand, can speak quite rationally, which is encouraging. Or she could just be "buying time". I take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt.<p>WAT: I think a better description of Plan A is that it's designed for the BS to be self critical and make improvements. If successful, the BS eliminates the WS's excuses for the affair - at least the ones within the BS's control.<p>JR: Yes, I'm thinking in terms of by making self-improvements, the excuses for the A start to become weak, which in turn weakens the WS's ability to successfully negate their own guilt (not necessarily having anything to do with "blame" per se). And I think the guilt can become too much to bear, breaking the fog in some cases. For example, an encouraging statement came from WW recently - she sneezed, I said "God bless you", and she replied, "Yes He did, I'm just screwing it up" - quite the guilty little conscience.<p>WAT: Plan A/B are not intended to "break the cycle." The premise of Plan A/B is that the BS can do NOTHING to affect the course of the affair. Rather, the affair will likely end on its own. To hasten its end, the BS should not interfere with it. Plan A/B, if successful, can only make the BS an attractive alternative to the OP as the affair dies, enabling recovery.<p>JR: Agreed, they are fascinating tools because they involve changing one thing (the BS) but very often have associated effects on WS, which may affect the course of the A indirectly. I wonder if that's the case sometimes because a good Plan A, transitioned to a good Plan B means that the WS hasn't really "escaped" their problems by being with OP - they're still there, but the BS isn't - BS hasn't given them a reason to have a "clear conscience". The good Plan A memories must be at least somewhat compelling for most WS, at least after the A has died, OR in some cases (I hope), helps contribute to the death indirectly. (The story of Joe and Sue in SAA seems to bear that out - she felt depressed throughout Joe's Plan B - why? - she had Greg, she could have treated him more like a "normal relationship" and allowed it to grow, allowing him to fill all EN as she did for Joe in their early days - if Joe has done a bad Plan A, I doubt Sue would have felt quite as bad during the A, and therefore it might not have died, or at least died far too late to save their M.)<p>I look to 2 examples of D I have seen in friends. In one case, it was a WW cheating on her H. She got to a point where she wanted a D - I don't think the A came out, but the point was she thought a D was the answer to get happiness. Her H LB'd all over the place - just reinforced her view that it was "the right decision". She got her D, and had many, many failed relationships after that. BTW, she and WW talk quite regularly - they're good friends [img]images/icons/rolleyes.gif" border="0[/img] <p>Second example was a friend of mine whose WW cheated on him. Her A eventually came out. She moved out, but they communicated regularly over a period of months (2-3 times a month). He'd always talk about making the M work, but she had to give up OM. She refused. He pushed things, filed for D, hoping to shake her out of her fog. She wouldn't budge. Then a couple of months after the D was final, she called him up in tears, asking him to take her back. By then, he'd had enough - she had been a real B**** to him throughout, and he wasn't interested in saving things at that point. So in contrast, he didn't LB to the same level (too much, although by asking her to end it with OM, he was doing so), so he got the somewhat expected eventual "please take me back".

Bump! This is an important question in my mind right now.....<p>What was it that drove Sue's depression in the SAA example?<p>Was it her own guilt?
Was it the breaking of the bubble?
Was it anything that Jon did at all (in Plan A)?
Was it Greg's reactions in the "new light"?
Was it her uncertainty about her decisions?<p>All of the above?<p>If Sue had not allowed herself to be depressed, do you think she could have really pulled off trying to be happy with Greg, despite the knowledge of what was going on with Plan B (i.e. Jon's continued love and hope for her)?<p>If it was the thoughtlessness and deceit that went into making the affair that helped destroy it, how?<p>[ December 11, 2001: Message edited by: J.R. ]</p>

jr...1. When someone goes to Plan B, I've seen many people insist that the WS should leave. Is that best in my situation? My WW works in a city about 50 miles from our apartment (I work in a city about 50 miles in the opposite direction). So, if she stays in the apartment, she is in somewhat familiar surroundings but has bad access to OM. The familiarity might work for or against me - not sure. If she goes, she'd likely move to the city she works, so then she's in an unfamiliar environment, but great access to OM (might just turn this supposed EA into PA). She might view moving to this other city as exciting, too. What do you think?<p>snl...I am pretty much opposed to strategy and tactics as an approach to finding out whether you (or they) love someone. Is the wrong focus, makes the whole thing a game, people are not won or lost, what should prevail is unfettered (freewill) choice sans manipulation of any kind. Your concerns are manipulative, and make you focus on this as a contest. IMO one should simply live their life as they see fit, be the best person they can be, practice not LB'ing, and let the chips fall where they will...if you are to be restored she will find her way back to you, on her own (as she must), if she can't do that, you don't want her anyways...<p>2. How many BS out there recall instances where the WS admits that they KNOW they're in a fog. E.g. my WW admitted that she "misses" her old self, but seems powerless about it. Said once she thinks in some ways she's just waiting for her to pull her head out of her butt. Etc. So she knows something's clearly "not right". How common is this?<p>snl..I think ws vary a fair amount, as do bs, as do people in general. I would say though that knowing one is in a fog is an oxymoron. The fact that you know, implies you are not, and indeed are in pretty much full control of what you are doing. IMO the fog imagery is of limited usefullness, and probably only applies at the height of emotional love feelings for op. After d and/or real world consequences start straining the affair, I think the fog pretty much rolls out to sea, and you are dealing with the real thing, who your spouse really is under that mask.<p>3. In thinking about the dynamics of many A, I suspect what happens is that the WS does a bad thing - the A itself. In turn, they begin to believe that it makes them bad. But we're psychologically wired to resist this - "can't be so" - so that badness is projected - onto the BS. In doing so, it lessens their belief that what they've done is truly a bad thing, in turn lessening their own sense of badness. First, I suppose we could debate the validity of this.<p>snl...I have my own theory about this particular part of marital disharmony, and it differs some. BS (and ws for that matter) both suffer from unfair characterizations, some is simple anger, childish name-calling in the heat of conflict, which folks usally own up to, and apologize for. But some of it is also revelation of truth, at least as how the bs/ws sees it, and is a sympton of the deep problems both individually and maritally of the parties. Lastly I think this is a mechanism of sorts, humans use in disconnecting from those. It seems to me when we want distance from someone we typically focus on negative stuff.... it makes sense, why would we leave someone we were perfectly happy with? And often people are not equipped to fully and appropriately (using psychoanalysis) to disconnect, so resort to negativity to accomplish this desire. I think it is very human. That is one of the goals of plan a, is to minimize this (provide no ammunition), and perhaps break through to the ws (or bs when ws has to plan a) to shift their perception enough to consider the marriage valuable, if that does not happen, and the marriage still ends, one can feel comfortable it ended for the right reasons (radical honesty re the motivations of both parties), and not cause of needless conflict.<p>[ December 11, 2001: Message edited by: sad_n_lonely ]</p>