I am now about to put my hand into a hornets nest. I am not a prowokative person. And I do this with more than a little doubt. Yet I do so in the hope of helping some of the excellent posters on this site to gain even a greater knowledge and understanding. A-hm. Yes, I do in fact mostly address this thread to female posters. Some of them MB veterans who have done an excellent job of helping hundreds of M survive.
I will try to be a little bit humble.


I have in all my humbleness started to wander if women really can understand men. At least there are sides to being a man that most of the excellent woman posters here at MB are ignorant about. In fact I think they have they have no idea at all!
In this thread I will address two issues where I feel women here on MB do not understand the depths in the male psyche. First the one I have labelled A:


A) The doubts and uncertainty a man may feel whether he is the biological father to his child / children. First, please realise, honoured female readers, that this issue is a very different one from that of taking on the task and responsibility of being father to an adopted child. In that case there is no doubt as to whether a betrayal has taken place, there is no pain and no wound to overcome! But a child born in the M which may be (or knowingly is) not the bio-child is a huge issue! Even husbands who live in happy M with no reason to suspect any unfaithfulness from their W will still some times feel this uncertainty. Are all of my children really mine? Yes, I think all fathers have felt a little bit of this doubt from time to time!


Thus the hurt and pain and uncertainty of a BH is a big one. A BH knows about a betrayal. So the question of biology can no longer easily be dismissed. Yes, this issue is big!
When you go to the pregnancy/child forum you can observe time and again that there is a gender difference in how this issue is dealt with in the posts.. When this is an issue there will be some posts from male posters offering sympathy, but soon the thread is taken over by female posters who strive to minimize the issue with slogans like �it is not the sperm that makes a father!�. There is some truth in a statement like that. But time and again I am struck by the obvious lack of understanding to the depth of this issue. Yes, I am sometimes really surprised how ignorant many of the very excellent female advisors here on MB are on the depths of this issue in the mind of the BH.


The issue of an OC is a deep one. The very child that the BS now loves and has taken on as his own, is also a very powerful trigger to the deepest pain the BS ever has experienced. It is a daily reminder of his perceived failure as a male, husband and a lover. It is a reminder that his wife preferred an OM to him sexually and emotionally. (Or does he wonder, is it still �prefers�?)


In this thread I will probably not raise issue A again, and I expect issue B that you will find in my next post to provoke far more responses. But please do not forget this one. The issue with an OC is a big one, as is the pain when the bio-origin is in doubt.


A BH who take on the task and obligations to be a father and invests love in an OC should really be recognized as a hero!


As a side issue: The BS pain on parenthood does not justify a betrayal from the BS to the child. An abortion or the choice of being a bad parent for the child is a grave sin and a terrible betrayal. The child is an innocent part! I am equally surprised by how a few male posters are able to completely disregard this part!

To continue with topic B:

B) Often during an A the WW is much more free, willing and motivated in the SF with the OM than she ever was with the BH. Often a WW volunteer to do acts with the OM which she consistently has rejected to do with the BS throughout their M. In this case you female posters seem completely ignorant in how big an issue this is. The thread of Outofkilter is an excellent example. I will return to this topic in the next posts. For some reasons many of you female posters think it is OK for the WW to continue to refuse this when she returns to the M and the BS.

Of course she is: As she is free to stop talking to her BS, as she is free to stop sharing their financial burdens, or as she is free to refuse to take part in the housekeeping, as she is free to refuse any SF at all! But realise than that the BS is equally free to then go for a divorce. And you female readers, you would be really surpriced by how many male readers would concider this choice of the WW to be a dealbreaker. You seem completely ignorant to how big an issue this is for males.

Somehow female posters have monopolised what is �political correct� to say on these matters here in the forums. Many a BH stay off these threads altogether and only a few newbee male posters offer sympathy for the BH pain and for the position he has been brought into by this particular betrayal. These posters do so in politically incorrect terms and they offer non-MB like advice So they are quickly brought to silence. In the next post I have collected some of the posts on this issue taken from outofkilters thread. The gender difference should be observed in these statements:

These are statements taken from the thread of Outofkilters, a very interesting thread in many ways. I have selected statements than touch into the topic of the present thread:


Outofkilter: The sex issue is complicated. It's humiliating to admit this, but during my A I acted like a real slut... totally out of character for me. Some of the things I did would not be healthy to do in a marriage (I won't go into details, but there was another person involved in some acts). Others are completely against my morals, and didn't I get myself and my family in this mess by not respecting myself? But there were/are some things I would like to try w/ my husband, but unfortunately it's the stuff he is not interested in. BTW I find it very difficult to let go and be vulnerable with someone that used to call me all these names (he doesn't do that anymore but he is always furious with me, which is also hard); and plus anytime I have opened up w him I feel he has used it against me by freaking out that I have 'learned from other man'. And then my BH hasn't accepted certain things which he has to accept. For instance, in his mind because I never refused OM for sex, I should never refuse him. That's just not realistic even under the best of circumstances as this is marriage not an affair.... I know this is not fair, but it is the way that it is. So there are all these hangups, which in his mind are my problem to solve... BUT in my mind we need both of us to solve them.


the Road: If you were able to do all those with a smile for the OM and your BH has always wanted these things from you has made it almost impossible for your BH not to expect the same performances. It's another story if the things you did with the OM were a total turn off for BH and he never wants to do these things. Your BH may never even thought to ask you to do these things before but you woke up the sleeping dragon.

Shaken: He is right. You are wrong. You are making your husband second. You were willing to be another man's sl**, but you can't be that way for the man who married you.
That's a double standard and not only have you emasculated your husband, you continue to devalue him by proving you were willing to devalue yourself for someone who wasn't your husband.

It was realistic enough for you for the OM. Yet you deny your husband his wishes. I can understand his anger.
Angel: The difference is that she was in love with the OM and it didn't feel like a "request" for different sexual favors but a natural progression of their love for each other. She never felt like she was a $lut to the OM.


Schoolbus in her suggested letter to outofkilters BH: I cannot do some things from the affair with you, because these things remind me of the depth of degradation that I sank to. I am not that person anymore, and I never want to be that person again. Deep inside, I know you do not want to be married to the person who did those things, either. Our love life can be wonderful again, when we agree together on the things that are mutually and enthusiastically enjoyable for both of us. Things that degrade either of us, truthfully, degrade both of us. Together we can find new things to do - and there is a way forward that could be pretty exciting....I propose we do that instead.

I would love to have a marriage that is built on openness, honesty, sexual fulfillment for both of us, companionship that builds our trust for each other again, and a way that both of us can fall in love and stay in love.


Martialbliss: You're kidding, right? Shaken, NO ONE should be obligated to perform sexual acts that they would be uncomfortable performing. This is out of line for her husband to demand. I appreciate his devastation, but this is unacceptable behavior on her H's part.


Americajin: This post is taking a LOT of things for granted. For example, how does anyone here know exactly WHAT sexual acts the husband is demanding? Have you ever known a betrayed husband to demand that his WW perform a threesome? Perhaps it can be anal sex (which someone suggested) or something as simple as oral sex, which maybe she refused to do before? We don't know specifics, now do we? There have been wayward wives before that refused to have ANY sex with their husbands but were only too willing to have frequent sex with their scumbag affair partner. Her husband may just be pissed that she wouldn't do things that he had asked before that she was happy to oblige her AP with.

We are so willng to believe a woman that admits that her husband tried everything he could to stop the affair, who admits that she continued her perfidy IN HIS FACE, and I have to wonder why? Just because she says she's sorry? Well, I would agree that someone that would pull threesomes is pretty sorry. I just love people who talk about their morals, or tout their Christianity, when it's convenient for them to do so.

That's why I suggested that she contact the Harley's. Good luck getting this one back on track.


Martialbliss:Yep, we know what 'kind' of sex her H wants. He wants sexual acts she doesn't want to participate in! What did you miss about that??

Sexual acts that are not mutually agreed upon are acts that are not in balance. One participant is submissive, the other controlling the act. When either person does not agree with this structure it is unhealthy for the M, not healthy.

Would it make a difference if it was, say, sex with a threesome is bad, but sex with a cucumber is good? What does the type of sex have to do with it?? Oral, anal, what's the difference?

Atema: outof kilter is not posting any more. I guess there is something in all this she is not saying. I read the whole thread.
I just cannot believe that the fog makes you do sexual acts you would not do with your H or W. Like threesomes.
By all means, she should not do those with her BH, because it would be like doing the wrong thing over and over again and once was enough.
But how can you be so fogged up as to do that sort of stuff? Plus, it also tells a lot about the OM and the kind of trash he was.

Bubbles4you: She should not have to do types of sex she does not want to do. But then why why why did she eagerly do it with the other man???
That sounds pretty creepy to me. If it was so good with the other man why can't she branch out, at least if the offending sex was simple oral sex, and share that kind of sex with her husband. I can see never having anal or threesomes. Oral or light bondage she can share it with her own husband if she had it with her lover.
And why withhold sex from her husband turning him down when she never turned down the lover. The whole thing is bad. And she does not see how she is hurting her husband.

In this post there is a letter written by Schoolbus, a wise and knowledgeable poster who has helped many here with her advice, and her empathetic (sp?) support to people in pain. The letter was originally intended for outofkilters BH and it can be found in Outkilters thread.

Background: Outofkilters has during her A eagerly committed sexual acts with the OM which she now feel ashamed of and she is unwilling to share them or similar acts with her BH. This letter was intended to explain to him why he was not entitled to expect any of that in their M. I really hope Outofkilters has not made this letter her own and given it to her BS. If she was to give it to him I am pretty certain that the effect on the BS would be quite opposite to what she intended and this letter would increase the likelihood of an ugly divorce.
(By the way: Outoflilters BS is not being nice towards her. Please do not make that a topic of this discussion. The topic of this thread is not outofkilters M. The topic is how (I believe) female posters fail to understand how males perceive this letter and other posts that tries to explain the same thing.

Rather than to explain the male psyche to female readers (that is the strength of Just Learning to do) I have translated the original letter to the opposite gender�s issues. Hopefully female readers will then have a little idea of how a male BS would read the original letter. Thus, Imagine now that the betrayer was a male and the BS was a BW. This is the letter from the WH:


Dear Wife,

A few years ago I committed adultery with a woman who participated with me in a number of acts that, at the time, I thought were supposed to be liberating and would show me to be some kind of male who was of superior romantic prowess. I did ever wake up and realize how wrong I was before you busted us.

The worst day of my life was when you discovered the affair, because my behaviour was out in the light and because I realised that the greatest love I ever have felt now would have to stop. Yet, because I was still locked into the deep feelings I felt for this woman, I continued on with all of it. My behaviour was, and still is, inexcusable. It took me far too long to stop the affair. It took me far too long to stop lying to you. It took me far too long to tell you all that you wanted to know about the affair.


I wanted to be a Knight in shining armour for her. I walked long romantic walks with her in the moonlight on the silent paths along the river. The very same paths that you showed me back when we were engaged. To the sound of a lazily moving water I shared with her my deepest thoughts and all of my dreams. I felt a freedom from the restrains that often makes the communication between you and me so forced and shallow. I could talk, and I could listen like ever before in my life. I shared with her all my hopes for the future. I did in this borrow much from what you and I previously had planned and hoped for. In that way the OW and I gave each other the full access to each others hearths and hopes. We planned our future together and we declared each other an eternal love that surpasses anything we had felt for any of our previous partners and lovers.

