SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Dr-

I think the answer lies in the specific cases.

When true reconciliation occurs the ws has gone in a quest to trace all the things that made them want to cheat, and able to carry out.

Cheating is often far more complex than "they did it to have an orgasm" that is such a simplification that you would never be able to correct it. And for some people it’s that simple. But in the larger scheme of things cheating happens in all sorts of marriages, even great ones.

There is a laundry list of things that I had to really work on for years. People pleasing, perfectionism, martyrdom, illogical thoughts and conclusions, my own programming, my relationship with my values, mindfulness, intentional appreciation, taking full accountability and making amends, being intentional in building trust, becoming responsible for my own happiness, becoming aware of my avoidance and tendencies for escapism, communication skills, and more.

The new marriage is easier to understand when you think of it as the person you are now married to is markedly different. They actively love and respect you. We had a pretty good marriage before, but I can point out vast improvements that are tangible and agreed upon by both of us.

No one in this forum would encourage someone to forgive, get cheated on, forgive, get cheated on, etc. a lot of multiple ddays listed are trickle truth and even some of those are not encouraged, though I do think that is a bit more tolerated than having subsequent affairs after discovery. There is some failure going to happen, it’s inevitable. It just depends on what that failure is.

Those here who are successfully reconciled report still hating the affair, but satisfied with their decision because they like their marriage the way it is now.

I agree with you that there are many people who do not reconcile, they stay together, and for some of them that still works for goals they personally have but they are people I think that have made peace with not being vulnerable with their ws.

Reconciliation is not achievable or even encouraged in all circumstances. But there are many situations here and in real life where the ws hit this place of rock bottom and never want to go back to that so they have had to learn to manage their life differently.

While I don’t condone what precipitated it and I wish I had done this work some other way, my marriage is so much sweeter, more passionate, we are more vulnerable and honest, we support each other unconditionally, and have true connection. We went through hell getting here but there is nothing I would trade it for. That’s the truth.

Are there people who repeat? Yes. Most of what I see is that happens in situations where the affair was not properly dealt with, processed, and both people focused primarily on themselves for a period of time before turning back to deal with the relationship. No one starts there though, it seems that often that first year is about grieving. I think you could divorce but that year of grieving.

[This message edited by hikingout at 3:23 PM, Thursday, April 3rd]

In an attempt to keep this thread on track for our OP-

Marriage 2.0 is definitely an idea that I chased after for a while and it was helpful to a small extent. We were building something new.

However, at 9-years in, while we took substantial steps in building a newer way to treat each other and communicate, we never pretend the bad stuff didn’t happen or try to keep it hidden away. Overcoming this unique adversity is a part of our bigger picture. Not all of the days pre-A were bad. We accomplished some good things for our kids along the way. In other words, we kept some of the highlights from Marriage 1.0 as well.

I use building a relationship "worthy" of staying for fairly often, but I think for a successful R, I should use the term "healthy" instead.

So to start, if one chooses to stay — is to be certain they make their choices from a position of strength and rebuild a healthy or healthier relationship from there (providing the WS is also working to be a healthier, stronger, safer, partner).

That perspective... I've have read about it, but it's always struck me as illogical. It seems like mental gymnastics, trying to keep both the relationship and the principles intact. Though, that's just my opinion.

It leads to these absurd theoreticals. Picture this: a betrayed spouse at an icebreaker, asked how many relationships they've had. 'Eight,' they say, 'all with the same person. Every time they cheat, we reconcile, and it's a "new" relationship. I could never maintain a relationship with a cheater, so naturally forge a new one.'

It's just... maybe I'm not seeing the bigger picture. Obviously that was an example brought to absurdity but the principles the same. Maybe It works if it's a one off occasion and as soon as they've comes clean or been caught It ends (wider discussion here probably needed discussing the odds/stats of infidelity being a one and done case). Though I still think it's a rationalisation. However It gets more and more hard to swallow with more D-days. Now 8 is probably pretty rare, even the most foriving person has their limits... but you regularly read of couples up to 3/4. Sometimes years apart. Are these all new relationships? Or is the case 'new' relationship is what they tell themselves to feel more comfortable with the cheating not truly being a deal breaker for them?

Ultimately, it doesn't have to be. It's external pressures pushing people to leave cheaters. I think this view point came as a counterpoint to quell those pressures. Again, just my opinion whilst trying to follow logic.

A side point but I think the most interesting aspects of infidelity is the societal push for a betrayed partner to leave their spouse. I would love to know why this is such a prevalent view. Is it wisdom or crowds? Is it because that's generally the best choice so people generalise the stance to be applicable to all? I would pay a lot of money to have the answer to that question.

I think we agree more than we disagree. Maybe I'm just illogical. Maybe the loss of "something integrity adjacent" is as simple as living with broken principles. But this mental framework is basically necessary for R. If you believe you are weak and unprincipled in the face of fear instead of resilient and flexible in the face of injury you won't be able to R.

The good news for most of us is that we are not required us to be consistent or logical to be content.

