SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

In my JFO thread, This0Is0Fine introduced himself to me by talking about needing to walk an "integrity adjacent" line after being betrayed. The wisdom it conveyed helped attract me to the community. I can acknowledge the taboos and societal shame that comes with staying with a cheater. And, with all sincerity, I can say "who the fuck cares"? Is there possibly an evolutionary benefit to isolating liars and betrayers? Yeah, probably. Does that mean every individual needs to bow in service to that cultural norm? Fuck no. Walk your walk, keep your eyes open and you will find the path best for you.

Apparently we needed three pages to demonstrate it.

(I am embarrased to say I just found the emoji"s)

@unhinged

I've found our dialogues to be unhelpful to each other or fellow readers historically, so I'm going to politely decline your offer. I believe I've answered your question in the form of analogy previously anyways.

To me, it showed extraordinary character. It's grit, the ability to deal with adversity without succumbing to it.

To this I say, maybe you need go get yourself an even worse partner and keep forgiving them! Like a real serial cheating scumbag. Best possible outcome for you! You can walk around glowing with your outstanding character and your ability to deal with adversity will be off the charts.

The above is a mild joke to attempt to lighten the mood of an awkward situation/ response.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 8:10 PM, Tuesday, August 25th]

To this I say, maybe you need go get yourself an even worse partner and keep forgiving them! Like a real serial cheating scumbag. Best possible outcome for you! You can walk around glowing with your outstanding character and your ability to deal with adversity will be off the charts.

The above is a mild joke to attempt to lighten the mood of an awkward situation/ response.

My gosh that is so nasty to claim that response is a "joke" DRS. It's not going to feel like a joke or lighten the mood when it's clearly a direct response to what they said, and it reads as sarcastic and condescending towards their personal character. I do not understand how on earth you could think a sarcastic, disrespectful response like that could possibly lighten things or make it less "awkward." You are not stupid, you know you can take your stand on the issues without treating people like this. This is disgusting and it harms the community (in my personal opinion).

[This message edited by torso1500 at 8:28 PM, Tuesday, August 25th]

To me, it showed extraordinary character. It's grit, the ability to deal with adversity without succumbing to it.

I would rather be putting my grit and character towards people and causes worthy of it. A woman who proved herself severely disloyal--not so much.

... 'R is possible if you want it' ....

Why in heaven's name do you keep dropping the '...and if the couple does the necessary work'? No one here says wanting R is all that is necessary for R - wanting is certainly necessary, but it's just as certainly not the only requisite.

Obviously, some people will consider it a hit to their self-respect and others will not.

Exactly. For the record, I don't see a moral superiority in one response or the other, although I agree with Unhinged on self-respect.. If a person decides they will respect themselves less if they choose one option instead of the other, I'd recommend the one that supports a higher level of self-respect, whichever option that is.

You saw how he was treating you and how he had manipulated you. Even if he apologised upon confrontation and vowed to make amends, would you stay at the company?

I don't see M as a business, although D certainly is. I want so much more from my M than I want from my employment - and I wanted a lot from my employment. And I was in IT, so I had plenty of opportunity at work.

I got a lot from my W during our years together before her A. Hell, she gave me some important support during her A. IMO - that is, for me - her A didn't wipe out the support she gave me through the decades. That was my choice, my evaluation. It may or may not be relevant to someone else.

I can quote an overwhelming number of people whose experiences of R directly align with how I describe it.

Hmmm ... I wouldn't call that R, and that's why I think it's a false description of R.

I see R as a process of resolving issues. If a couple hits an issue that can't be resolved, R ends. The folks who come here 10-15-20 years after being betrayed tend to report some rugsweeping or some other way of stifling oneself. Rugsweeping isn't R even when an MC or IC recommends it.

IMO, it's not R unless both partners assert themselves.

*****

@WBFA, I read you to imply that you wanted to R with your W, but her pre-emptive exit prevented that. Am I reading your posts correctly?

self-respect

I think for an awful lot of cases, when people say "self-respect" what they’re really saying is how they are viewed by others.

Social pressure is enormous. The courage required to stand against it is equally enormous.

The odds

I’ve always thought it was time well spent when someone new shows up here to tell them the odds of reconciliation. It’s a tough bet, with an awful lot of efforts failing fast, and plenty of others failing slow. Some make it through, but it is a minority.

Here’s the thing though. If you try to reconcile you either will or you won’t be successful. It is either a one or a zero. You just don’t know which one.

It’s like someone flipping a coin and slapping their hand over it. The uncertainty isn’t in how the coin will land, it is sitting there beneath your hand, either heads or tails. It has landed. The uncertainty is in your knowledge of it. And the only way to find out which way it goes is to do the work, to give it a try. You are successful if you figure out whether it is a zero or one.