I know that you have always wanted to experience moments like these in our M. But you must know and understand that when I am with you I feel a restraint which makes me clumsy with my words and acts. Besides, my thoughts always start to wander if you and I try to create a romantic experience. True; during our engagement period We did find romance, but to do so now is unrealistic in the everyday life of a M. For the sake of our kids I have now returned to our M and to you. But please realize that what I had with her can never be in our M. You see, she and I were true solemates of a heavenly kind. We were created to be together. Unfortunately life interfered and this can not be. Such a connection between man and woman is not possible in a standard M like the one you and I have. It is entirely unrealistic to hope for such depths of feelings.

Thus, it is not of any kind of belittlement to you when I tell you that true romance is now not possible with you and I. You are a fantastic woman and I am fortunate that you still want to stay with me after my betrayal. The fact that there will never be a true romance in our M is not your fault. I could only experience this with a truly special person. Not one, not you nor anyone else can be blamed for not being created to fill the standard she filled in my life.


I know that you still have pain, because you talk of needing to know more romantic details from the A, and you ask for me to do romantic things from the affair with you. I cannot do these romantic things from the affair with you, because these things remind me of the deep and special love I felt with this woman. And the deep loss I feel in knowing that she will never be mine again. I am not that person anymore, and I never want to be that person again. I can only be that person when I am with her.

Our life can be wonderful again, when we agree together on the things that are mutually and enthusiastically enjoyable for both of us. Things that are not felt right to do for both of us truthfully, degrade both of us. Together we can find new things to do - and there is a way forward that could be pretty exciting. I propose we do that instead. I am truly sorry that I will never ever be able to live up to your romantic expectations. But I would love to have a marriage that is built on openness, honesty, sexual fulfilment, and companionship. I am sure this can be done without shared romantic experiences. Then both of us can experience a realistic level of happiness in our lives.

I have plans to start today. I hope that you will start with me.


Love, Your Husband.

B) Often during an A the WW is much more free, willing and motivated in the SF with the OM than she ever was with the BH.
****edit****

I hope my character Frank57 here in MB will survive this thread. He has I believe put his hand in a hornet nest. In Norway where I live time is now nearly 03 AM. So I will not know until tomorrow.
I look forward to read your responses!

Frank, I don't think you understand what it takes to recover a marriage if you think it is ok for her to engage in sexual acts with her husband that disgust her. I understand fully that he is hurt that she engaged in sex acts with him that she won't with her H. That really is irrelevant to what it takes to recover her marriage. You seem to believe the solution is for her to sacrifice on his behalf.

An addict will do disgusting things while drunk that they would never dream of doing while sober. I put these sex acts in the same category. Bringing the past into the present will not help the marriage recover.

The most important thing you are missing is what it takes to create a loving sex life. If she does things with him that she finds disgusting, then she soon will not be having sex with him at all. People won't do unpleasant things for long. Pretty soon she will mentally associate disgust and unpleasantness with having sex and will develop a big fat ole aversion. And when that happens, the sex life is OVER.

In order to be willing to have sex, there have to be two elements in place for women: an emotional attachment to the man and the prospect of enjoyment.

A husband who demands she perform disgusting sex acts with him has just destroyed both elements. She obviously will not feel an emotional attachment to a man who selfishly demands sex acts he knows she finds disgusting.

And let me ask you what kind of man WANTS a wife to not enjoy sex with him? I don't know of many who would.

The solution, Frank, is to be found in Marriage Builders materials and it surprises me you don't know this. The solution to a satisfying sexual life is to make sure that BOTH partners enjoy it; NOT just one at the others expense.

Mel rote

"Frank, I don't think you understand what it takes to recover a marriage if you think it is ok for her to engage in sexual acts with her husband that disgust her. I understand fully that he is hurt that she engaged in sex acts with him that she won't with her H. That really is irrelevant to what it takes to recover her marriage. You seem to believe the solution is for her to sacrifice on his behalf."

I have not ever stated that she should. My point is that the female readers are unable to understand how the BH will see an additional betrayal in the refusal of the WW to engage in the same acts with him. Thus my focus is on the lack of understandig to the depths of this issue. It is not an equally shallow statement of what the duty of the WW should be in this situation.

Many BH will be very tempted to go for D should their WW go by the solution advocated by the female posters on this topic. Observing this lack of understanding obviously makes me a male pig. OK. But try to say something as to why ?

Frank, When ANYONE is "forced" to perform a sexual act against their will, it is called RAPE. Married people CAN and DO experience rape. Telling a woman that she needs to sexually satisfy her BH in whatever way he deems right is WRONG on so many levels. It is not about being politically correct, it is about doing the right thing.

There definitely ARE gender differences. There are different ENs which tend to go along gender lines. SF tends to favour H's. I don't think that comparing romantic gestures to SF even comes close. I have never seen a person accuse someone of forcing them to perform romantic gestures.

Saying that you know that you have stuck your hand in a hornet's nest, does in NO WAY excuse your posts.

WH's tend to do things with OW that they NEVER do with their BWs. Sometimes they NEVER do. It is sometimes things that their BW have ALWAYS dreamed of, but will NEVER see. People in affairs do things that they normally wouldn't do. It isn't about gender. It just is.

The affair itself is a HUGE betrayal. I DO understand that her BH will be unhappy with her unwillingness to perform sexual acts that she did perform with OM. It is something they will need to get through TOGETHER. POJA.

If her BH decides that he would D her because he can't get her to perform these acts, then that is his right. OOK made that decision when she chose to have an affair. What if she does everything that her BH asks for in regards to SF and he still decides to D her? What would you tell her then?

SF, for women happens first in the mind and second in the body. There are times when a woman can get "caught up" in an act of sex that when she is thinking more clearly, she regrets. As ML pointed out, would you suggest that she have SF in whatever way her BH demands just to please him?

Again, I have not in any way made any statement as to what the WW should do in this situation. Thus your answer does not address me in any way. My point is that many female readers seem unable to understand the BH pain in this situation.

The answers to this thread so far certainly supports this point of view since any of them has been able to read what I have written.

Again: I have not suggested that anyone should be "forced to perform a sexual act against their will". Please keep your response to what I have written! My point is a lack of understanding an empathy for the BH position!


Edited to include:
This I did write:

"For some reasons many of you female posters think it is OK for the WW to continue to refuse this when she returns to the M and the BS.

Of course she is:"

Yes, of course she is!! As is the BH in his full right when he draws his conclusion regarding to whom the loyalty of the WW belongs to from this choice of hers. His conclusion may be wrong, but you can bet this is what he will see in it. You are very unrealistic if you think that he will not perceive this choice in that manner.

Thus we are back to my topic: You do not understand how the BH must percieve this situation that he finds himself in. And when you do not understand this, how can your support to a couple in this situation be optimal?

I'm not addressing the issue of piggery.

I would just to ask, first, what makes you think that women do not understand how it feels for a man to doubt his paternity?

Some women who have been BWs have to face an OC. The situations are not identical, but I imagine that the pain levels from each situation are similar.

Second, are you aware that some BWs feel the same doubts about their sexual appeal after finding out that their WH had sex with another woman? Are you aware that the same questions arise about what they did, and how often? Are you aware that "mental movies" cause trauma for some BWs as well as for BHs? Are you aware that some BWs live with the knowledge that sex for the affairees was better - because of the illicit nature of affairs?

Can you imagine how that affects the BW's side of the marriage - perhaps forever?

I am not a man, and I have never been betrayed, so I will never fully understand the horror I put DH through four and a half years ago.

But I will say this, we didn't recover our M by him grinding axes everywhere he went. Or by him reaping some kind of secondary benefit by keeping me under his punishing toe for the last four years. Or by obsessing enough over a stranger's thread to start his very own thread so that he can quote everything she wrote.

Yes, I confessed my A, Made amends, put in EP's, showed the "fruits of repentance." But what I did was nothing special....it was the LEAST I could do after my terrible choice. We recovered because of what my DH chose to do, the fact that he chose to stay, and what he chose to let go of.

Frank, I guess maybe what you posted was misread by all of us women.

What you quoted, as I have not read the original thread, was supposed to support your argument. What I read was a bunch of posts telling the WW to perform whatever sexual acts that her BH asked of her and female posters suggesting that that was the wrong thing to advise. This may have been where the confusion happened. Because the quotes that YOU chose to include read as someone suggesting that this WW needs to perform ALL sex acts that her BH deems appropriate.

If you were misunderstood, perhaps you could state more clearly what you are trying to argue?

You are wrong that female readers are unable to understand how a BH feels. We fully understand. Now, so what? What matters is how they recover the marriage. And his tactic of endlessly bringing up the affair 3 years later will not recover the marriage much less make her desire him.


I dare say that Dr Harley is a MAN, my friend. I posted a Dr Harley article as my suggestion.

Yes he should.

So should those women like faithful follower, who take OC into their family. Some BWs here have fought for full custody of OC, and others like faithy are lovingly active in their care and upbringing.

Some men, like the stalwart of that forum, pops, have agreed with the "slogan" that �it is not the sperm that makes a father!� They are living proof of that "slogan", and you do them a disservice to turn this into an issue of women's lack of empathy.

I feel sickened at the thought that a BH might sever the relationship with the adult child that he has raised, if he find out at this late stage that he is not the bio father. Your post would appear to empathise with his feelings, despite your statement that "he choice of being a bad parent for the child is a grave sin and a terrible betrayal. The child is an innocent part! I am equally surprised by how a few male posters are able to completely disregard this part!"

Abandonment of the child is the logical outcome of your claim that the child is the reminder of the man's perceived failure.

A child is so much more than that.

I don't think you are being humble and I do think you are being provocative, but you have the right to post as you wish.

Frank, I don't think you understand that it is irrelevant. I would argue that we do understand. But an understanding is not relevant to the solution. The solution remains the same.

The goal here is to find solutions. Not to understand the depth of someone's pain.

I actually know plenty of happily married men whose lives have not been touched by an A who I am absolutely sure would disagree with you on this one.

How does understanding his pain change the solution? What is the relevance?

Oh, and my H is the one who completely believes that sperm has very little to do with being a father. These have been his words far more than they've been mine. I may be writing them, since he isn't much into posting on forums, but he is the one who I hear them from time and time again. I actually had some doubts about this in the beginning, but his actions toward our OC and the obvious love and devotion he shows toward her everyday has convinced me that he means what he says.

****edit****

sugar cane wrote:
I'm not addressing the issue of piggery.

I would just to ask, first, what makes you think that women do not understand how it feels for a man to doubt his paternity?

This is based on the responce from a number of excelent posters to posters in this situation. I have felt that they were not up to their usual standard of understanding and emphaty, and that they were quicker to expect the BS to get over it. This is my impression, it is not based on statistics or a systematic study.



Some women who have been BWs have to face an OC. The situations are not identical, but I imagine that the pain levels from each situation are similar.

For women who have experienced an OC, and taken it into the M to raise as her own, yes I believe the situation would be very similar.

Second, are you aware that some BWs feel the same doubts about their sexual appeal after finding out that their WH had sex with another woman? Are you aware that the same questions arise about what they did, and how often? Are you aware that "mental movies" cause trauma for some BWs as well as for BHs? Are you aware that some BWs live with the knowledge that sex for the affairees was better - because of the illicit nature of affairs?



