SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

@Morbs

Whilst I understand this perspective, sometimes what someone wants isn't in their best interests. Sometimes what someone wants isn't good for anyone.

Consider how this framework applies in other contexts of abuse, remembering that infidelity is, after all, a form of severe emotional and psychological abuse. Suppose a victim of domestic abuse posted in a support forum stating that, despite ongoing toxicity, they simply wanted to stay and find a way to tolerate the situation. They have explicitly stated what they want. Should a supportive community simply accept that mandate and ask, "How can we help you stay and accommodate this?" Of course not. Members would challenge the trauma bond, point out the severe danger to their wellbeing, and highlight that what they want in that moment of trauma is actively harmful to them.

The underlying principle does not change when supporting a betrayed spouse. In the wake of acute trauma, panic, fear, or codependency, what someone desperately wants in the short term can directly undermine their long-term safety and wellbeing. A betrayed partner might want to rug-sweep, accept ongoing disrespect, or surrender essential boundaries out of sheer terror of losing the relationship. Treating a person's immediate desire as sacrosanct under the guise of "meeting them where they are" risks validating decisions driven by trauma rather than clarity.

There is a vital distinction between stripping someone of their agency and offering a crucial reality check.

I challenge those initial impulses because we see the alternative play out on this forum every all the time: individuals returning four, five, or ten years down the line, filled with profound regret and wishing deeply that they had taken a different path. They spend precious, irreplaceable years exhausting themselves to rebuild something that was never actually viable, only to end up having to start completely over a decade later.

Will my approach always be accurate? Impossible. Would some people much rather a softer tone and an arm around the shoulder? For sure. But we already have plenty of that.

Side note: I deeply respect WWTL and find his account devastating, largely because it reflects an alternative reality I easily could have inhabited. Reconciliation requires a specific internal tolerance for betrayal that many people—myself included—simply do not possess. Suppressing that incompatibility doesn't heal it; it usually resurfaces years later as bitterness or cruelty.

Many betrayed partners desperately want reconciliation without auditing whether their own self-worth, principles, and emotional thresholds can actually withstand it. WWTL’s account highlights the tragic cost of forcing a reconciliation process you aren't built to survive: spending years trying to endure the unendurable, only to realize the resentment has irreversibly corroded you anyway. That potential outcome needs to be part of the conversation upfront. You could argue I spend too much time on this but I feel it important to.

Furthermore, many betrayed partners look back years down the line at how they desperately clung to the relationship with feelings of intense shame and disgust. Retrospectively, they acknowledge that their behaviour during that panic-driven phase was entirely out of alignment with their usual self-respect and dignity. Whilst I would always advise anyone in that position to offer themselves grace considering the severe trauma they were undergoing, that does not change the reality. If a voice had actively challenged their betrayal fog early on, it might have saved them years of regret and self-flagellation. Pushing back on trauma-driven wants isn't about arrogance or cruelty; it is about trying to protect someone from losing years of their life to a slow-motion disaster.

Sometimes, it appears to me, some members of this community doesn't view infidelity as the abuse that it is. Perhaps I'm too strong of a counter-point to that position but I think it's good to have all voices.

@Pogre

This connects directly to the interaction you brought up on your JFO thread. I appreciate you sharing how that reply landed, and I genuinely hear that it felt demoralising at a time when you were already dealing with acute trauma.

When I shared the observation that individuals who refuse to contemplate life apart from their partner often face the hardest outcomes, it was not an assumption about your worth, nor was it a decree that you must divorce. It was a stark warning about a well-documented, high-risk pattern. In the raw aftermath of betrayal, panic frequently drives people to seek reconciliation at any cost, often at the direct expense of their safety, sanity, and boundaries.

All I was attempting to do was to highlight those risks, the intent is not to label someone or project a personal agenda onto them. It is to hold up a mirror to a dangerous failure mode so the poster can audit their own situation and ask: Am I protecting myself, or am I acting out of sheer terror of being alone!