If you really want to try and you have a realistic understanding of the challenge, then doing anything else would mean not being true to yourself. The worst case would be if you didn’t try because you were manipulated by a message on an anonymous forum.

post #53:

Reconciliation isn't romanticized here.

Um I'm not sure I believe this in fact....

Admitting you "cannot quite reason why" you hold a belief is the ultimate self-own. You are literally outsourcing your definition of self-respect to archaic peer pressure and calling it strength.

This actually is not true at all as it goes against how our brains work. Underneath our newer neocortexes are our older limbic systems. They drive an awful lot of our decision-making whether we acknowledge it or not. To try to deny that is just...nonsense.

In any event yeah you bet, my views are traditionalist in a lot of aspects. No apologies from me!

Judging men who possess the bandwidth for vulnerability, strength, and genuine emotional courage from a place of unexamined fear isn't wisdom. It’s just pathetic.

I don't accept this reframe. And staying with a WW who keeps demonstrating complete disregard you while you're hoping that one day she eventually gets it...NO that is NOT strength, it's not courage. It doesn't work either. In more than few instances on here it is actually putting the family in danger. I'm going to keep pointing this out whether you find it pathetic or not.

[This message edited by WontBeFooledAgai at 1:43 PM, Wednesday, August 26th]

Reconciliation isn't romanticized here.

Sure about that? Even sisoon said:

https://survivinginfidelity.com/forums/?tid=666189&ap=21

I agree that some people romanticize Reconciliation

I think there is a romantic element to reconciled. The process of getting to that point, however, isn't very romantic.

When a couple does the work to create a better, healthier, happier marriage, there's something romantic about it.

**Member to Member**

Admitting you "cannot quite reason why" you hold a belief is the ultimate self-own. You are literally outsourcing your definition of self-respect to archaic peer pressure and calling it strength.

This actually is not true at all as it goes against how our brains work. Underneath our newer neocortexes are our older limbic systems. They drive an awful lot of our decision-making whether we acknowledge it or not. To try to deny that is just...nonsense.

Not true at all? The thing about our brains is that the complexity allows most people to overcome the most basic programming, especially when the brain has some time to think before reacting. I agree that human beings may not know all their motivations, but we certainly can identify some and guess others. If one can't come up with some ideas about why one believes one way but not others, one may be blocking oneself, and if one blocks oneself, one can unblock oneself.

And staying with a WW who keeps demonstrating complete disregard you while you're hoping that one day she eventually gets it...NO that is NOT strength, it's not courage. It doesn't work either. In more than few instances on here it is actually putting the family in danger. I'm going to keep pointing this out whether you find it pathetic or not.

I think the only people who call this R are those who do not think straight about R.

I agree that some people romanticize Reconciliation

is very different from

I agree that some people romanticize Reconciliation here.

Further, I did not add that IMO, those who romanticize R may not have R'ed and therefore may be speculating, not writing from first hand knowledge.

And romanticizing is probably as dysfunctional as catastrophizing....

[This message edited by SI Staff at 3:57 PM, Thursday, August 27th]

I think personal experience is bound to color anyone’s views, even if the person understands that their outcome isn’t and shouldn’t t be everyone’s outcome.

Some of you have not reconciled. Maybe you were situation with a ws who was never a good spouse, or wasn’t agood rebuilder in the aftermath, or even that your own beliefs and values don’t align with staying with a person who cheated on you. And those are valid viewpoints and will be the experience of some of our new posters or those in the trenches currently. There is as much importance in what you have learned as to what I have learned, and both sides have a lot to offer.

If someone says they are hoping to reconcile, those of us who reconciled try and offer different framework or pathways and may even say things they are happy with in their post A marriage. An endured love can be deep despite the challenges that made it that way.

I can see how that can seem romanticized by some. Reality is those who made it fought a long hard battle before reaching that point. There is an element, at least for me, that I am so fucking grateful we did make it (at least so far). On the other side there has been so many experiences that I can’t imagine how much more joyful or comforting it has been to have him as a solid partner by my side. Since the affairs, ourchildren had weddings, huge health issues, graduated with various degrees, brought new grandbabies to love, lost grandbabies to grieve. I pushed him to see a cardiologist he never would have left to his own devices and it saved his life. I could go on and on. I am sure that perspective comes with some romanticism/hope that comes out in how I post.

It doesn’t mean I think everyone should do that or that it will even be possible.

I do not believe that I or anyone else here think that it’s easy, that it is always possible, that all ws will work to be worthy of that second chance in that relationship, that a bs should be a doormat, or continue tolerating abuse. I do think a romantic relationship can be restored and that I have the warm and fuzzies about it, but I am under no delusion that it will be that way for everyone.