Yes I am aware that women who have experienced this will have similar feelings as to a man who has experienced his wife to volunter acts with the OM as she refuses to do with him. Yet the advice to the man would be that he is not entitled to the same enthusiastic acts in his M. Would the BW in your scenario receive the same advice? I doubt it! She should be encouraged to work for a rewarding SF with her FWH.

Can you imagine how that affects the BW's side of the marriage - perhaps forever?

I realize that like I, the female posters I have written to here have a potential to understand more, particular in posts from female posters. Though some of them has impressed me deeply and I have them generally in a high regard. I probably can not read posts from female posters to the same depths that I can with male posters. Yet I think I understand much, though I am not as understanding as some of the posters to whom I addressed this thread. My hope was that they should understand some more of how men works. I now feel that this was not achieved.
But I will not categorize any one who would point my lack of understanding out to me as a female chauvinist!

This is disingenuous. You made a point and now are denying the point you made. There was much more after "of course she is" which was a facetious comment that indicated you most certainly are advocating she perform affair sex with him:


So you are equating the withholding of weird affair sex with withdrawing from the marriage. Which it is not. It is a false analogy. No one would ever advise her to stop talking to her husband because it would be bad for her marriage. But so would having unpleasant sex with her husband.

So please don't try and pretend that is not what you are advocating, because it is.

And if you aren't advocating that, then there is no point of contention. case closed!

I asked my DH if he had doubts about either of our children being his.....He looked at me like I had three heads and a tail and answered no.

Honestly, if a man is plagued by doubts about his kids' DNA and his W has never been unfaithful, that speaks way more to his mental instability than it does to her understanding of "the male perspective."

The people who helped me most in our recovery helped me not because they could commiserate with me about my pain or because they could pat DH and say, "Yeah, those hussy-fied WW's are trash." The people who helped us the most were the people who focused on OUR M instead of projecting their own hurts onto our situation. Many of them are on this forum, and they have never been a man or a WW....but they knew what was TRUE. And that truth is what helped.

"SF, for women happens first in the mind and second in the body. There are times when a woman can get "caught up" in an act of sex"

How is the BH supposed to accept that WW was able to have threesomes with the OM and not him?

How is the BH to not think that WW loved OM more or was turned on more by the OM to do things with the OM but not BH?

How is there to be just compensation if the WW won't do for the BH what she did for the OM?

For has it not been said that a BS should go to the places and get to do the things the WS did with the OP to reclaim those things back from the affair?

Just Compensation seems to be a myth.

I don�t advocate threesomes.

How is this BH to be made whole when his WW won�t give him what he wants?

He just wants what his WW gave the OM. (we don�t know what his WW did for the OM)

This BH will have to be convinced that wanting what WW did with the OM is not want he should want. That is going to be hard to do when all his injured mind is seeing the WW performing for the OM and her now telling BH no way.

To all!

So you still think the original letter from schoolbus was the best approach to take to a BH who has experienced this? Can you not see how provocative it must be for him to read?

Can you not see the parallel to my translated version?

Why ask?

Why not just present the test results just to burry the smallest doubt, even as aprotective measure against a future doubt?

I agree that the BW should strive for a rewarding sex life with her FWH, as should WW's with their BH's.

However, as I explained earlier, the path to a good sex life is NOT to demand that your wife perform sex acts she finds disgusting. That will not get the BH what he wants, but will instead make his wife averse to sex.

I don't think you get that part, Frank, because I don't think you are familiar with Marriage Builders concepts about sacrifice and POJA.

You don't have the slightest idea what Just compensation even means. Do you honestly believe that JC means doing things that are HARMFUL to the marriage? That is a ludicrous suggestion.

Show me WHERE Dr Harley ever says a WW should submit to a BH's sexual demands? That goes against everything MB teaches and against what it takes to recover a marriage.

No, I don't. All I can see is that you are being inflammatory and are provocative on threads where you have nothing positive to contribute. ***edit***and keep your biases to yourself.

Road, I think Luri asked her H that question because of this discussion. I don't think her H has any doubts about the paternity of their children or is asking for a DNA test.

Certainly you're not saying that every single married couple should have DNA tests performed on all of their children just to make sure they really belong to the H. That's taking things way overboard in situations where there has not been an A and the paternity of the children is not in question.

Care to explain this?

It depends on the time frame. And then there can be more than one PA over the years. Unfortunatly the BH only knows about the one but does not know about the other's. Along with a WW may honestly believe it could of been her BH's, but was the OM's.

Well, in Luri's case, her A happened when her children were older, so I don't think either one of them are questioning paternity. I think she was responding to Frank's assertion that all men, even those whose marriages have not been touched by an A, question the paternity of their children, and I just don't believe this is true. I know plenty of men who would just never even think to question paternity, because they have absolutely no reason to.

I'm not in favor of 3somes or forcing a WW to do sf that she does not want to do. How does the BH get convinced that what he thinks is fair not fair? And what about where a BS and a WS are told to go places and do things to reclaim things back from the OP?

This is why there can never be just compensation. The acts of an afair can never be undone. And WS's are allowed to refuse to do what they feel is wrong.

All the BH see's is the WW had no problems doing this for two years. Now because it's the BH wanting to get the same treatment as the OM the BH is wrong.

So the BH got sit there for two years while his WW is giving everything to the OM and he can't even get a kiss good bye on his way to work.

Now he's wrong to expect what his WW freely gave the OM?

His WW does not see this?

I think WW does not want to do it because it reminds her of the PA with OM. WW putting herself first again.

The goal is not to convince a BH of fairness if it involves sacrifice on the part of his wife. That won't build a happy marriage. The path to a happy marriage excludes sacrifice.



Of course he is if it disgusts her and involves acts that are unpleasant to her. Selfish demands and disgusting sex acts do not a happy, romantic marriage make.


Can I ask how it is that you have been on Marriage Builders for years and understand virtually nothing about the program? If it reminds her of the OM, then of course she shouldnt do it. No matter WHY it is unpleasant is irrelelvant. If it is unpleasant it should be avoided.

[TheRoad, I want to know how it is that you have been here for 3 years and know absolutely nothing about Marriage Builders. Do you even own a MB book?

edit

Seems to me a FWS avoiding being reminded of an affair is putting their BS first, not themselves.

(Of course, others have correctly pointed out that it doesn't matter why it is unpleasant; if it is unpleasant, it should be avoided. I'm starting to think Dr. Harley boils down almost all talking about feelings to "It bothers me when you ..." and "I'd like it if you ...")

Yes the WW says: "Even though I did it every day for two years with the other man, eagerly and hungrily I PREFER not to have that kind of sex with you, my husband."

How does the husband feel hearing this? Terrible.

If that makes him feel terrible, he doesn't have to stay married to her. In fact, it might good for him to move on and find someone who is willing to do things the way he likes. It seems to me in such a case this might often be advisable; to me my thinking is otherwise either he is torturing her by forcing her to engage in sex acts that she does not want to, or else she is torturing him by withholding from him something that she is willing to do under other circumstances.

Marriage Builders is not marriage at any cost.

Scotland raised the question of my quotes from the other thread. As I write in a post before the post with the quotes in it:

Frank wrote: Many a BH stay off these threads altogether and only a few newbee male posters offer sympathy for the BH pain and for the position he has been brought into by this particular betrayal. These posters do so in politically incorrect terms and they offer non-MB like advice So they are quickly brought to silence. In the next post I have collected some of the posts on this issue taken from outofkilters thread. The gender difference should be observed in these statements.

Comment: I believed at the time of writing that it should be obvious from these statements that the quotes were not in any way expressions of my point of view, but that this was an attempt to sum up parts of an other thread that was relevant for this one. I am sorry I didn't spell this out so that everybody would know. Perhaps then there would not have been so many DJs as to what my agenda really is.

Scotland raised the question of my quotes from the other thread. As I write in a post before the post with the quotes in it:

Frank wrote: Many a BH stay off these threads altogether and only a few newbee male posters offer sympathy for the BH pain and for the position he has been brought into by this particular betrayal. These posters do so in politically incorrect terms and they offer non-MB like advice So they are quickly brought to silence. In the next post I have collected some of the posts on this issue taken from outofkilters thread. The gender difference should be observed in these statements.

Comment: I believed at the time of writing that it should be obvious from these that the quotes were not in any way expressions of my point of view, but that this was an attempt to sum up parts of an other thread that was relevant for this one.

In the scenario I labelled B there is much pain and many issues on both the ww side of the fence and on the BS side. In this thread I pointed out that there is a lack of understanding from many female posters to the issues and pain on the BH side.

The responses have been very entrenched in the issues on the WW side of the fence and there have been no attempt to penetrate into the BH issues. And there have been no expression on empathy with the position he finds himself in. I am forced to conclude that my original assessment is a correct one. Many female posters are unable to see or empathise with all of the issues a BH in these two scenarios labelled A and B will have to struggle with.





While there have been little empathy nor willingness to try to see these scenarios from the BH side there have been many attacks on the messenger.


Every writer on this thread is familiar with the Harley concept of DJ. Still poster after poster claims to know there is a secret agenda with me to advocate point of views that I repeatedly have stated that I do not support. This is obviously an effective technique in any debate. It renders any position the other part want to communicate dead and worthless. The other part is forced to again and again protect against false accusations rather then talk about the topic at hand.


My next post will address some of your DJ that some posters so freely have judged me by.

So then, to answer some of your DJs:
I have never in this thread supported the view that any person should be forced to do any acts that sexual or otherwise that is against their will. Nor do I have any secret agenda of communicating this statement.

The DJ that have been thrown in my way are far to many to answer all of them. Melody Lane is one of the posters I have held in highest regard here on MB, thus I will answer hers:


Quoting ML:

This is disingenuous. You made a point and now are denying the point you made. There was much more after "of course she is" which was a facetious comment that indicated you most certainly are advocating she perform affair sex with him:

Answer: I suppose you mean that I advocate that she perform acts with him that is against her will. And this I certainly do not advocate. I recognize her right to refuse. The statements following the "of course she is" are intended to show that that if she should choose to exercise that right, her choice will have an impact on the remains of the M and the likelihood of recovery just like exercising other rights she does have.

The choice is hers to make. But the choice will have consequences. Speaking of a generalized type B kind of scenario so as not to be caught up un the case of Outofkilters and her BH I will say this:
I do agree that for her to be forced against her will into a certain kind of sexual acts will build resentment and impair the prospect of recovery.
The two of us apparently do not agree on the consequences of her choosing to refuse to engage with her BH in exciting and thrilling sex of the kind she willingly gave to the OM. I believe you hold on to the politically correct view that this will not influence the chance of recovery. I will say that if so you have no idea whatsoever on how the BH must perceive this choice of hers.

ML also wrote: �I don't think you get that part, Frank, because I don't think you are familiar with Marriage Builders concepts about sacrifice and POJA.�

And:

"Frank, I don't think you understand what it takes to recover a marriage if you think it is ok for her to engage in sexual acts with her husband that disgust her. I understand fully that he is hurt that she engaged in sex acts with him that she won't with her H. That really is irrelevant to what it takes to recover her marriage. You seem to believe the solution is for her to sacrifice on his behalf."


Answer: These statements is based on your DJ that I advocate that the WW should be forced to engage in acts against her will. Which is untrue.