As for the societal push to leave a cheater, I think it is well explored by Esther Perel who I mostly don't recommend. Her insights here on "the new shame" of staying are interesting.

** Member to Member **

"I'm willing to have a romantic relationship with someone that has cheated on me, but there need to be additional guardrails in place that I wouldn't have in a relationship where we have both been loyal."

Is it a matter of guardrails, or is it a matter of deciding to 'do the next right thing'?

IMO, it's a lot easier to live making decisions to act ethically, lovingly, and authentically than to live trying to avoid doing unethical, unloving, and/or inauthentic things. I think that's because there are fewer right things to discover and consider than wrong things that need to be avoided.

... It seems like mental gymnastics, trying to keep both the relationship and the principles intact. Though, that's just my opinion.

It leads to these absurd theoreticals.

Relationships always have illogical elements. Always.

I read 'mental gymnastics' as 'lie to themselves.' If that's not what you mean, tell us what you do mean.

We always run a risk of lying to ourselves in some way. But I see no lie when a person evaluates multiple options, including D & R, takes in as many factors as possible, and realizes the necessity of turning a 50-50, 75-25, 90-10, or even 100-0 calculation into a decision to stay or go.

...you regularly read of couples up to 3/4. Sometimes years apart. Are these all new relationships? Or is the case 'new' relationship is what they tell themselves to feel more comfortable with the cheating not truly being a deal breaker for them?

Depends on POV, I believe. People change. Relationships change. I've had several relationships with my W, even though we've been together continuously since the autumn of 1965. Consider - friend, suitor, accepted suitor, fiance, H, partner in child rearing, empty nest partner, lover, BS....

If someone told me they'd had 8 relationships, all with the same person, I'd either ignore it or ask questions. Stephen Covey said, IIRC, 'Seek first to understand, then to be understood.' Good advice, IMO.

*****

Infidelity was never a deal killer for me or my W.

We grew up in the 1950s being taught infidelity was a product of an M problem, and if the partners worked to solve the M problem, the M would be good again. Now we think infidelity comes from issues in the WS. Either way, we're both agnostic on stay/go in theory, pro-staying for ourselves, and

We came of age in the '60s. We weren't for free love ourselves, but we knew human beings didn't always stay monogamous.

It's not that we thought that R was always the right choice; rather, we thought that responding to significant events probably required significant thought, and we thought that automatic responses are not always valid.

*****

Self-talk is one of the biggest factors driving voluntary behavior, and it's true that some of our self-talk is self-delusion.

But I think most of us who have R'ed are comfortable with our choices. If we weren't, I expect most of us would switch course and D. I know I do not second-guess my decision, though I do check in with myself from time to time to sense whether or not I'm still happy in R. (But I also check in with myself for many other aspects of my life.)

I have great sympathy for those who stay together when they don't want to, especially when it takes years to realize the unhappiness.

A side point but I think the most interesting aspects of infidelity is the societal push for a betrayed partner to leave their spouse.

Hmmm ... I think other parts of society push the BS to take back the WS. In general, I think conventional wisdom can be found to support just about any position - on any subject.

Especially with infidelity, it's essential not to let conventional wisdom drive one's decisions. Charting one's own course and adjusting as appropriate as time goes on is the best way to deal with being betrayed and anything else.

*****

What problem are you trying to solve here?

Do you want to understand R?

Or do you want people who have R or who are in R or who are contemplating R to realize it doesn't exist at all because it doesn't exist in your logic?

[This message edited by SI Staff at 7:10 PM, Sunday, April 6th]

Hmmm ... I think other parts of society push the BS to take back the WS. In general, I think conventional wisdom can be found to support just about any position - on any subject.

Whilst I agree that you can find pockets of people who will support one perspective over another on almost any topic, do you genuinely not feel the overwhelming societal stance is to leave? With the exception of specific religious communities, who are naturally pushing there subscribed doctrine, I've found this stance that one should leave is incredibly prominent.

The question of why this seems to be the majority view is intriguing to me. I could pose several theories but the true answer is worth it's weight in gold. My leading theory is that statistics show partners who have cheated are far more likely to cheat again. This leads to many people trying to reconcile and getting burned again. Thus generalizing that leaving is always the correct stance.

What problem are you trying to solve here?

Do you want to understand R?

Or do you want people who have R or who are in R or who are contemplating R to realize it doesn't exist at all because it doesn't exist in your logic?

I have no desire to influence anyone contemplating R in any way. Just because I couldn't sleep at night with an unfaithful spouse at my side doesn't mean someone else couldn't be happier despite betrayal. I am trying to understand R and remain open-minded about it. However, a rational and logical argument for R would greatly aid that understanding. Unfortunately, when I probe for such reasoning, discussions often devolve into the ideas that "people aren't logical" or that "the heart wants what it wants."

You might ask what the problem with those types of responses is. Relying on irrational arguments to justify R can yield various negative outcomes, even if some individuals go on to live fulfilling and happy lives after reconciling, as many in this community have shown. For this reason, I urge individuals to prioritize logical reasoning when deliberating about R.