I think the resistance between the two groups basically originate in the following ways:

1. Most ws are FUBAR after an affair. It doesn’t mean they were before or they will be in the future.

Some of the non-reconciled group sees a ws as not redeemable for things that most ws do. It’s understandable they want to save the other poster time they feel they wasted or extra pain they endured and hope to eliminate that for the next person. But just know that we could say you are romanticizing divorce in the same token. The pain is going to be there a long time despite what you chose and ending a marriage often requires a long deliberation process for a lot of people. They can’t just skip the process and take your word for it, just like they shouldn’t skip the process of recovering before deciding they should reconcile.

I am generally am okay with this difference. Both sides are really just using their own experiences to help the poster as they see fit. Having both perspectives allow the poster to try in different things to see what feels right to them. We need both groups in this site, both have great wisdom to offer.

2. The one I am not okay with is: shaming the bs thinking it will knock some sense into them, thinking that every situation is unsurmountable because trying to reconcile is hopeless, deeming someone ws the worst when in reality we are all typically really shitty when we are cheating and in the immediate aftermath. Thinking every situation is the same and all should divorce and if you don’t you don’t have values or principles. Claiming to know it’s not going to work is not helpful, and telling the bs some of these things in their earliest darkest days strikes me as cruel every single time. I can’t read JFO for that reason, the last time I looked years ago it was untenable to me to keep reading.

To me, what we should be offering no matter which side of the fence is compassion. I do not mind which outcome you root for or which outcome happens, we owe compassionate support even if it’s in the form of a 2 by 4 which is needed. I give those sometimes, nothing wrong with that if you can still recognize the struggle in the poster and can be kind to them.

Usually if I am arguing with you it’s because I think you are not being sensitive to the OP or it’s a philosophical thread like this one where it’s the entire point of the thread.

[This message edited by hikingout at 3:06 PM, Thursday, August 27th]

@sisoon

I agree that some people romanticize Reconciliation

is very different from

I agree that some people romanticize Reconciliation here.

Any objective reader of the thread I referenced would see the entire context was what happens HERE at SI. Here it is again:

https://survivinginfidelity.com/forums/?tid=666189&ap=21

I agree fully with HoP:

I’ve always thought it was time well spent when someone new shows up here to tell them the odds of reconciliation. It’s a tough bet, with an awful lot of efforts failing fast, and plenty of others failing slow. Some make it through, but it is a minority.

Imo, part of "romanticizing reconciliation" is downplaying, or more often, failing to inform, just how difficult true R is, and that it’s NOT the norm for betrayers to fundamentally change their inner character and for a M to completely heal and for both spouses to live happily ever after. YES it does happen. And YES, divorce isn’t painless. Why is the better path NOT to share sobering truths with the betrayed so they can make more fully informed decisions?

Imo, part of "romanticizing reconciliation" is downplaying, or more often, failing to inform, just how difficult true R is, and that it’s NOT the norm for betrayers to fundamentally change their inner character and for a M to completely heal and for both spouses to live happily ever after. YES it does happen. And YES, divorce isn’t painless. Why is the better path NOT to share sobering truths with the betrayed so they can make more fully informed decisions?

Divorce sucks. I’m glad I’m divorced, so much the less bad option in my case, but it sucks none the less. Framing it as the land of a thousand waiting virgins is nonsense and seems like it’s treating this forum like a video game to "win", trying to get people to do what you (in the general sense, not specifically grateful) think is best.

We keep talking about these supposed numbers but we have nothing we agree on to put our feet down on. Gottman’s demonstrate-able and repeatable high 90 percent predictions about divorce using the Four Horsemen is amazing, and unless I’ve completely missed it, there is nothing equivalent in the world of post betrayal reconciliation.

Gemmy wants to take a shot at it. So do a lot of people. There is much to gain, and much to lose. I don’t see how we are even debating honoring adults making informed choices about their lives, as if we should patronize them into our will.

[This message edited by InkHulk at 7:50 PM, Thursday, August 27th]

I don’t see how we are even debating honoring adults making informed choices about their lives, as if we should patronize them into our will.

That boils my thoughts down nicely. I think most of us all have something to help illuminate the experience regardless of outcome and we can be kind and compassionate in the process.

On the topic of reconciliation being romanticised, I’m not sure where I fall on how often that actually happens on this forum. That said, I do think plenty of posters underplay the odds. Given the nature of this place, we naturally skew towards long-term reconcilers and reformed waywards, which can paint a picture of misplaced optimism that probably shouldn't exist. The cheaters I've met in my personal life are the furthest away from the ones reflected in this forum in all the worse ways.

Either way, the concept itself is completely beyond me. Dodging solicitors’ fees and dividing up the crockery is just damage containment—avoiding a logistical nightmare isn't romantic. And staying simply to avoid the modern horror show of dating apps doesn't sound like romance either; it’s just convenience dressed up in a nicer outfit.