And finally Maritalbliss wrote:
�unless you dwell in the underbelly of men who live and die by the best places to find their bait & tackle. You know, the same ones who say "WOMAN, GO GET ME A BEER! Is that you, Frank? Do you need your woman to go get you a beer? Maybe ***edit***

edited to add:
"Your ignorance astounds me. Return to post all you wish; I await your return. You are totally creeping me ***edit***

Answer:
These are the worst DJs I have found on this thread. Do you really believe that this forum is served well by disrespectful posts of this kind?

Markos wrote


In this I agree with you. Not all M should be saved. And as I see it there should be remorse on the WS part for a recovery to really be successful. In particular in cases with a WW and BH we have seen in these forums several cases where a spectacular plan A followed by recovery according to the MB principles did not produce the expected result. The lack of remorse and willingness to invest in recovery from the WW side undermined the efforts from the BH. Bob Pure and his FWW comes first to mind as an example of this.



Edited to add: This is not a comment on the actual case of Outofkilter's and her BH. But rather from the generic example B above. I do hope that Outofkilter's and her BH may overcome their struggles and recover their M.

Wow. Frank is correct at least in one point: Some of you women do NOT GET IT.

As a former BH, I was starved for physical touch, and SF. I would try to initiate, everything from hugs to sex, and got tepid responses for MONTHS. I was starving to death. I was open with her, honest, and she told me it turned her off because I was acting "like a little puppy dog" - too "needy".

I was starved for any scrap of love she tossed my way. Yes, she showed her love in other ways. But not in the ways that mattered - because my top ENs were different. A man who is being physically neglected by his wife loses energy, confidence, self-esteem, and, in my case, spiraled into depression and anxiety - a loss of zest for life.

She wasn't playful, she didn't flirt with me, the spark was totally gone. I felt emasculated, worthless as a man, alone, empty. It was awful.

When I found out that she'd sent hundreds of flirtatious, sexual emails to POSOM, and had been joyously having great sex with him, I can't describe how low it made me feel to know that everything I'd been needing and craving, while she was saying she wasn't in the mood, or it didn't feel right, she was falling over herself to GIVE to the OM.

It cuts you to the core. It stabs at a deep place, a place that you have hidden from everyone except your wife, and eviscerates you.

In our culture (post-feminism) and in THIS AND MANY threads here at MB, the guidance towards women sexually is "if it doesn't feel good, don't do it". Isn't that the most selfish thinking imaginable?

Guess what? I don't "feel like" getting up and going to work every morning. But I still do it. In fact, there are LOTS of things I don't "feel like" doing. But they need to be done, and since I'm a man of responsibility, I do them.

SF is a NEED. It is just as valid as any other need. What if I didn't "feel like" being O&H? Or if I didn't "feel like" having recreational companionship? What would your advice be then, ladies?

It would be along the lines of, "get over yourself; it's a need, and step up and make it happen."

This is NOT to say that I approve of the way that Outofkilter's husband is going about it. The way he is acting is, frankly, nightmarish. So my comment is an "in general" comment, not telling outofkilter that she's wrong and he's right.

In fact, I think Vibrissa summed up how a couple can handle varying levels of sexual desire nicely on HeadHeldHigh's thread, page 5.

Melodylane,

Books?
What books?
I don�t need no stinkin� books!

I learnt everything I know from one of the best, you, but you it appears you have done a bad job.

I think I read for about two years before I first posted.

Many a times here on MB a WS has been told to man up for the team and do what has to be done during recovery.

Many a time a BS has been told to reclaim their spouse by doing what and where the WS and OP went and did.

How good is the advice when it can't apply to all situations equally?

Even in a marriage were there was no affair all forms of SF need to be freely consented to.

On the other hand.

Why should a WW get away with doing her OM for two years while denying SF to her BH. Then say I done with the OM now and will have SF with you BH but I get to chose what SF we do. Then the WW gets to deny to the BH what she freely gave to the OM?

You and others refuse to see this BH�s feelings on this point.

Why should the BH have to accept he�s not going to get what the WW gave the OM for all those years?

Why should this WW expect her BH to take less then what she gave the OM?

How is a BH to be able to understand it�s ok for his WW to deny him what she gave the OM?

I think outofkilter has not comeback here because she was not getting unanimous support on denying her BH what she gave OM. There are more problems then how she did the OM. I hope she calls the Harley�s.

MB way is to find a solution that takes feelings of both into account.

Could we please try to find that kind of solution here for situation where WW has made things with OM but does not want to do these anymore (her feelings) and BH wants to do these things otherwise he is inferior to OM (his feelings).

My opinion is that trying to convince BH that his WW was just out of character during A will not work. How do I know that it was out of character and not the enormous attraction towards OM which I'll never achieve? How can I believe my WW in this?

Disregarding or ridiculing BH feelings about the situation is not the solution and I guess that was the point Frank tries to make.

Arpeggi,

I had that happen to me, for months also. I felt the same way as you did; "eviscerated" describes it well.

I have read many of the flirty texts and emails that used pornographic language to describe what the affairees would like to do to each other. I have also seen loving, emotional words from my H to OW such as "I love you" and "the only reason I am in my marriage is for my kids".

It would never occur to me to claim that some men on this forum DO NOT GET IT because they are men and do not understand how it feels to be the sex-slave wife and the happy, domesticated mother of his kids reading this.

Where do such competitive claims lead us? What is the value in them? I can see none.

No woman here is arguing that a wife should not be a willing an enthusiastic sexual partner to her H simply because she does not feel like it. Dr Harley advises this and suggests resources for women to use to explore the issue of sexual fulfilment, and the women on this thread (and on MB generally) are here to learn and practice Dr Harley's concepts. We do not tell each other not to have sex if we do not feel like it. We discuss how to meet the EN of sexual fulfilment and how to create the conditions that enable us to "feel like it".

This statement is silly, childish and untrue. You do yourself no service by making ridiculous, untrue statements.

Women posters who are on board with Dr Harley's programme always make the point that you make; that all ENs are equally valid and that women do not have the right to deny the EN of sexual fulfilment. We point out also that it would be foolish to deny this EN if they want their husbands to feel love for them.

Also, I doubt that you would get the crude response to just "step up and make it happen" if you did not feel like O&H or RC. I have seen threads here giving the most helpful suggestions about how a couple can find RC that is mutual enjoyable, or why openness and honesty are necessary, especially after an affair, and how this EN can be safely met. Finally, if a man did didn't feel like going to work, posters would take time and trouble to explore why he hated his work and what might be alternative sources of occupation and income.

I have found posters here to be the most kind and painstaking people giving help on all subjects that one could ever hope to meet.

But since it is outofkilter's thread that is sparking Frank's and your comments, and since women are advising the wife NOT to engage in practices that her BH seems to want to humiliate and punish her with, then you ARE "telling outofkilter that she's wrong and he's right".

I 1000% agree with this.....

and I'm willing to bet that the BH in this case didn't jump out of the gate with his DEMANDS...more likely they are coming after rejection after rejection after rejection, more of a build up of FRUSTERATION....having to deal with that after his dealing wiht his WW boinking SOMEONE else...breaking her VOWS....poor guy

Not

ps...I am woman, hear me ROAR.....

Frank, this has nothing to do with being politically correct, something I am not.

And yes we do disagree with the consequences of her refusing to have a type of sex with her H that she finds disgusting, because you disagree with Dr Harley. Dr Harley is a man, Frank. A MAN. So keep that in mind before you dismiss his opinion.

And his opinion is that sex MUST be enjoyable to BOTH partners. She does not want to perform sex acts with her H that she performed with the OM because she is now disgusted by those acts. If her sex life with her own H is disgusting, and she proceeds to have disgusting sex with him she will soon have a big fat aversion to having sex at all. People do not do unpleasant things for long.

The solution is to find a way to make love that makes them BOTH HAPPY. Making one person happy or making sacrifices for the other will lead to resentment which will harm the marriage.

And I will repeat Dr Harley's message again: women need 2 things to be present in order to be willing to have sex: an emotional attachment to the man and the prospect of enjoyment.

So see, Frank, the consequences of her having sex with him in a way she does not enjoy is not the solution and it will not get him what he wants. It will get him just the opposite, a wife who has an aversion to sex.

Do you even own a single Marriage Builders book? Or have you just been reading posts here for 3 years?

"Even in a marriage were there was no affair all forms of SF need to be free freely consented to.
No. No. No. This will not build a happy marriage! SF that is not consensual will cause anger, anxiety and resentment. Some spouses kill their spouse because of this sexual abuse! "

YES YES YES

Need to be freely consented to means that they both want to do "it", whatever "it" maybe. Does not mean they must reach an agreement, or just do it because the other wants to. Even in a marriage without prior infidelity.

Again try to convince me why this BH will be convinced why he should not get what the OM got.

No books

Read all the articles put up on this site by the Harley's. Been here for 5 years. Haven't posted for 5.

"Again try to convince me why this BH will be convinced why he should not get what the OM got."

This BH is hung up on that point. I think threesomes are bad. However whatever this WW did the OM did not hold a gun to her head and force her.

She did it.
She kept going back for more.
Then she kept doing it after her BH knew what she was doing with the OM for another year.
How bad could it of been to do it all that time then continue after her BH found out?

This is what her BH is thinking. Change his mind. What words do you have that will make the BH see the error of his ways?

I see Frank's point as well.

It's a perception of one's value. If the WW valued the OM enough to do certain things, then when she denies those same things to her BH she is saying with her actions that she valued him far more than her BH.

So folks can try to argue red herrings such as someone should not do things that disgust them. The problem with that argument is the WW has already proven the act doesn't disgust her. After all, if it disgusted her, then she would not have engaged in that act with the OM.

Since she's engaged in that act with the OM, the argument, especially if it was more than a one time event with respect to that act, falls short of being credible.

So I tend to agree, if she freely and without reservation gave something to the OM, but refuses to offer the same to her husband who has made respectful requests for that act, then she is simply acting in a selfish fashion.

Even if she doesn't think she is, the burden of proof is upon her to prove to her betrayed husband that she is not being selfish and is fully committed to meeting his needs and avoiding love busters.

That's a consequence of her decision to have an affair, and she has to demonstrate in a fashion that will be judged (rightly, not the DJ kind of judgment) acceptable to her husband. He is the only one who gets to decide what his perceptions are. No one can, nor should tell him his perceptions are faulty.

If he observed his wife do A with the OM, but refuses his requests for A, then her burden is to prove to her husband how refusing A with him is a loving act, designed to meet his needs and avoid the destruction of romantic love.

That's the bottom line. We can argue about who gets whom, but the truth is that if a WW did some act with an OM that she's refused to do with her husband, especially if it was a recurrent event in the affair that she approached with enthusiasm, then she should expect that her husband will take this as she doesn't value him over the OM.

Indeed, it looks selfish on her part.

Frank:

I understand your POV here. And it isn't limited to just men feeling this way. Women, can and do, wonder why they can't get the same thing that the OM/OW got.

Be it huge amounts of text messages/emails (EN= Conversation) or sex acts that were never given to the betrayed spouse.

As a former OM, I can tell you that I pushed the OW to perform things that she may or may not have been willing to do. She was interested in pleasing ME, and when I was in that A, I was interested in pleasing ME as well, and if it degraded her, it didn't matter because I was HAPPY. (And, it was pretty plain vanilla stuff that we did, however the locations were always "someplace else"...)