I am genuinely glad to hear that you had already taken proactive, protective steps, such as setting up legal consultations, and that 16 months later, you and your wife are making real progress. But your experience actually proves the core principle: taking firm, protective measures and maintaining the willingness to walk away is precisely what prevents the worst outcomes. Pointing out the danger of unconditional surrender isn't about imposing personal ego or dictating someone's choices; it's about ensuring someone in crisis sees the potential traps ahead before they walk blindly into them.

It's often said of SI, referring to the advice given, take what's useful to you and leave the rest. I agree with this. But I'm happy to offer advice knowing it will only resonate with some.

Anyways, hopefully that's the last time I will need to defend the motivation behind my posts. Feel like I've had to do it way too much of late. It just drags us off track whenever discussing interesting topics. That's somewhat on me but I just find it difficult to ignore and not engage with people claiming I've got ulterior motives. Guess it comes with the territory when offering alternative perspectives. I can see why people with my perspective aren't well represented in this community, I'd presume they got either wore down or run off in the long term. I will persist however whilst keeping in mind the voices I would have appreciated when going through this.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 11:04 AM, Monday, August 17th]

…remembering that infidelity is, after all, a form of severe emotional and psychological abuse

That is in no way automatically true, which means your entire argument, rest on a false premise.

Whilst I understand this perspective, sometimes what someone wants isn't in their best interests. Sometimes what someone wants isn't good for anyone.

It's an astonishing level of arrogance to presume you know what's best for strangers on the internet.

@HouseOfPlane

Well, that’s your opinion. But even if I granted you that infidelity isn't automatically classified as abuse, I fail to see how that invalidates the rest of my argument—feel free to attempt to demonstrate how it does.

My core point doesn't hinge on a label; it hinges on the reality of acute betrayal trauma. When someone is in the grips of panic, shock, and fear of abandonment, their short-term wants often directly undermine their long-term safety and dignity. Whether you call that experience "abuse" or "profound betrayal," the psychological dynamic is identical. A supportive community shouldn't passively validate panic-driven choices under the guise of "meeting them where they are."

Debating the definition doesn't magically erase the real-world outcomes I highlighted. It doesn't undo the well-documented pattern of people rug-sweeping out of terror, only to return years later filled with profound regret and lost self-respect. Knocking over one word in an opening statement doesn't collapse an argument built on trauma-driven decision-making and real-world results. If you believe removing the word "abuse" completely dismantles that logic, lay out the proof.

From my experience.

The AP while younger was not prettier or smarter or in better shape or anything else (except for the large number of tattoos covering her neck, chest, arms & legs). Her fashion sense was to wear to small tops and let her best assets hang out of every shirt she wore.

She was new. She was exciting. She was single.

At dday2 and learning it was months of false reconciliation I recognized a few things.

While my H begged me to give him another chance at R, I was planning to D him. So I didn’t demand no contact or access to his phone or any other course of action. I recognized that if the person wants to cheat, they will. If they want to lie & cheat and pretend to be reconciling, they will.

My H made changes in his own. Maybe that is why they stuck and they still exist today. He could do whatever he wanted and make any decision that he wanted. And I would act accordingly and if I didn’t like his decisions or behavior, I could choose to D him.

I’m sorry but IMO if you have to tell a grown adult "you cannot be in contact with the person you were cheating with" then I seriously doubt the cheater really wants to end the affair.

Again just my opinion. Based on my experience.

there's a fundamental problem here, where a number of posters here have stated they want this community to have a certain impact on those who come here.

The thing about measuring success by impact is that it means that intent or motivation is less important.

DRS the problem some have with you here is that you have a pattern of arguing your intentions in order to justify when your participation is hurtful. You've now illustrated this in your response to Pogre. The most you were able to do with Pogre's harm is state that you hear it, but you immediately jumped into defending your intent instead of directly addressing Pogre's feeling that they would have been better off had you said nothing.