I have several significant concerns regarding R, although I recognize that these concerns can be situation-dependent, and I’m sure many on this forum would agree. For instance, I worry about those I refer to as "cake eaters"—individuals who never intended to end their marriage but manipulate their partners into staying, even when it’s clearly not in the best interest of the hurt partner. I’ve observed that advice on some forums can devolve into manipulation tactics disguised as help—though not necessarily on this site, but certainly others.

I genuinely worry for those who are being manipulated into staying. It’s often difficult to distinguish between those who genuinely want to remain in a relationship and those who are being coerced, because manipulation blurs those lines. It can lead one to believe that what is being suggested is truly in their best interest. Consequently, I tend to advocate for caution, generally recommending that individuals leave a cheating spouse unless they are very self-assured and can articulate their reasons for choosing to stay. In such cases, having logical reasons is vital.

A well-defined list of logical benefits for staying in a marriage cannot be easily manipulated. Love can be, and often is, used as a tactic by abusers—such as in the phenomenon known as "love-bombing."

Moreover, I find it troubling that the general perspective on cheaters here often assumes they are not simply bad people. While I agree that not all cheaters fall into that category, it is evident to me that some individuals are, by any definition, genuinely harmful. Yet within this space, we often seek to find deeper meanings behind every action, suggesting that the cheater is wounded or that the relationship has inherent issues. Can we not accept that some people are not necessarily broken or haunted by deep childhood trauma? Sometimes, individuals simply pursue pleasure—like the thrill of infidelity—if they believe they can get away with it. It isn’t always as profound as we might wish to believe. To date, I have seen no evidence supporting the notion that cheaters are more often broken individuals rather than simply morally questionable people chasing thrills.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 11:58 AM, Monday, April 7th]

To date, I have seen no evidence supporting the notion that cheaters are more often broken individuals rather than simply morally questionable people chasing thrills.

I do not dispute you re right there are a gradient of ws. I doubt anyone else would either.

However, the reason you see this so much is because many of the ws here and many of the bs’s ws are in therapy. What does one do in therapy? Decide what parts of themselves that need worked on to lead a better, more satisfying life.

Do I think some ws go to therapy to appease their bs, with no true curiosity about themselves? Yes.

Then there are people like me who put themselves in therapy, not wanting to keep up a life they need to escape from.

There is way more evidence to suggest that cheaters are broken people, because healthy people with a good relationship with themselves and their values would be incapable of it.

There are lots of types of broken. There are people who have mental illness that prevent them from having a conscience, people with love , porn or sex addiction issues, or even drug or alcohol issues.

Then more often you see people who have always relied on others to make them happy, avoidant people who never can say what they want or negotiate a relationship they can be happy in. They do not have a good relationship with themselves and are willing to trade their value system to escape that unhappiness. But that unhappiness is not the failing of the bs, it’s the deficit that exists in the ws.

I think the question is more, is the ws truly interested in change? And that takes a long time to discern.

I don’t think it’s mysterious why people want to reconcile. There are lots of things that people value in their spouse or marriage.

And I think some will try and reconcile in vain, needing time to become more objective about their ws before divorcing.

Over my 8 years of reading countless books, listening to podcasts, reading here and on other sites, talking to many ws privately, there is a laundry list of things most of us have in common. If something ever happened to my husband and I decided to date, I can tell you there are many things that I would avoid like the plague and they are common, not evil on their own.

I would say to a bs who still wants their marriage to detach, focus on themselves, prepare for the divorce scenario, and spend zero time accepting responsibility for their ws’s actions. A ws who is worth starting the reconciliation process should be remorseful and earning everything back in a very intentional way, while learning the circumstances that allowed them to do these horrible things and changing them. They should have deep explanations for how these things trace to their cheating. By the end the change should be undeniable, and even then reconciliation is not owed nor is it always possible.

But to say you have seen no evidence that majority of ws is broken, it means you have done little research past reading in forums because the evidence out there is actually overwhelming. Healthy people don’t cheat. And if one can believe a ws would need to change in order to stay married to them, then you believe they are broken and need to fix their shit.

[This message edited by hikingout at 3:10 PM, Monday, April 7th]

Sisoon:

Is it a matter of guardrails, or is it a matter of deciding to 'do the next right thing'?

I don't know if "guardrails" was the right way to put it. I'm more trying to explain the additional caveats around trust and giving myself permission to change my mind. I don't plan on changing my mind, but having the option is enough. The guardrails aren't around her behavior. They are around how I feel about the marriage in relation to my self. They are more detatched.

I was at least previously a quite rigid thinker. Along the lines of what DRSOOLERS is thinking of in terms of in terms of "highly principled and consistent". This is probably why I have some draw to this conversation.

Sometimes, individuals simply pursue pleasure—like the thrill of infidelity—if they believe they can get away with it. It isn’t always as profound as we might wish to believe. To date, I have seen no evidence supporting the notion that cheaters are more often broken individuals rather than simply morally questionable people chasing thrills.