And I feel that it is a reasonable expectation that a betrayed spouse GET what the wayward spouse gave away freely. (Be it TM/conversation/affection or SF) IF the wayward one trys to hide behind the cloak of "it reminds me of the affair" then they are using an excuse to keep the A alive. To keep something "Special" between the affair partners. And THAT is the continuing affront to the betrayed spouse every day that the refusal is given.

And this isn't just about degrading sex acts either. No one should submit to degrading activities whether betrayed or formerly wayward. It does NOT build romantic love, as Dr H states clearly.

BUT having submitted or provided them, to someone OUTSIDE of your marriage, and then, in order to protect what was "special" in the A, NOT to even express the willingness to do them with the betrayed spouse is a slap in the face.

A marriage ravaged by infidelty has a LOT of hurdles to clear to get to "normalcy" A betrayed spouse who KNOWS that the wayward spouse provided unlimited amounts of something that is important to the betrayed spouse (affection, conversation, SF, admiration) and then refuses to do the same to the betrayed spouse, should be castigated, not coddled.

LG

TheRoad, you don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

Frank, I want to emphasize that the goal here is to have a sex life that satisfies BOTH the H and the wife. No one is trying to deprive the husband. But he must be satisfied in a way that pleases HER.

That is achieved by finding ways to make love that satisfy both. If she agrees to his demands to make love in way that disgusts her, she will soon be avoiding all sex with him and there goes their sex life. He will not be happy if she finds sex so unpleasant that she avoids him.

A better solution is to find a way to meet his need of SF that satisfies BOTH.

Here is an excerpt from Dr Harley's article on Sexual Aversion:


Now, in the case of outofkilter, her H uses abusive tactics and bullies her and DEMANDS that she make love to him in the same way as she did in her affair. She has explained to him how those disgust her, yet he persists. Dr Harley addresses this abusive tactic in the same article:

Sexual Aversion

This is what has happened in her marriage. His demands have made the situation worse, not better. This couple is not in love because they have no program of recovery. Because they are not in love, the FWS is not sexually attracted to the H, which rightly upsets him. This causes him to lovebust her, which makes the situation worse.

The solution is to follow this program and fall in love again.

A better solution would be to do MORE THRILLING sexual acts with her H than she did with the OM. She should not bring the degradation of her affair into her nice, clean marriage if it disgusts her. What would make it thrilling is if they were both in love. THEY ARE NOT.

And that is the key, they have to restore the love to the marriage. When a woman is in love, her willingness to try new things goes way up.

I agree that this husband should be sexually fulfilled, but he won't be sexually fulfilled for long if she doesn't enjoy the sex. It is imperative that they BOTH enjoy SF.

I disagree with this. Waywards do lots of things while high on the affair that are utterly disgusting to them when the high wears off. If they aren't disgusted, then they probably are not really recovered and don't feel any remorse. I did things while an active alcoholic that did not disgust me then, but greatly disgust me now.

But I have to ask: what kind of a husband would WANT their wife to perform a sex act with him that he knew she disliked?

Yes they are locked into a circular game of tag. I couldn't of stated what you said any better."

So will you again try to explain how this BH will be convinced why he should not get what the OM got."

This BH is hung up on that point. I think threesomes are bad. However whatever this WW did the OM did not hold a gun to her head and force her.

She did it.
She kept going back for more.
Then she kept doing it after her BH knew what she was doing with the OM for another year.
How bad could it of been to do it all that time then continue after her BH found out?

This is what her BH is thinking. Change his mind. What words do you have that will make the BH see the error of his ways?

I thank you in advance melody.

No one is suggesting she do something that disgusts her. However, almost everyone is saying they don't buy the idea that something she did with the OM was something that disgusts her.

Unless it was done at gunpoint, she was a willing participant. The burden is rightly on her to convince her BH in a fashion that he and he alone gets to judge if he believes her, that he should buy the idea that while she freely offered that act to the OM, he should accept that that very act disgusts her.

I'm certainly not saying she should do it. I'm saying that she has to convince him in a way that is credible to him that that is the case.

It's going to be a tough sell, and her BH may rightly not buy that argument and simply see it as continued selfishness on her part.

Remember, ultimately her BH is the one who judges if any particular act is more or less THRILLING than any other act. So she runs the risk of not being able to do what you suggest by keeping things off the table. Especially if she willingly engaged in such acts with the OM.

So I'm not suggesting she force herself. But I am suggesting that she has put her marriage at risk and continues to put it at risk if she refuses something to her BH that she freely gave to the OM.

Melody, so let's take a look at what you say because it greatly supports my argument.


This is the burden the WW faces. The BH is keying in on this fact. If she's always refused a particular act to her BH, but freely gave it to the OM, her BH is going to conclude she never and still doesn't love him, but loved the OM enough to try this very act.

So what is she going to do to convince her BH that she loves him more while continuing to say no to something she freely said yes to the OM.

He will conclude that either she doesn't love him, or that she's simply selfish.

You've written the very piece that supports what I'm saying.

Remember, I've never once said she should engage or not engage. I've simply presented how her actions likely will be perceived and you've filled in a key part of my argument.

The BH will not perceive that he is loved more than the OM if she continues to reject him for something she freely gave the OM. The BH will perceive that she loved the OM more and may NEVER have loved him, due to the very words you wrote that I quoted for emphasis.

So understand, I'm not saying she should. What I'm saying is she needs to understand that her actions will not be viewed as loving by her BH.

And as I've said time and time again, the burden of proof for her love and protection is 100% on her.

Because.....my A was 4 1/2 years ago and my children are 12 and 14. I will not be taking a blood test, not because I had two other secret flings that no one knows about, but because A) I did not have an A 15 or 13 years ago and B) my DH has the character, the strength, and the ability to forgive enough that he doesn't need me to do that.

If DH wants to question the parentage of his kids, then I will move heaven and earth to settle his doubts, but I'll be damned before some stranger who doesn't know me is going to imply that my DH's children are not his just because THEY can't brush off the giant chip on their shoulder.

I was weak and afraid for a long time. I'm not anymore. I know who I am and so does my DH - the only man whose opinion counts.

I don't remember anyone telling a man or woman to do what and where if they hated it, though, or if it was a trigger for memories of the OP. It's all subject to POJA.


A recovered marriage where the wayward has no say in things after "recovery" is not a recovered marriage.

And who would want that? You messed up, so now you are my slave? I don't want a slave; I want to be IN LOVE FOR LIFE.


He doesn't have to accept it. If the lack of these sex acts is a dealbreaker for him, he can and should divorce his wayward wife. If the terms of recovery that she can offer are not acceptable to him, he doesn't have to accept it. He should not attempt to build a marriage on his resentment; that is not fair to anyone involved, least of all himself.

I only posted to OOK's thread because I felt strong enough to try to be helpful. But I will NOT post on a forum where some man who is bitter at his own wife is going to question how many affairs I REALLY had and whether the children who have their father's eyes/ mouth, mannerisms, etc. are really his because obviously since I strayed 4 years ago nothing I say or do has any value. maritalbliss and Mel and writer....thank you. But I'm not going to be called a whore by someone I. Never. Betrayed. I'm out.

Bingo.

I think the problem here is an erroneous assumption that the WW did what she did with the OM out of love, when in fact, A's have very little to do with being in love. Certainly, the wayward believes they are in love with the OP, but love involves many things that are simply not present in an A. The WW is not acting out of true love when she does things that she would normally find repulsive and disgusting with the OM. She is acting out of desperation to hold onto her addiction, and she will often do things she would never normally do in order to assure that she continues to get her "fix" from the OM. That has absolutely nothing to do with love.

And according to the Love Bank model, who is it who is responsible for taking actions that can create the environment for her to feel in love with him?

If she does not feel in love with him, he does need to reach exactly the conclusions you are saying, and he needs to act on that fact. He needs to be very concerned with whether or not she feels in love with him. And he needs to accept the truth of her feelings, not get mad at her for not feeling the way he wishes she would.

I found an old post that Dr Harley wrote about a pastor who was "demanding" that his wife give him oral sex [the actual thread was lost in the October 2009 board crash]:

Lemme ask ya this......

If a WS robbed banks and went on a killing spree while she was in the disgusting and inexcusable fog....does she need to "prove" she loves BH by robbing some banks and shooting some people with him??? That question sounds ridiculous because it is ridiculous. I didn't have any 3somes. I didn't have anal sex or wear costumes or have OM dress in a diaper or whatever. What I DID do was sleep with him....and that fact alone is perverse. It wasn't the technique that made my A perverse....it was the fact that I had one.

I have been thinking a lot about DH lately, and the fact that he stayed. The fact that he stayed is in itself amazing, but it wasn't the mere fact that he stayed that helped us recover. It was WHY he stayed. He stayed because he was able to practice forgiveness, because he loves me, because he made a promise to me and to God and he wanted to keep it, because he believed in his heart of hearts that we could survive and thrive. He didn't stay so that he could be a perpetual victim or so that he could have the satisfaction of punishing me anytime he wanted or because he wanted a tangible and constant reminder of how morally superior he is. If THAT was why he stayed....I don't think either of us would have really recovered.

Again....honestly.....the more of this thread I read the more thankful I am for my DH.

Bingo!! That is a correct conclusion. She doesn't love her H. That is what I have been saying. So the first step is to RESTORE love to the marriage. That is called recovery.

So you are blaming him for the affair?

I doubt her affair made him feel loved. Therefore, if the WW wants recovery, she has to do what it takes to make him feel loved.

That doesn't mean he doesn't have to do those things that would lead her to feel loved. However, once she is the WW, I think she has to go first and go without expectation of anything until she has proven that she is a safe and loving partner.

If she doesn't want to do that, then she is at risk of losing her marriage.

This gets said alot here. Note, though, that Dr. Harley's model is behavioural, while the above statements put a moral/ethical gloss on things (it can't be love because the surrounding conditions are not consistent with an ethical view of what true love is.) Whereas, MB simply says if your LB is full because your ENs are being met you will be more willing to meet the other person's ENs and even enjoy doing so in that context. So, it's perfectly understandable why a particular BH might use the shorthand (she loved the OM more) to describe a situation where the OM clearly was meeting some ENs that BH does not appear to be givn that WS is now unwilling to do the same things.

No arguments. I'm simply suggesting she will have a steeper and longer climb if she offered something to the OM that she has refused her BH.

EE, how can she prove something that doesn't exist? She is not in love with her husband! And how can she love a man who makes selfish demands and angry outbursts? Those are lovebusters that have destroyed her feelings for her H.

The solution is for both to STOP the lovebusters, meet each others emotional needs to create romantic love.


http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5013_qa.html

I would say that it is "LOVE," but it an unsustainable love because of the inherent problems in an affair. It is like a crack high. Crack addicts "love" crack when they are under the influence of crack. But that high quickly wears off when reality sets in. And when a crackhead recovers he doesn't still "love" crack, because a more sustainable love [a healthy recovery] has taken its place.

This is why it is so important to create a romantic relationship in the marriage after an affair. It fills a gap left by the affair.

Who said the hypothetical BH's demands are selfish? I clearly said he made a respectful request.

So the BH has made a respectful request for something both prior to the affair and once again after the affair and his WW's willing participation in the behavior is well known.

So he's made a respectful request for this act, no selfish demands at all.

How is he supposed to perceive continued refusal?