People keep questioning your intentions here not because they don't understand your argument, it's because it's frustrating to see you repeatedly prioritize your rightness over your impact, and one starts to wonder why. Trust me, we all understand very well at this point that you think you are correct. I think we feel that you can be correct and have an unhelpful impact in application. If you think what you're saying is worth the reported impacts, then there's really no need to keep arguing your intent. Your intent doesn't matter to pushback that is about your impact.

I've also noticed another pattern, where when you get called out for being hurtful, pigheaded, condescending, etc, you go silent for a bit, then leave a few comments along the lines of "gosh I'm so sorry that happened. that's terrible," then you're back to the problematic behavior. This contributes to the feeling that the help is performative, and the real motive is something more self-aggrandizing.

I’m sorry but IMO if you have to tell a grown adult "you cannot be in contact with the person you were cheating with" then I seriously doubt the cheater really wants to end the affair.

Again just my opinion. Based on my experience.

Your opinion is valid based on your experience . My ultimatums were valid as well based on my experience . I had immediately told my H that the M was over when he confessed to his A. I then got up from the sofa and told him to message the adultery co-conspirator so that they could make their plans for their future because we were DONE. My experience from my 1st M was "once a cheater always a cheater"...and I was NOT going to stay married to a cheater. I KNEW how that turned out!!

As I went to the bedroom though...my H...who was now a FREE MAN from ME...followed me . He ASKED to come and lay with me in the bed. This...after two days of being home from overseas and barely touching me at all ! We talked for a bit...him trying to talk about US...and me continually talking about life without US being together. I finally told him that he needed to go and message the adultery co-conspirator. The time difference between the two countries would mean that she would be asleep soon...and I wanted this to be DONE. He reluctantly got up and left the room.

It wasn't until I was alone that my lizard brain started to calm down. When I began to get a little clarity then questions started popping up in my head. WHY did my H come into the room with me IF he WANTED to be with the adultery co-conspirator? Did I misread what he was telling me when he confessed? Was there something I could do to see if his intentions were to be with me...and that he regretted his bad decision to have an A? I had a LOT of other questions in my head...way too many to be listed here and some I have written about a LOT . But it all boiled down to the point that IF my H could change his ways and become the man who was WORTHY to be called my H...then why not try? I knew I could handle D...I did it before. That is when I came up with the ultimatums . The FIRST one being...he had to send another message to the adultery co-conspirator. Only this time...instead of discussing THEIR future...he would be telling her there was NO future for THEM. I wanted to see if he was willing to burn that bridge. If not...then I would burn OUR bridge. That may also be WHY other BS tell their WS to send a NC? I can't answer that for every BS on here...I just know...for ME...this was MY ultimatum on that.

Just in case anyone is unaware...The1stWife and I have been here around the same time...and we are both happily reconciled . We VALUE each other's opinion and advice...even though there will be some things that one of us has/hasn't done that the other one has/hasn't. One being that I wash my H's clothes now...and she doesn't !! Another being that we BOTH didn't do the "pick-me-dance" when we decided to R after D . Even though our outcomes are the same...we didn't reach them in the same way...because of our experience . EACH of us have to decide what will work to get us to the point of recovering from this trauma...and then we can decide on whether to R or D. I believe that ALL of us who are happily in R can attest that BOTH parties have to be ALL IN in order for R to work.

For ME...I wasn't ALL IN until about year 3...but my H was ALL IN the moment I came back into the living room and told him that R may be possible. In fact...he told me later that while he was in the living room alone...after messaging the adultery co-conspirator to let her know our M was over...and them messaging about what to do next for THEIR relationship...that he thought to himself that IF I were to give him another chance he would do whatever I wanted because he couldn't even fathom a life without me. I often joke on here that IF I had known that THEN...I may have given him MORE ultimatums !!

Reconciliation requires a specific internal tolerance for betrayal that many people—myself included—simply do not possess. Suppressing that incompatibility doesn't heal it; it usually resurfaces years later as bitterness or cruelty.