I think in a previous discussion I sort of talked about the two types. The ones that cheat by way of circumstance and loose boundaries after meeting the affair partner and the ones that look for an affair before they meet an affair partner. I don't know which is more common, but I do think that you often see the difference in the types by the stories on this forum.

I think it's very worthwhile to consider the overall nature of a cheater when considering R.

A well-defined list of logical benefits for staying in a marriage cannot be easily manipulated.

I totally agree with this. In fact I made such a list. But even though I used a decision tree with assigned values, the reality is the values I chose are essentially based on feelings. These type of rigorous decision-making tools are often just an exercise in turning emotions into numbers.

I don't think these tools are useless. They help clarify thinking in a fixed framework. But even the clarified thinking around a relationship is going to be painted with emotional assignment to values of certain outcomes.

To be perfectly clear. I have accepted the risk of repeat behavior of my wife (which I assigned a probability to) because I think it is outweighed by the benefits of remaining M'd.

It's actually much easier to make this type of decision in a numerical model than it is to determine if staying with someone that has betrayed you includes a penalty of betraying your principles. In fact, I would argue things like rigid principles that you stick to even if it hurts you economically is its own type of irrationality. There is no quantifiable reward for ideological purity.

** Member to Member **

Thanks for the clarification, This0is0Fine. I think I understand what you mean by 'guardrails', and if I do, I agree.

Also, I agree that logic has its uses after being betrayed, but is not the last word. I've always found dcision trees especially useful in clarifying what I want. That is, when I find myself consistently giving high probabilities to one solution or another, I start to hypothesize that's the solution I want....

*****

...a rational and logical argument for R would greatly aid that understanding. Unfortunately, when I probe for such reasoning, discussions often devolve into the ideas that "people aren't logical" or that "the heart wants what it wants."

I'm surprised to read that you haven't seen and can't see logical reasons for R. Here's a list that took me less than 5 minutes to create. I can't imagine you haven't seen something like this list in the past, since each element is so obviously possible.

Not so BTW, there definitely are logical arguments for R. That does not mean R is the best choice in all sitches, IMO. The goal here at SI is not R or D. The goal is to heal, irrespective of what happens with the M or other committed relationship.

- If R works, it is much less disruptive than D.

- If R works, one has a sexual partner throughout the recovery period.

- If R works, kids stay in a family that works.

- If R works, life is less costly - no legal fees, and one household generally costs less than two.

- If R works, at the end of the process the BS has a stronger relationship with someone one loves instead of a period of being alone - and needing to be alone to avoid making a bad choice on a rebound.

- If R works, it's possible - I've bet on it, actually - that the former WS is less likely to cheat than the next person the fBS will connect with (analogous to broken bones).

Logic can't help much with

- deciding on wants and don't-wants...

- evaluating how good a candidate for R the WS is...

- deciding if one's read of the likelihood of success is worth the risk...

- getting out of the Drama Triangles that occur so often in life, especially after being betrayed....

Emotion always overrides logic. ALWAYS. Emotion does that influencing all sorts of things directly and indirectly. Why does one choose a car, a house, a friend, a lover, a partner?

As This0is0Fine states, even when one can draw up a chart rating different options, the overall rating often depends on the criteria one uses and the relative priorities of the criteria.

It's one thing to rate advantages as trivial; it's quite another to say or imply the advantage doesn't exist, and that's what you seem to have done. That's emotion overriding logic, perception, and thought. So is stating one couldn't sleep at night next to a cheater. Odds are that you selpt with your WS before your d-day, after all....

*****

IMO, most WSes aren't evil people. My reading here and elsewhere says WSes are mostly people like you and me who did something evil that turned out badly. I've done evil but it never came back and bit me. I do think people in power who prey on people in their charge may actually be evil people, but the run of the mill WS, IMO they're mainly people who took wrong turns.

That may be emotion overriding logic again.

*****

...do you genuinely not feel the overwhelming societal stance is to leave? With the exception of specific religious communities, who are naturally pushing there subscribed doctrine, I've found this stance that one should leave is incredibly prominent.

That could be because you're filtering out what you don't want to take in, because I do not think the vast majority of voices say, 'Choose D.'

I hear and read lots of voices saying 'D' and lots of voices stating or implying that R should be the default.

The question of why this seems to be the majority view is intriguing to me.

I don't accept that. It may be true, but it hasn't been proven, so I'll stay uncommitted as to who is in the majority.

...statistics show partners who have cheated are far more likely to cheat again.

There aren't a lot of good stats on infidelity, but this sounds probable.

What is rarely considered, however, as stated above, is that a former WS who changes themself from cheater to good partner is also less likely than the norm to cheat again.

I look at my W and the healed fWSes on SI and see people who will not cheat again, except perhaps under extraordinary stress and maybe not even then. They may leave, but they won't cheat, IMO. Note, however, that they've done the work. They know that external validation does not give them what they think is missing.