What do you suggest the WW do to rebuild romantic love given her actions are telling her BH that she doesn't love him?

As long as she continues to reject his respectful request for something she freely gave the OM, then she is making her task to prove her love even more difficult.

Not every request for something in the bedroom is a selfish demand. And certainly not in the scenario I clearly spelled out.

So let's go with the BH made a respectful request since that's clearly what I said before.

You know what is funny about this? When DH and I went through hysterical bonding, I felt - for the first time in our M - completely uninhibited. I poured out the kind of passion on him that I had always wanted to. DH asked me after a few weeks if I was doing X because I had done it with OM. The answer was no. I had not done that with OM. What was DH's response? He was relieved. He told me as we lay there holding each other that he couldn't bear the thought that I might be reliving with him something that OM and I had done. This led to him asking me questions and me giving him a verbal and written detailing of every single thing that had gone on during the A. But the funny thing is....he didn't want to be some OM reminder. He didn't want to think that that me (TMI alert) tying his hands together with one of my scarves and ravaging him was something I had learned with OM. Because he didn't want ANYTHING we shared to be tainted by my A.

Since he is the only BH I have any really close and intimate experience with, I guess the thought that a BH would want his FWW to list every act she did with OM and then proceed to do them all with him seems foreign. My DH didn't WANT to have some sexual connection to the OM. He just wanted US. He wanted US, he wanted our marriage, and he wanted to be together to raise the children that are absolutely and undeniably his.

I also want to shre this: 2 years after D-Day, DH asked me to please try to find a Christian counselor to talk to. Because he couldn't bear to watch me keep wearing that scarlet A. He didn't view me through the lens of spring/summer 2006....and it broke his heart that I still viewed myself that way. He wanted me to see myself as he saw me....the woman he loved who wasn't perfect but who had shown that she could get up after a terrible fall and go on to do right.

And THAT is a big part of why I am so thankful for him, and why - even with the challenges we still face from time to time - I know I will never meet another man of such character, true manliness, and grace as my DH.

So maybe the reason I have trouble understanding the typical male point of view on this one is because my amazing DH is anything but typical.

Its ok to make a respectful request. But that was not the case in outofkilters situation. He made selfish demands coupled with disrespectful judgments and angry outbursts. And just because a spouse makes a respectful request does not mean the other spouse wants to do it. And in this case, she most certainly does not want to bring acts she finds disgusting into the marriage.


He should percieve that she is not in love with him and commit to resolving that problem.


She doesn't love him, though. So his perception is accurate. The solution is to work together to CREATE romantic love. And making sacrifices on her part WILL NOT CREATE ROMANTIC LOVE. So, if he wants to be loved, he should avoid demanding that she make sacrifices for him.


But she doesn't love him. So how will she "PROVE" something that does not exist?

Again, who says the guy who wants the refused act is any different that your BH? If a guy wants a certain act, because he's experienced it before and enjoyed it a great deal, and his wife doesn't provide it, but provided it freely to the OM, then after the affair, he still knows he liked it and he now knows that the WW freely gave it to another man.

I think every BH wants to know that his wife is totally and 100% his and only his.

The differences are in how the man perceives that state.

The affair doesn't change his preferences. But the affair certainly puts his WW in a new light.

Please note, I've never said she has to perform the act. If she is really repulsed, then she shouldn't. However, the natual consequence of the prior behavior is it's going to be more difficult for her to prove this to her husband given the fact that she's freely offered this up to the OM.

So you have a BH who has not made selfish demands nor had angry outbursts being told NO to something he's respectfully requested, and he seriously doubts not only that his wife loves him, but that she's ever loved him at all.

Now folks can present all sorts of facts, such as affairs are addictions, and what not, and those of us familiar with Dr H's work will understand those facts at the level facts are understood.

But marriages also have a feelings component.

For years I've been told that I'm too logical, that I need to consider the feelings of others. I accept that. So now that I present the feelings aspect of the BH, I'm given all sorts of facts.

I just want to scream and pull that last bit of hair that's still on my head out

Folks can present facts all day long. I know from personal experience that feelings are largely impervious to facts and logic.

We see proof of that everyday on this board. Folks like lurioosi's BH was betrayed, yet he loved his wife enough to outweigh the fact that she betrayed him.

I probably had more to say, but my phone rang and I lost my train of thought. I reserve the right to revise and amend my remarks

I need to expand on the answer I gave to this question. He should percieve 2 things: a) she is not in love with him and b) since she WANTS to be in love with him she will not agree to do sex acts she finds disgusting

If she agrees to perform these acts she finds disgusting, she will develop an aversion. So that having sex with him will actually be a LOVEBUSTER for her. She will grow to associate bad feelings with having sex with him. It will drain any romantic feelings she has for him.

I would refer back to this Harley quote about sacrifice:

outofkilter's scenario? This is a thread started by someone named Frank57. What does outofkilter have to do with anything I've said here?

That is all we are saying. But the solution is not perform the same degrading acts in the marriage, but to come up with a solution that satisfies BOTH.

And it cannot be overemphasized that falling in love will bring an exciting new dynamic to the marriage. And in the marriage, this love is sustainable, whereas it was not in the sleazy affair.

]

He needs to face the fact that his wife HAS fallen out of love with him in many cases. The fact that she would say NO to a specific request that will cause lovebusters is a good thing, not a bad thing.

THAT BEING SAID, it is important that she offer up something as a response to his specific request that makes him just as happy. And it must be something that makes BOTH HAPPY, not just one.

Frank's scenario B is about the outofkilter thread.

lurioosi, I am so glad you mentioned this, because it has been my experience on this board that BS's are very leery of the WS bringing in adultery tainted sex acts to the marriage bed. That is very disturbing to most BS.

I understand the issue is about her being willing to do things with the OM she wouldn't do with the BH, but it seems to me the best solution would be for her to do things with the BH that she wouldn't do with the scumbucket.

Her married sex life should not be an emulation of 2 pigs rutting in the pig pen, it should be BETTER. It should be SPECIAL.

My wife will freely tell you that her Giver ruined our marriage by saying YES to things she was not happy about and accepting situations she was not happy about. Not just sexual issues, but almost everything in general.

So for me it's a complete Love Buster when I find out that my wife has been saying yes to something that makes her unhappy. I want her to say no and be honest about how things make her feel. I have always felt that way, but even moreso now.

Coming out of my self imposed exile to respond to this above quote.

Replace BH with BW. Replace OM with OW. That is ME ME ME. I was devastated to a level that apparently the men on this thread cannot fathom. SF is my top EN. It has been for a long, long time. I was traumatized to a point of having PTSD due to my H continuing his LTA with his 2nd OW long past multiple ddays. What traumatized me the most?

1. His refusal to have SF with me (I had no idea he was still in the A at the time and this continued even after the PA ended)
2. His lack of "being there" when we did have the rare SF.
3. Lack of affection
4. his confession later that he continued the PA long after he stopped caring about xOW because...HE ENJOYED IT!!!
5. Knowing that some wh*re had the son I was supposed to have and had prayed for

Yet, after all that I have the OC in my home on a near weekly basis. I am loving and caring with him. He is treated well in my home and it shows in his behavior toward me.

How is it that just because I am a woman, I cannot be "viscerated" by my FWH's enjoyment of his sexual experience with the xOW?

How is that just because I know the OC is not mine my hurt is any LESS than a man raising his FWW's OC?

Frank, you will often see us BW's on the pregnancy board encourage BH's dealing with an OC? Why? Because nearly 100 percent of us would happily raise our H's OC if there was no OW in the picture.

I agree, and I think in the present edition of Surviving an Affair, Dr. Harley uses the terminology the same way. (But I haven't read the whole thing, and he's revising it, anyway.)

I think some waywards have been helped by contrasting what they felt with their affair partners against genuine sustainable caring love, and I agree that the moral dimension is important for them to recognize.

But I've never heard that betrayeds need to be hammered by telling them that what the wayward felt was not love.

I am sorry Mel, but you are wrong. I am in perfect agreement with your quote fro Harley. It is your flawed perception of what I say that is in effect.

You wrote:

Again I am in perfect agreement whit what is said here. Again it is your DJ as to what I mean that is flawed

What I said is that the BS will interpret her decision to refuse these acts as a lack of love and rejection of him. I have all the time said she has the right to make this choice.Thus this choice will have consequences that are detrimental to recovery.

I think your recovery is wonderful. But, am I remembering correctly that SF is not a huge EN for your husband? To the point where it actually makes you frustrated quite regularly? I guess I'm suggesting that another reason you may find it difficult to relate to the opinions posted here is that your H has an unusual alignment of ENs as opposed to something fundamentally more sound about his character than some of the men posting here.

No, I did not misunderstand you at all. You said:
And I have addressed this. You don't understand what constitutes recovery so I have explained what it will take. And that means NEVER agreeing to perform sex acts that one finds disgusting.


He should interpret that she doesn't love him. She is probably not in love. So that would be an accurate interpretation.

BUT, doing acts that disgust her will not restore that love, it will only cause more erosion.

If the man is not logical enough to understand this, then he has more problems that can be resolved here.

The ultimate goal here is a happy, romantic sex life for BOTH. It should be enjoyable to her and most especially HIM, but the man has to be logical to understand to asking her to perform pig pen sex that disgusts her is not an act of love and will not restore the love in the marriage.


I agree that she has a right to make this choice. And if she agreed to something that repulses her that "choice" will have detrimental consequences to recovery. Unless he ENJOYS having sex with him, she should not do it otherwise it will cause an aversion. NOT SMART.

mel wrote:


Amen to all of that. But it will take two to achieve this. The WW will have to be on board.

It was built off of that, citing it as an example.

Yet even that fact doesn't change the emotional aspect of this. I agree,use the POJA, come to a mutual agreement.

Part of the deficit the WW has built in the love bank is that she freely gave to the OM and now is saying she cannot offer the same to her BH.

A barrier to the POJA is his perception she's not negotiating in good faith. Citing the POJA, while correct is too simple. The POJA is unlikely to work if he doesn't believe she is negotiating with the objective to build romantic love, as one who wants to protect the marriage and meet his emotional needs.

So how does she convince her husband that the POJA is the answer, that rebuilding romantic love is the answer when she continues to do things that tell him that she's still selfish and not looking out for the best interests of the marriage. Not to mention, her previous acts prove that she cannot be trusted to keep her word. The affair casts doubt on any agreements she makes via the POJA. After all, if she can discard her vows so easily, how does he trust her if she engages in the POJA?

The only tool at his disposal is to watch and see if she offers extra-ordinary protections for the marriage, if she is meeting his emotional needs, and finally if she is avoiding love busters.

I don't think a BH will even consider the POJA until he's assured she's a safe spouse.

So while I agree that the POJA and the MB program is the best answer, what has been described here is a barrier created by the actions of the WW to convince her BH that MB is a worthwhile program.

On one hand, you have the program talking about meeting needs, avoiding LB's and building romantic love. But on the other hand, you have a WW who to this point has done the exact opposite and is now telling her betrayed husband, that while he should engage in this process to rebuild romantic love which will result in him getting his needs met, she will not meet a need for him in the fashion he wants even though she did that with the OM.

Again, that's the hurdle she faces. How does she present a credible case with this scenario in play?

The fact that she did that for the OM makes her less credible in his eyes, making him even less likely to embrace MB.