WRONG AGAIN. As I have said before...just like those who have never experienced infidelity don't know how it REALLY feels...those who have never experienced true R don't know how it REALLY feels either. I can tell people it is AWESOME...but until they have actually experienced it...they can't possibly know. For ME...tolerance was what I did to R in my 1st M...which I found out later was false R when I caught my 1st H with another adultery-co-conspirator. Tolerant was NOT what I was going to be this time around...and that MIGHT have been what brought us to be happily in R ! My H and I were definitely incompatible BEFORE the A...but became very compatible AFTER the WORK we BOTH put into our M . I am sincerely sad for you DRSOOLERS to see the bitterness and cruelty has taken over your psyche. I pray that one day you will be able to have your heart softened...because the words you use on here do not show that you are a person who has peace in their heart (((HUGS))).

I've also noticed another pattern, where when you get called out for being hurtful, pigheaded, condescending, etc, you go silent for a bit, then leave a few comments along the lines of "gosh I'm so sorry that happened. that's terrible," then you're back to the problematic behavior. This contributes to the feeling that the help is performative, and the real motive is something more self-aggrandizing.

I have as well. Does anyone else here feel like this is a poster from the past...whose username was similar to "Thermos"? He was definitely in the "Burn the Witch" club and had very STRONG opinions against others who were attempting R? These are patterns that he used so strongly against my sweet Niece on here...and sadly she has never come back to spread her words of HOPE. After he accomplished this...he left. Or did he ?

This connects directly to the interaction you brought up on your JFO thread. I appreciate you sharing how that reply landed, and I genuinely hear that it felt demoralising at a time when you were already dealing with acute trauma.

Well I'm glad that you hear me, but it didn't do much for my morale at the time. I was already devastated and here I had a veteran member of a forum with "Dr" in their name telling me that I might fall into the camp of someone bound for disaster. For all I knew at that time you were (and may yet be) an actual Dr who had the best possible advice on the entire forum. For all I knew at that time you could have been staff. That maybe you saw something I didn't see about myself.

When I shared the observation that individuals who refuse to contemplate life apart from their partner often face the hardest outcomes, it was not an assumption about your worth, nor was it a decree that you must divorce. It was a stark warning about a well-documented, high-risk pattern. In the raw aftermath of betrayal, panic frequently drives people to seek reconciliation at any cost, often at the direct expense of their safety, sanity, and boundaries.

I'm not even saying you were wrong. In fact I agree more than disagree with the substance of what you said. It was your delivery, telling me you suspect I "fall into that camp" certainly felt like you'd made an assumption about my worth, or at least my ability to discern my worth. By the time I found these forums I had already started my now almost year and a half long deep dive into this subject. I had never been through anything like this, but I also didn't arrive here not having already done some homework. You made a caveated assumption about me based on my first couple of posts, but to someone reeling from trauma and grief a caveat means little.

All I was attempting to do was to highlight those risks, the intent is not to label someone or project a personal agenda onto them. It is to hold up a mirror to a dangerous failure mode so the poster can audit their own situation and ask: Am I protecting myself, or am I acting out of sheer terror of being alone!

I didn't know if you were projecting or not, but I did feel labeled within my first few posts here as a lost cause.

I am genuinely glad to hear that you had already taken proactive, protective steps, such as setting up legal consultations, and that 16 months later, you and your wife are making real progress. But your experience actually proves the core principle: taking firm, protective measures and maintaining the willingness to walk away is precisely what prevents the worst outcomes. Pointing out the danger of unconditional surrender isn't about imposing personal ego or dictating someone's choices; it's about ensuring someone in crisis sees the potential traps ahead before they walk blindly into them.

I appreciate that you're glad I had already taken steps, but had you asked some more questions instead of telling me about the potential traps and pitfalls you seemed to assume I was falling into then I would have answered them. You just flat out told me you think I may fall into that camp.

At the time I didn't consider me calling a couple of lawyers was as important a data point as the other things I included in my OP. Your post felt a little bit like an indictment along the lines of "if you keep doing what you're doing you deserve what you get." For all I knew, when I first got here, I was going to be told I was a terrible husband and that it's no wonder my wife cheated on me. I'd done some homework, but I had no idea what this community was like. I was desparate and drowning in grief. I really just needed to hear "this isn't your fault." I was hoping someone would toss me a life preserver and "put their arm around me." Maybe that makes me pathetic, but let's face it, at 4 weeks out from d day I was pretty pathetic.