This leads to many people trying to reconcile and getting burned again. Thus generalizing that leaving is always the correct stance.

I think there are lot more scenarios than this one that have to be considered.

I'd argue that R is a better default than D, because ...

1) A d-day is traumatic.

2) Change in M status is also traumatic, and adding trauma to trauma makes it much more difficult to heal.

3) Therefore, for partners who are willing to do the work necessary to heal themselves and their M, R should be the default. If one or more partners is unwilling to do the necessary work, R is impossible, so D is likely to be the best course of action.

But I believe there's an even better default - no default at all.

Instead, the BSis best advised to...

1) Put aside everything you've thought or been taught about responding to infidelity.

2) Figure out what you need to do to heal and do it.

3) Figure out what you want to do about your M.

4) If you want D, do it. If you want R, find out if your partner is a good enough candidate for R to warrant taking the risk and choose accordingly.

I've left a lot of steps out here, but I think what I mean is pretty clear.

[This message edited by SI Staff at 10:43 PM, Monday, April 7th]

I'm surprised to read that you haven't seen and can't see logical reasons for R. Here's a list that took me less than 5 minutes to create. I can't imagine you haven't seen something like this list in the past, since each element is so obviously possible.

I didn't state that I see no logical reasons for R; quite the opposite. I provided a list of logical reasons for R. Several people pushed back on this list, citing more intangible reasons such as forgiveness or love. My exact point is that shifting away from the list of logical reasons can be dangerous for the reasons I outlined in my previous comment.

In fact, many of the logical reasons I outlined are exactly what you go on to state in your own list. I don’t think we are as much in disagreement as you believe.

However, I do take issue with some of your reasons, particularly these three:

If R works, one has a sexual partner throughout the recovery period.

If R works, at the end of the process the BS has a stronger relationship with someone one loves, instead of experiencing a period of being alone—wherein they might be tempted to make a bad choice on a rebound.

If R works, it's possible—I've bet on it, actually—that the former WS is less likely to cheat than the next person the fBS will connect with (analogous to broken bones).

Some people don't find it hard to secure a sexual partner. In fact, I'd argue most people would not struggle to find a sexual partner. I believe people have low self belief or esteem which may make them think this way. This echo's a previous point we discussed. I believe low self esteem is a leading reason for 'R'. If they choose the path of divorce, they are free to engage with others. While your statement isn't incorrect, it's highly situational. Additionally, many BSs do not wish to engage in sexual activity with a wayward spouse for a significant time after discovery due to disgust. Speaking personally, I'd be firmly in this camp.

Your second point is predicated on the belief that R leads to stronger relationships. While this may be true for some, I am highly skeptical that it applies to the majority. Data on this will be hard to verify. You read many cases on both sides. Some stating they communicate better others saying the trust never fully comes back and that they always feel like something is missing since the betrayal.

Your third point overlooks the more likely scenario that the wayward spouse may reoffend. A study conducted by the University of Denver found that individuals are three times more likely to cheat if they have cheated in the past.

Logic can't help much with

- evaluating how good a candidate for R the WS is...

Whilst I agree logic cannot assist with every element of consideration that must go into deciding if 'R' is the correct path, it should be heavily leaned on where possible. Otherwise, these intangible emotional wants, are prime to be manipulated by an abusive wayward.

Again, this is clearly not the case in all scenarios, but the aim should be to minimize manipulation chances.

I'd argue that R is a better default than D because ...

A d-day is traumatic.

Change in marital status is also traumatic, and adding trauma to trauma makes it much more difficult to heal.

Therefore, for partners willing to do the necessary work to heal themselves and their marriage, R should be the default. If one or both partners are unwilling to do the necessary work, R becomes impossible, making D the best course of action.

All of these points could equally apply to reconciling with a physically abusive spouse. Would you advocate for that as well? If a physically abusive spouse reforms, is that all that is needed? Is it worth the risk? Do you not see cheating as a form of abuse? Or do you accept that cheating is a form of emotional abuse but believe it’s not as serious as physical abuse?

I can't answer these questions for you, I can answer them myself though. It's extraordinarily well documented that victims of infidelity show the same PTSD markers as spouses who've been physically abused. That is because cheating is a form of abuse and I do not believe that emotional abuse is less damaging then physical abuse. Of course physical abuse can result in death, you may respond. As can emotional abuse. See suicide rates.

Given my response, you can clearly infer that while I believe R is possible—and we have many shining examples of its success on this site—I think erroring on the side of caution is the correct stance. Therefore, I believe divorce should be the default, if we are forced to have a default at all.

To end on a agreement, I do think, no default is probably the best way. That is a long as they BS has support to ensure they are not being manipulated by an abuser.

Outside of having a support network, other useful tools to avoid this would be; going no contact for a period of time, such the waywards begging and pleading influence you. This too avoids love-bombing and hysterical bonding influencing your decision . Another reason why continuing to have sex through the betrayal isn't optimal.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 12:05 PM, Tuesday, April 8th]

Outside of having a support network, other useful tools to avoid this would be; going no contact for a period of time, such the waywards begging and pleading influence you. This too avoids love-bombing and hysterical bonding influencing your decision . Another reason why continuing to have sex through the betrayal isn't optimal.