Frank, you continually accuse me of making "DJs" but I would point out that I am not trying to fill your love bank. You are not my husband. Nor is it a "DJ" to disagree with you.

And this is why as a BH in the past, I would give a WW about a nanosecond to prove that she actually loves me should I ever be betrayed again.

If she is unwilling or unable to do this, I would simply cut her from the team.

Why?

No love.

If she didn't really love me before, or doesn't love me enough to avoid an affair and make respectful requests, that are delivered in a fashion that I understand completely, then she's not really worth additional effort on my part.

So she would have about a nanosecond to prove that she loves me should I discover she's in an affair.

She should not offer "the same," she should be offering BETTER. Why should she offer disgusting pig pen sex that reminds her of some scumbag OM?

However, she is not likely to offer him anything when he continually verbally abuses her and makes selfish demands. \

The worst thing she would do is have sex with him when they are in a state of CONFLICT. When that happens, she will begin to associate bad feelings with the sexual act.

Sexual Aversion

She should meet his needs, he should meet her needs, and they should both stop lovebusting.

How can she prove something that doesn't exist? Women typically love one man at a time. What usually happens in an affair scenario is the WW has fallen out of love with her H.

And that is what the MB recovery program addresses: the restoration of love to the marriage.

Mel,

Are you being obtuse on purpose? I clearly said the BH is not making selfish demands or engaging in angry outbursts. Yet you continue to cite these things.

If you are unwilling or unable to stop twisting what I've said, then I'll leave you to argue with yourself.

I clearly did not cite a scenario as you've described. If you want to argue with yourself, feel free. But don't write back to me with your scenarios as if what I've said bears any resemblance to your argument with yourself.

Take your straw man argument and knock it down on your own. You cannot knock down what I've said by writing something different, making it appear to be my words, then knocking it down.

Now, if you want to address the scenario I've presented. You know, the one where the BH is not making demands, nor is engaging in AO's, then I'd be happy to discuss it with you.

But I've clearly said, more than one, in English even, that I'm not talking about that.

Do you understand?

I have already addressed this TWICE and you ignored my answer. Here is one post where I touched on your scenario where the BH made a "thoughtful request" :

Sucks to be her.

Remember, I've tried Dr H's plan to recover from an affair, and failed. I worked with Steve H, did my assignments faithfully, filled out my surveys, tried to engage her, tried to even get her to speak with Steve H, eliminated what I thought were the LB's since I got no feedback from her, tried to meet what I thought were her EN's since I got no feedback from her.

I exposed the affair, including the OM's wife, my XWW's parents, family, friend, her employer where she met the OM, the OM's employer, and beyond.

So one cannot say that I didn't give the program a good faith effort.

The sheer effort and the typical results are why I would never try to win a WW back again. I've tried the program, coached by Steve H and I'd never try to win a WW back again.

So I stand by my statement, if I should ever discover my wife is unfaithful, she has exactly a nanosecond to prove that she loves me. If she doesn't love me, then it's her loss.

I have nothing to lose other than someone who doesn't love me. What loss is that?

She would be the one to lose, she loses a husband who loved her.

So if what you say is true, that she doesn't love me, then what am I really losing if I close the door on her? The answer is I'm not losing much.

Let me state it AGAIN so you see it clearly:


That is the answer. Just because a spouse makes a respectful request does not mean the other spouse should do it if it is a sacrifice. If she agrees to something that repulses her, she will soon stop doing it.

Does that answer your question?

This is the burden the WW faces. The BH is keying in on this fact. If she's always refused a particular act to her BH, but freely gave it to the OM, her BH is going to conclude she never and still doesn't love him, but loved the OM enough to try this very act.

Mel wrote:

Quote

Bingo!! That is a correct conclusion. She doesn't love her H.

I am happy you have now reached this conclusion. It was the whole topic and motivation of this thread to make you and others understand that this is how the BH will perceive her choice. And that meeting him like suggested in Schoolbus's letter would add wounds to his injury. But I was not as provocative as you are, I just said he would perceive her choice in this way. Not that she did not love him. Yet you and others spent half this thread labaling me with DJs and claiming I wanted to force the WW to perform degrading sexual acts because i said this very thing that you now said here.

Does this mean that you will call back the DJs you have labeled me with?, or will you persist in your untrue statement that my agenda is to force the WW to perform degrading sexual acts?

I don't think that what you and I have said will contribute much to this thread, faithy.

Frank's argument is that there is a sex difference, with men understanding each other's feelings of "evisceration", and women posters standing up for other women doing "what feels right".

Threads like these only cause the sexual division around affairs that they seek to illuminate. They begin by a man saying "men have it worse than women when it comes to betrayal; BWs don't know how lucky they are; WWs are the very devil", and not your story or mine or anyone else's will change that view.

The result, for me, is disappointment that anti-affair campaigners - BSs, FWSs and neither (like Frank) - line up to compare hurts, instead of supporting ALL the hurting people on here.

The FWW whose situation started this debate has an H who wants her to participate in 3-ways. She will not do that. Men here are arguing that her refusal is a detrimental to her H's personal and marital recovery and is causing him to not love her.

Walk away, faithy! This thread is a pointless, divisive indulgence.

I did answer that. I said feelings are largely impervious to facts.

I said that she can deliver that message just as you've said, and it may not make a bit of difference to her BH due to her self-destroyed credibility.

She has to PROVE, not just say that she's doing what she's doing to build romantic love.

The WW has seriously damaged her BH. So she likely has to go first and work longer and harder to convince him that she really does love him (or want to love him) before he'll trust her enough to engage in the program.

That's what I see in the idea of just compensation. The WW is willing to go it alone, doing the program to fill his love bank enough that he'll trust her that the program will make his/their marriage better.

The dilemma she faces is how does she do that while at the same time refusing to honor a respectful request made by her husband who has the knowledge she consented to with the OM?

You can say she's trying to build love. But how does she prove it with her self-destroyed credibility?

Yes, she is the big loser in your situation. You didn't lose much in your situation and it sounds like divorce was the measure of success in your situation. You can honestly say you tried everything to recover your marriage. There is only so much one can do when one partner will not participate. But you can't save a marriage alone ultimately.

HOWEVER, that does not mean that others have not successfully recovered their marriages. We have scads of BH's who are in fully recovered marriages today. And their wives were not in love in them at one time. They are today.

Frank, what is wrong with the BH's understanding the truth of the state of the marriage? This is not a secret. After an affair, Marriage Builders solution is to "restore the love in the marriage. " Something can't be restored unless it is lost, right?

However, to your point, the WW's refusal to do affair sex acts in her marriage is not a signal that she doesn't love him if it is accompanied with an OFFER to engage in something better than PIG PEN SEX. It indicates her willingness to rebuild the love in the marriage.

What would erode the love further is if she, in a misguided attempt to make sacrifices, agreed to engage in sex acts she finds disgusting.

Yes, this is true of almost all affairs. WS's do things with their OP that they don't do in their marriages. The BS is right to conclude that the love is lost in the marriage.

The solution is work to restore the love in the marriage. NOT by engaging in sex acts that she finds disgusting, but finding sexual techniques that make them both happy.

That's why in my case, a WW would have to prove in that short period of time that she really loves me and would do what it takes to first never hurt me like that again, and second, build a stronger marriage.

The burden of proof falls on the WS.

Now I don't think threesomes fall into that category, and I'm not talking about anything that would bring another person into the marriage.

The WW does have to offer something better. However, understand that the BH is the one who judges what he believes best meets his needs. That's not being selfish.

Let's take sex out of this, since it's such an emotionally charged topic. Let's say the BH is Jewish and doesn't eat bacon. Let's say he's always wanted Lamb, but has refused his requests for Lamb.

He finds out she made lamb numerous times for her lover. So he asks for lamb. She refuses saying lamb is repulsive.

She offers bacon, because she really thinks bacon is the bees knees.

She doesn't get to decide what is better than what he's requested. If his favorite dish is lamb, then anything less will not hit the mark.

Of course each of them has a vote to stay or go. If he really wants lamb, and she won't make it for him after she freely made it for the OM, he can always pull the plug.

Likewise, if he's made respectful requests for lamb, and she freely gave it to the OM without emotional or physical trauma, then she COULD choose to offer lamb to her BH as well.

Frank, you are not my husband so please stop trying to silence any opposition by labeling it a "DJ." I am not trying to fill your lovebank!

And yes, I do understand your agenda, even though you continually deny it. You believe it is WRONG of the WW to refuse to perform sex acts in the marriage that she performed in the affair even though she now finds them disgusting. No one is confused about your point, Frank, so please stop acting like they are.


It is not we silly female posters who believe it is ok for the WW to refuse to do sex acts she finds disgusting, it is the opinion of Dr Harley.


So, yes, the WW is right in refusing acts she finds disgusting. What should happen is finding acts that both find enjoyable.

Let's take sex out of this, since it's such an emotionally charged topic. Let's say the BH is Jewish and doesn't eat bacon. Let's say he's always wanted Lamb, but has refused his requests for Lamb.

He finds out she made lamb numerous times for her lover. So he asks for lamb. She refuses saying lamb is repulsive.

She offers bacon, because she really thinks bacon is the bees knees.

She doesn't get to decide what is better than what he's requested. If his favorite dish is lamb, then anything less will not hit the mark

There is a third choice. She was willing to make BACON for him occasionally before the affair....so now she could offer BACON every day and cook it in the style of LAMB.

Relating it back to sex, he maybe preferred the "Lamb style sex" that she willingly and eagerly engaged in with the OM for years".

But she does not want to do this with the husband, first because it is now disgusting to her, and secondly because she reserves that kind of sex for HER OTHER LOVER because it is THIER SPECIAL THING.

So, as a compromise, could she not offer BACON every day as often as her husband wants it, willingly....at least she could up the frequency and excitement of thier sexual life....

It is not always black or white, Lamb or Bacon, vanilla sex or disgusting wild sex....it could be a compromise to honor the husband's masculinity and his feelings and to have them both heal from her selfish affair.

"EE, how can she prove something that doesn't exist? She is not in love with her husband! And how can she love a man who makes selfish demands and angry outbursts? Those are lovebusters that have destroyed her feelings for her H.

The solution is for both to STOP the lovebusters, meet each others emotional needs to create romantic love. "

100% true as usual melodylane.

But what has to be said that will get the BH to accept that his WW will not do for him what she did for the OM?

It's interesting that now the insisted response is that the WS is, in fact, NOT in love with the BH. Fair enough. But, we see statements of that love urged all the time, in the context of the NC letter, in the context of what to say to the BS when they are angrily confronting the WS. I know that I have seen WS counselled to say: "What I had with the OP was not love. I love you." Or something to that effect. Clearly, though, that cannot be the case in the immediate, or even not so immediate aftermath of the affair. Right? Are we not, then counselling the WS to lie?

"I understand the issue is about her being willing to do things with the OM she wouldn't do with the BH, but it seems to me the best solution would be for her to do things with the BH that she wouldn't do with the scumbucket. "

Melody, I have never heard of a WW ever refuse to do for the OM anything that she had did or have not donefor her BH.

Your proposed solution will not fit any cases that I have read about.

No, we are counseling the WW to put her money where her mouth is. If she wants to save the marriage, then there must be some sort of love there, hopefully romantic love.

After all, why would a WW want to save her marriage if she didn't love her husband? Now there are reasons such as she's grown accustomed to the lifestyle his career offers, or he's really good in bed.