Strip away the logistics, and there’s really only one emotional argument for staying that holds any water: shared history. Fair enough. Decades of joint mortgages, family milestones, and inside jokes can’t be replicated overnight. But people conveniently ignore that preserving all that history means clinging onto the exact chapter where your partner set the house on fire. Doesn't seem romantic to me. if you were to torch the histor you'd torch the betrayal along with it. Seems like a cracking deal to me.

Then there’s the rhetoric floating around about staying being a display of "extraordinary character" or "grit," or the grand cope that "the affair was the wake-up call we needed to rebuild better." Splendid. But wouldn't it be far more sensible to build a normal, non-rotten relationship with someone who didn't need to put you through nuclear fallout just to realise they should treat you with basic decency?Again, not romantic in my mind one jot.

At the core of it, surely every single person here would choose a relationship completely free of betrayal if given the choice. Nobody stands at the altar hoping for a soul-crushing affair just so they can experience the 'profound journey' of repairing the damage. If an untainted relationship is universally the gold standard, why would anyone romanticise an outcome that is, at absolute best, a silver medal?

When I read about couples who have "survived infidelity" and come out the other side, my brain doesn't register a triumph of the human spirit. I just think at it's worst, "Poor bugger. Should’ve got out while the getting was good," or in the best case, 'I wish it had never happened to them in the first place'

Having walked away from betrayal into a relationship that is actually healthy and untainted, I will never understand the romance of pouring endless energy into maintaining a partner who's demonstrated the aren't worth of the work to begin with. Why dump all that effort into a broken foundation when that same energy could be spent on your own growth and finding a partner who wouldn't betray you? Please god, I hope not in the pursuit of chasing some bizarre, backwards... Hollywood description of romance.

As a side note, I was chatting with my partner the other day about how Hollywood has spent generations poisoning the well with deeply twisted ideas of romance that people still cling to today. The absurdity of it all is that cinema is about the worst place on earth to look for a blueprint of a healthy relationship. Expecting sound romantic wisdom from an industry with a historically appalling track record on basic sexual ethics is a bit like taking home improvement advice form a serial arsonist.

All of this to say, I find the idea of a long, happy and faithful marriage to be what should be romanticised, not just which marriages took the biggest beatings and stayed through it.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 9:02 PM, Thursday, August 27th]

Imo, part of "romanticizing reconciliation" is downplaying, or more often, failing to inform, just how difficult true R is,

I agree. When I first arrived here I was repeatedly warned that the odds of reconciliation are very low. And honestly, that didn't deter me one bit. Truth be told, at one point, I considered us reconciled. It wasn't until years later that I realized that I'd sort of talked myself into it and that the new marriage wasn't what I'd expected.

However, I do not regret the effort. The journey was it's own reward. I understand that may not be true for everyone, of course, but to purposefully, deliberately dissuade someone from trying is a disservice to them and the community in general.

Strip away the logistics, and there’s really only one emotional argument for staying that holds any water: shared history.

For the love…. How people can see so much and perceive so little.

It’s love. We love them. I loved her. I had 20 years of love. It wasn’t immediately obliterated. The great stories of the world are written about this insanely strong force that drives people to do the near impossible. Do you seriously not know that?

Yes, there is the crockery to think about, if by that you mean half the time with the children and not exposing them to having strange men (or women) into their lives.

It’s infuriating to have the stakes of this thing so trivialized. You betray your ignorance of what many of us experienced.

@InkHulk

It’s love

Only if you believe if some sort of fate, kindred spirits or twin flames nonsense.

Otherwise, presumably a rational person is willing to accept given the millions of other people in the world, we can find love that's as strong if not stronger elsewhere.

I was in love, then betrayed, now have a stronger love for someone else. This is the case for the vast majority of people.

That's why I said specifically shared history, shared history is the one thing you can't find elsewhere. Though of course you can build a new shared history.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 9:24 PM, Thursday, August 27th]

Do you actually feel things? Or do you just live in your head?

InkHulk

Yes, I deeply feel love. I would die for my partner. I swear by everything I stand by. You don't know me personally, so this is meaningless to you but I would. I want to give her the best life possible. That's romance to me.

I'm just not naive enough to think if she were to betray me, I couldn't find someone else. She has told me similar.

We have both loved before and when we did, presumably felt similar feelings. Though of course with hindsight and lessons learned I can certainly say this is the healthiest and most fulfilling relationship I've been in.

You may see this as a cynical or cold outlook but to my minds it's merely a factual one. Furthermore for those staring down the barrel of divorce... A hopeful one.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 9:27 PM, Thursday, August 27th]