I see why you say it, and I am not really arguing against any of it.

However, I consider recovery and reconciliation an evolution. If these parts were removed from our recovery/reconciliation I am not sure we would have stayed married.

I had to recognize some of these behaviors, admit to them and practice new ones. This was part of what built our trust.

Keep in mind that even in a good marriage (I consider us to have a good marriage before my affair) that these traits you are pointing out were always there. Why? Because they are often caused by attachment styles. I love bombed him for way lesser offenses. People experience hysterical bonding at times that are not infidelity related - thus the term "make up sex".

I think you see these things as sinister, calculated moves on the part of the ws. I do not argue that they never are, however, I think it can come from a place of sincere contrition. It did for me. I wasn’t trying to manipulate him with sex and love bombing, I was trying to do whatever I could do to make him have less pain. And I think it did help him at times. As long as it’s not intentional smoke and mirrors - meaning I was also genuinely putting my all into therapy, reading, practicing new ways of thinking and being. I didn’t use it in lieu of discussing the affair or trying to avoid. I just did anything that seemed to help.

I do agree that a level of detachment has to occur. Each partner should be focused on being honest with themselves, and pursuing their own healing. However, we took short trips together and had some days of let’s enjoy the day, and out the rest in moratorium because a bs badly needs to see you pursuing them. A ws who doesn’t put forth that effort is likely not a candidate for reconciliation. But the detachment from the outcome is important because there are ws who may do it for a while and stop. A ws needs to work on constantly bringing progress to themselves and sometimes the best way to see this is first hand.

So my advice would be- yes get you a divorce agreement, start putting money aside, for whatever you need to do to provide yourself with security. Focus on you and do your best to not force yourself to make a decision before you are ready. (That’s not to say there is anything wrong with the immediate decision to divorce, just most people are not ready for that out of the gate)

If the ws is not providing an environment to heal, then separate. But in my book love and sex bombing are okay if you aren’t using them to avoid getting your shit together. And as long as your spouse is receptive to it. Respect their boundaries of course at all times. Hysterical bonding is a reclaiming. It’s is all temporary bandaid stuff, but it’s not always bad. I wouldn’t reconcile with someone who is not trying their best to show me they see they have made some bad decisions and truly want to earn me back.

I think if the marriage was never good, then maybe it’s time to move on. If the marriage has been good and you believe this could have been an anomaly, immediate separation could really do more harm at chances to reconcile than not. My husband didn’t do any sort of pick me or hide his feelings, and I think that is also very important.

In the end the bs is the prize to be won, not the ws, and I think the ws needs to express that in anyway they can find to do so as long as you aren’t throwing smoke and mirrors. If the ws is doing the love and sex bombing and nothing else- RUN.

I'd argue that R is a better default than D, because ...

1) A d-day is traumatic.

2) Change in M status is also traumatic, and adding trauma to trauma makes it much more difficult to heal.

3) Therefore, for partners who are willing to do the work necessary to heal themselves and their M, R should be the default. If one or more partners is unwilling to do the necessary work, R is impossible, so D is likely to be the best course of action.

But I believe there's an even better default - no default at all.

In my own experience and opinion I have found that healing from the A was a lot easier for me once I D'd because I was no longer around the perpetrator. Now my xWS was not remorseful or a healthy individual he was very narcissistic and emotionally abusive and I had reactive abuse towards his abuse. We were horrible together. I truly don't know whether I would ever be a good candidate for R as I have issues with any kind of abuse infidelity or otherwise and my c-ptsd would probably not make me a good candidate even if my WS were remorseful. I'm the type that holds grudges and has a hard time letting things go. Maybe that is what makes a BS a good candidate for R one that is not compounded by abuse and is able to let things go. Obviously the WS has to be a good candidate for R and the BS a good candidate for R for any of it to work.

I am impressed with those who have R'd and say that they still love their WS, are attracted to their WS and can be intimate with their WS after an A. I don't think my body would allow me to be vulnerable to that even if the WS was a good candidate.

[This message edited by crazyblindsided at 7:07 PM, Tuesday, April 8th]

@HikingOut - your response made me deeply uncomfortable. I understand what you are trying to express but it is essential to critically assess the implications of love-bombing within this context. While you argue that love-bombing can come from a place of sincere remorse and can even aid in rebuilding trust, it's crucial to recognize that this behavior, regardless of intent, can still be abusive and manipulative.

I have a lot to say on this but I'm not sure you are necessary the target. I feel you do understand most of what I'm about to say but felt it important to add this should anyone come across this chain.

Love-bombing often involves overwhelming displays of affection, attention, and promises, which can create a false sense of security for the recipient. This behavior can easily cross the line into emotional manipulation, making the betrayed partner feel obligated to respond in kind while unresolved issues remain unaddressed. The intensity of affection in these moments can obscure the underlying problems, leading to an unhealthy cycle of dependency and distraction from the necessary work of healing.