But the question still comes down to, does she love him romantically. After all, that's what marriage is largely about in this corner of the world. (In other places, not so much, folks get married and stay married WITHOUT romance. Not saying it's better or worse, just citing the idea that romance is a largely Western construct, and others have made it work without such a heavy reliance on romance.)

She can say that what she did was NOT a loving act and she wants an opportunity to build or rebuild romantic love.

Here is what I would have died to hear from my XWW.

E_E,

What I did to you and our family was hurtful and wrong. I sinned against both God and our family. I ask that you forgive me and offer me the opportunity to rebuild our love one for another and to offer you the wife and marriage you've always wanted.

Signed,

The former Mrs E_E


I think something like that would work because it shows she knows what she did was not loving and wrong, and that she valued me and the family enough to be honest about how hurtful her actions were and how valuable our marriage was to her, and how she was throwing it all away with her choice to have an affair.

Saying that, then living out those words would go a long way to convince a BH that she is committed to a program of MB, and he would be far more open to entering the program with her and better meeting her needs and eliminating his love busters.

But the WW still has to go first, with that admission, the humility and then the courage to actually live out what was said by hanging in there, proving she meant what she said, even when he was too wounded to respond in kind.

So I'm saying the WW has to demonstrate that romantic love is a real and reachable possibility. Her window to do so may be exceedingly small. But if she wants to restore her marriage, it's a step she must take.

You surely know that "compromise" does not create romantic love, it erodes it. A better solution is win/win.

I agree they should both heal from her selfish affair, but it needs to be done in a way that satisfies BOTH, not just one.

One of the biggest mistakes I see FWW's make around here is they adopt practices of SACRIFICE in order to atone for their crime. Sure, they should make just compensation for their crime, but not in ways that harm the marriage. And sacrifice will definitely harm the marriage.

Nevermind not worth the argument

Sucks to be you. MB does not save every marriage. Don't be bitter about MB failing you. You did all you could do. Be proud in that.

Can you give me the link to the material on this? I thought I had read all of Dr Harley's material but I may have missed this.

You still claim that you know better then me what I think. So this discussion is now ridicules. I will spend no more time on you. All readers on this thread are able to judge for themselves. But you have disappointed me. Before this thread I held you in a high regard.

What has to be said is that she will not perform pig pen affair sex with the BH because her marriage means much more to her than a stinky affair.

And what they need to create together is a fantastic sex life that results from being in love. A woman needs to be in love to enjoy sex so that needs to be the focus.

writer1 answered this:�I think the problem here is an erroneous assumption that the WW did what she did with the OM out of love, when in fact, A's have very little to do with being in love. Certainly, the wayward believes they are in love with the OP, but love involves many things that are simply not present in an A. The WW is not acting out of true love when she does things that she would normally find repulsive and disgusting with the OM. She is acting out of desperation to hold onto her addiction, and she will often do things she would never normally do in order to assure that she continues to get her "fix" from the OM. That has absolutely nothing to do with love.�

W1 on the money, sometimes. I was going to post this to her but I post it to her and you now.

Writer1 how do you get her BH to accept this and that he�s not going to get what the OM got?

Why does it suck to be me? The amount of sex I get from her (none) is only a little less than what she offered while married, LOL. My ex-wife is the one who is no longer on my checks, running up my credit cards. Child support is a bargain compared to what she was spending

Now what does suck is not being able to be with my child every day because the courts don't consider infidelity a reason to grant primary custody to the betrayed father instead of until right before the divorce, a stay at home mother who has family locally.

So yeah, that part does suck, because my daughter sees there are few if any consequences to her mother's affair.

My concern is she'll grow up expecting everything just works out for her, or her family will fix it when things don't. She gets quite the contrast, having to face the consequences of her actions when she is with me, having to budget her allowance because I don't buy her stuff just because she said she wants it, etc. (Contrary to what her mother and maternal grandparents do.)

So aspects of it suck. But in the big picture, I really think it sucks more for my XWW than it does for me.

Divorce sucks for all involved. It just sucks less for the BH because he gets rid of a WW who apparently doesn't love him.

I am talking about her CASE and applying Dr Harley's principles. It doesn't matter if there are 10 or 1000 similar cases, what matters is HER situation.

And in her situation, the sex acts she did in her affair disgust her so she shouldn't bring them into the marriage.

But what SPECIFICS are folks suggesting? I've seen some very vague terms such as offer better, more exciting, etc. But no one has yet addressed the idea that he gets to decide what comprises better, more exciting, etc to him.

Some have suggested that he is right to conclude she doesn't love him.

OK, what then? Work together to build love. Good, but vague step. How does she present a credible argument that she's all about that and willing to meet his needs in light of the apparent contradictory information the BH has to deal with?

�I think the problem here is an erroneous assumption that the WW did what she did with the OM out of love, when in fact, A's have very little to do with being in love. Certainly, the wayward believes they are in love with the OP, but love involves many things that are simply not present in an A. The WW is not acting out of true love when she does things that she would normally find repulsive and disgusting with the OM. She is acting out of desperation to hold onto her addiction, and she will often do things she would never normally do in order to assure that she continues to get her "fix" from the OM. That has absolutely nothing to do with love.�

This can be the truth in outofkilters story.

No one has been able to but it into words that her BH will accept that he's never going to get from his WW what the OM got.

How is the BH to believe what Writer1 said. When the BH didn't get the goods until the WW fell in love with him.

Thus BH can only believe that his WW must of loved the OM more because look at all the extras she did for the OM.

BH has to then conclude that WW refusing must mean that she will never love me as much as she did the OM.

How is this BH going to believe what Writer1 say's over his own logic?

I have no idea. They would have to work that out amongst themselves because this is completely contingent upon personal tastes.


Its not vague at all. This program has very specific steps towards recovery. If I were her, I would approach him and tell him she wants more than anything to create a romantic, passionate marriage. Then present him with this program.

And her plan will not necessarily be credible just because she TELLS him this. She will have to demonstrate her sincerity and prove her credibility. Just because she SAYS something does not mean she is credible.

Yes and no. Her refusal, no matter how well intentioned may have a lot more power over her BH than other words.

That's the problem the WW creates when she refused/refuses her husband something she gave the OM.

Again, I'm not saying she should give that to her husband. What I'm saying it will likely serve as an ACTION that discredits any words she has prior presented saying she loves him, will do what it takes to recover the marriage etc.

Even if we all believe it to be true, even if we believe sacrifice is bad, etc. The question will still loom. OK, why was she willing to sacrifice for him, but not for me.

Because to call it a sacrifice doesn't help out her case. Instead, it will have the appearance OM was worth the sacrifice, but BH wasn't.

If the BH puts a value on sacrifice, romanticizes it, such as the heroic notion of throwing oneself on a live grenade in combat, then he just may see his WW as willing to perform heroically for OM, but she's not so heroic with respect to him.

Now again, all the "facts" about if it was or wasn't real love, or is sacrifice good or not good for the marriage really don't matter when facing the feeling side of this issue.

Frank....

I'm appauled at the liberty you took with schoolbus's recommended letter about why this FWW doesn't want to engage in group sex with her Husband.

You took a beautiful letter and SICKLY twisted it.

Now you and a few others are suggesting this FWW participate in group sex BECAUSE she did it with OM.

HOW RIDICULUS!

Waywards make immoral choices when they commit adultery and based on some posters reasoning a FWS should be willing to hang onto their IMMORAL behaviors so long as it pleases the BS??

NOT A CHANCE!

THIS IS NOT REASONING, THIS IS STUPIDITY!

The BS needs a repentent wayward willing to UNDO their immoral behaviors and replace them with moral choices. When a BS demands the immoral, it's time for the BS to clean up their own act.

**EDIT** beleivable!

Now it's contridictory if a FWS wants to behave in a way that re-establishes their character.

Ya'll that are espousing this that she hold onto her disfunctional character **EDIT** were just kidding, right?

What a **EDIT**!

**EDIT**

You're assuming here that I did things with the OM that I never did with my H. For me, that's not the case. Also, my H really didn't want a play-by-play of every moment I spent with the OM. I was always willing to answer his questions, but he flat out said he didn't want to know all of the details. So, for us, this really was never an issue.

Looking at this from outofkilter's viewpoint, I hope what she is trying to do is to create long-lasting, sustainable, romantic love with her H. This is often not the goal in an A. For me, my A was all about the thrill and the excitement of something new and forbidden. Not that I did strange things like have a 3-way or anything, but just the fact that I was doing things reserved for marriage with someone I wasn't married to. I can see how, in some cases, this could go so far as to cause someone to do things they would never do under normal circumstances (such as a 3-way). Now that outofkilter has ended her A and wants to rebuild her M, she can clearly see that doing things of a sexual nature that she finds repulsive will not help to rebuild her marriage. Quite the opposite. Sure she could do them with the OM, because when she was with him, building a lasting, loving relationship wasn't the goal. The goal was to continue getting that fix or that high or having those EN's met that the OM was meeting.

That's what she needs to do. She needs to help her H understand that when she did those things with the OM, she wasn't trying to build a long-term, sustainable, romantic relationship. That's not what A's are about, but that is what a marriage should be about.

But on the other hand, many BS's are greatly offended when an WS brings affair sex acts into their marriage. That is a much more likely happenstance. However, she should NOT give into his destructive notions of sacrifice and do her best to create a romantic, passionate relationship that fosters a fantastic sex life.

The worst thing she could do is sacrifice her own enjoyment for the pleasure of her spouse. That does not help their marriage. So regardless of a how a BS "feels", the WS still should not engage in things that are desrtuctive to the marriage just to assuage his resentment.

Also, I seriously doubt any BS would "feel better" if his/her WS grudgingly engaged in affair sex acts because it only triggers feelings about the affair.

What you writhe here is simply not true!

I have never in this thread suggested anything of what you accuse me of. I am tired of these ridicules accusations. I notify your post to the moderators.

I'm not disagreeing. Once the WW has the affair, everything she does or doesn't do is treated with suspicion.

So both doing and not doing a particular act, in light of respectful requests for the act prior to the affair and knowledge of that act occurring in the will result in withdraws from the BH's love bank.

Either saying yes or saying no will make a potential withdraw for different reasons.

The other thing I've thought of is does Dr H say sacrifice is never good, or that it's seldom good.

After all, plan A is a plan that calls upon sacrifice for the one in the plan for a short period of time.

I think Dr H even acknowledges that plan A is a calculated sacrifice for the purpose of saving the marriage.

So sacrifice is not to be part of a healthy marriage, but sacrifice IS CALLED FOR to save an unhealthy marriage.

So one cannot say Dr H is totally against sacrifice. Instead, he's against sacrifice as the day to day MO for a healthy marriage.

Mel can certainly speak for herself, but I wanted to mention: we have segued into 'respectful requests.' The OP was referencing her BH making selfish demands and retreating into AOs when she would not comply. There is a difference. Their relationship has not been restored to the point where either of them can entertain respectful requests.

Having said that, I believe (your mileage may vary) that anyone presenting a 'respectful request' must also take the other side of the coin - that the request will be respectfully declined. That does not give them the right to resort to selfish demands and AOs. At that point both parties need to respectfully discuss a POJA on the item, or agree to table it if they are unable to come to a mutually agreed-upon solution.

No shouting. No AOs. No DJs.

We are done here.