You refer to love and sex bombing as temporary measures that can be part of a healing process, but this outlook risks minimizing the importance of real, substantive change. True recovery requires accountability and difficult conversations about trust and betrayal, not just temporary gestures that might assuage immediate pain. To advocate for love-bombing is troubling as it can become a substitute for genuine remorse and responsibility, it can further harm the relationship, creating a barrier to authentic healing.

While you suggest that love-bombing is acceptable as long as it respects the boundaries of the recipient, it’s important to acknowledge that the emotional state of the betrayed partner can be precarious. In moments of vulnerability, they may not be in a position to assert their boundaries effectively, which can lead to further emotional distress and confusion. Love-bombing can complicate the healing process by shifting focus from the need for honest communication and self-reflection to a cycle of affection that may not be genuinely healthy.

The idea of hysterical bonding as a response to trauma does exist, yet it's crucial to recognize that this phenomenon can also be a coping mechanism that distracts from the need for processing the actual hurt and betrayal. While partners may find temporary solace in intimacy post-betrayal, it’s important to differentiate between moments of genuine connection arising from healing and those that are more about avoiding the hard truths about the relationship.

Even if the intention behind love-bombing is rooted in a desire to make amends, it can ultimately postpone critical discussions necessary for a relationship to thrive after infidelity. If a partner is engaging in love-bombing in lieu of confronting the underlying issues, it risks fostering an environment where those issues remain unresolved and festering, which could lead to further betrayal or disconnection down the line.

In conclusion, while there may be instances where love-bombing is carried out with the intent of healing, it is vital to recognize the potential for it to be manipulative and emotionally damaging. A healthier approach to reconciliation would prioritize clear communication and a commitment to addressing deeper relationship dynamics, rather than relying on affection as a form of atonement. A genuine, lasting recovery process mandates facing uncomfortable truths and engaging in meaningful change, rather than temporary emotional fixes.

@HikingOut - your response made me deeply uncomfortable. I understand what you are trying to express but it is essential to critically assess the implications of love-bombing within this context. While you argue that love-bombing can come from a place of sincere remorse and can even aid in rebuilding trust, it's crucial to recognize that this behavior, regardless of intent, can still be abusive and manipulative.

I did say that it can be that- it can be smoke and mirrors trying to trick or manipulate. I think what you have to discern is intent. And not all ws who love or sex bomb have bad intent. Not all have good intent.

The best way to look at intentions is what else are they doing? Are they going to therapy? Are they doing all they can to answer questions and figure themselves out?

In that case love bombing and sex bombing is often more directed at the results they are getting from it. If it seems to help their bs then they are going with behavior they see being rewarded or helpful.

What I mean by building trust is this- a bs watching the whole evolution of changes. When the ws has evolved enough to be intentional rather than love bombing, that is recognizable. To monitor progress you have to look at baselines. So what I meant by building trust is my husband saw the evolution go from my desperate love bombing to intentional, calm, authentic behaviors. All these nuances are part of reconciliation, the discernible progress that is undeniable.

And all of this is prefaced on the idea there are true signs of remorse and while some of the behaviors are misguided, the intention is truly to rebuild the marriage. I definitely in hindsight love and sex bombed him. I didn’t have ill intentions

I have a lot to say on this but I'm not sure you are necessary the target. I feel you do understand most of what I'm about to say but felt it important to add this should anyone come across this chain.

This is often why I respond to you as well. Not to convince you but to discuss nuances that may be helpful to other readers. Most of the time I can expect you may be able to do the logical parts but because you have not been through the process there are things I feel you warn against that are not necessarily bad things, you have to take the total picture and sum of efforts and progress when it comes to reconciling.

The person who just put a knife in your back has a lot of growing to do. A bs who is reconciling must recognize this, detach from the outcome as soon as they can figure out what that even means and get their emotions there so they can objectively weigh whether there is true progress or if it is negligible or feigned.

I am not suggesting all should bs try reconciling or put up with anything , I believe a lot of people my be better off divorcing. But when the bs thinks it is in their best interest then they basically have to give time for the ws to learn and change. I mean, when I confessed, it was not so I could turn around and keep cheating. I don’t think the bench mark is they don’t cheat any more - that is the easiest, lowest benchmark of qualifying criteria.

It’s that they are going to work on what ever made that possible, whatever can be traced as a contributing factor so that they move forward they can grow into a person who would be a better spouse overall.

So when I was trying to "help him heal" which I later understood was not something I could do for him, I was trying to show him through croons. Any words that I could say felt hollow in my mouth, so I would do everything I could to make his life easier, including initiating a lot of sex, and overly taking care of him.

What I am saying is sometimes it’s not sinister but a hyper-active initial response until better thoughts, behaviors, are more evident.

Love-bombing often involves overwhelming displays of affection, attention, and promises, which can create a false sense of security for the recipient. This behavior can easily cross the line into emotional manipulation, making the betrayed partner feel obligated to respond in kind while unresolved issues remain unaddressed. The intensity of affection in these moments can obscure the underlying problems, leading to an unhealthy cycle of dependency and distraction from the necessary work of healing.

I do not disagree that a ws when discovered often has a hyper focus on the wrong things. I also think the bs is responsible to state boundaries and what they want and don’t want. I witness many here who draw the lines. My husband would oscillate like most bs’s from Wanting to be hyper binding to wanting to be left alone, and I respected it.

But again, it’s about intentions. A ws who is remorseful could simply be trying to hang on a they attempt to ride the roller coaster with the bs. Ws who have only had a short time to work on themselves have limited view points on how else to handle it. Things change drastically(understandably) minute to minute.

This is why I think of the first year as nothing but recovery. Any reconciliation that is happening is honestly just two people who are emotional wreck trying to hang in there with each other. Seeing undeniable progress on the part of the ws often weighs into the decision to really get active into trying to repair the relationship. But the ba has many things they have to weigh for that decision. It takes a while for many to see things as irretrievably broken or know that it’s more than hopium it can work.

You refer to love and sex bombing as temporary measures that can be part of a healing process, but this outlook risks minimizing the importance of real, substantive change. True recovery requires accountability and difficult conversations about trust and betrayal, not just temporary gestures that might assuage immediate pain. To advocate for love-bombing is troubling as it can become a substitute for genuine remorse and responsibility, it can further harm the relationship, creating a barrier to authentic healing.

I I said you have to look at what else they are doing. A ws who is only love bombing and sex bombing is not who I am talking about. I was simply overzealous, as are many ws who have been here at different times. Hyper reaction does not always spell abuse. I can tell you if I wasn’t pursuing him, there would have been no way we would have gotten to the later stages.

While you suggest that love-bombing is acceptable as long as it respects the boundaries of the recipient, it’s important to acknowledge that the emotional state of the betrayed partner can be precarious. In moments of vulnerability, they may not be in a position to assert their boundaries effectively, which can lead to further emotional distress and confusion. Love-bombing can complicate the healing process by shifting focus from the need for honest communication and self-reflection to a cycle of affection that may not be genuinely healthy.

I don’t disagree. I am only saying it’s not always that. I think you would find in every case of reconciliation there was a lot of flailing around in both sides. Things you wish you did differently.

The idea of hysterical bonding as a response to trauma does exist, yet it's crucial to recognize that this phenomenon can also be a coping mechanism that distracts from the need for processing the actual hurt and betrayal. While partners may find temporary solace in intimacy post-betrayal, it’s important to differentiate between moments of genuine connection arising from healing and those that are more about avoiding the hard truths about the relationship

.

It can, but I can tell you when hysterical happens, that is not just the case s driving it at all. It’s a reclaiming thing from the bs side too. It doesn’t last forever, it runs it’s course and often in a window the bs as not ready to divorce or separate. It’s rarely a final deciding factor in anything. Most here report they were going to do it for them and they didn’t even care if the ws got anything out of it.

E

ven if the intention behind love-bombing is rooted in a desire to make amends, it can ultimately postpone critical discussions necessary for a relationship to thrive after infidelity. If a partner is engaging in love-bombing in lieu of confronting the underlying issues, it risks fostering an environment where those issues remain unresolved and festering, which could lead to further betrayal or disconnection down the line.

Yes, it can. But as I said if it’s the only thing the ws is doing….run. We would be telling that bs that they are being manipulated. It’s actually quite obvious when a ws will have all the sex you want but won’t talk about it bring up the affair. You seem to want to isolate this but I am saying look at the whole picture.

I

n conclusion, while there may be instances where love-bombing is carried out with the intent of healing, it is vital to recognize the potential for it to be manipulative and emotionally damaging. A healthier approach to reconciliation would prioritize clear communication and a commitment to addressing deeper relationship dynamics, rather than relying on affection as a form of atonement. A genuine, lasting recovery process mandates facing uncomfortable truths and engaging in meaningful change, rather than temporary emotional fixes.

If you can find two rational people after infidelity, who can perfectly execute everything as if they live in a vaccumn then sure.

What I think happens most of the time is the ws dwindles their chances when they won’t discuss the affair or won’t be honest or a host of other things that we see here. The hyper bonding does not stick around - it lasts anywhere from a few days to a few months, and is generally two sided.

Many bs come here and they say they want to be pursued, grand gestures to be made. That may be misguided in some cases. But I think it is fine if in the big picture where the ws is doing the work. And I think it’s completely understandable if the ws does all the work and truly changes and the bs still wants a divorce.

In every case of what I am talking about we must remember I am thinking about what is best for the bs and not the ws. A bs who wants to reconcile for whatever their reasons and their spouse is trying to move mountains but some of it is misguided stuff like love and sex bombing reads completely different than someone who is being manipulated at every turn. If I didn’t make that clear I apologize.

[This message edited by hikingout at 6:17 PM, Wednesday, April 9th]