I know there are patterns and commonalities, but people are different. I said in my original post that I thought my wife and I were outliers, and it turns out that was accurate. My wife is certainly an outlier in many ways. I knew that about her when I married her, and I'm certainly not what most people would consider "normal." Plus we had some unusual extenuating circumstances that I tried to convey in that first thread.

It's often said of SI, referring to the advice given, take what's useful to you and leave the rest. I agree with this. But I'm happy to offer advice knowing it will only resonate with some.

I don't think you're a bad guy. In fact occasionally you will author a post that really resonates with me. I believe you mean well and don't want to see people suffer needlessly. I just think you could soften your approach in JFO sometimes and still get the same message across.

I felt like you had a certain disdain toward me right off the bat (and maybe still do) because I expressed a desire to reconcile. It felt to me like you saw that and automatically put me into the "lost cause" bucket. Being brand new here I put on my brave face and stiff upper lipped a lengthy but courteous reply to you thanking you for your input, but truth be told I felt a little bit like I was kicked while I was down.

Anyway, I dragged this far enough off topic. I apologize Morbs.

I will say the NC advice I received here was invaluable. I was a little soft on that. The good folks here drilled that into my head early on, and I immediately made that a condition for R. Wife and AP worked opposite shifts so I thought I could tough it out, but it really did bother me. After some strong nudges here I told her that was a non negotiable boundary and she put in for a location transfer the next day. I was waffling on it because I was trying to not be "controlling." I understand now that it's a pretty critical condition for R.

Just in case anyone is unaware...The1stWife and I have been here around the same time...and we are both happily reconciled smile . We VALUE each other's opinion and advice...even though there will be some things that one of us has/hasn't done that the other one has/hasn't. One being that I wash my H's clothes now...and she doesn't laugh !! Another being that we BOTH didn't do the "pick-me-dance" when we decided to R after D wink . Even though our outcomes are the same...we didn't reach them in the same way...because of our experience smile

Thank you Want2BHappy. I agree that there are so many paths and ways to get to a happy reconciliation.

It’s funny how we both told our CH "you are free to go" and be w/ the OW or anyone else you choose. And how suddenly the CH no longer wanted a D to be free to date the OW (or others).

No pick me dance either — as we both learned it makes the betrayed look weak, trying too hard and I believe irritates the hell out of the cheater.

I like to read successful stories for R from the people here at SI — we can all learn something.

I didn’t lift a finger to help R. I worked for 6 months to R and when I found out he was still cheating, I recognized I no longer cared AND I knew I was D him.

I’m also against a polygraph test for the simple reason that if I need someone else to verify what my H tells me or told me, then the marriage is over for me. It’s my personal opinion but I would never discourage anyone from doing one. Especially if the BS needed it.

All in all we will never agree there is only 1 way to R. And thanks to frequent posters like Bigger and Pogre and too many names to mention, I hope I have helped even one person the way this group has helped me.

Pissing matches aside, here's what I've concluded from this thread:

NC is paramount, but for whatever reason not always possible. In the latter case, it's up to the BS to decide if they can deal and for how long.

It's also up to the BS to decide whether the ends justify the means.I personally don't mind calling it an indignity to have to ask your partner to cut off contact with the AP. But everyone has their own equation in this cost-benefit analysis. Maybe if we all became Buddhists, we could remove the ego part at least.

All this, pissing matches included, has lead me to be contemplating the the notion of intent. I know there are exceptions (one active poster's partner straight up told them that they did it to punish them), but most waywards didn't "mean" to hurt us despite all of their why's. At what point do we factor intent into the equation?

examining intent is valuable to understanding why one did an action which led to the impacts at hand. Intent can matter in the BS calculus of their boundaries with the WS. But generally when it comes to harm reduction, harm prevention, and healing, impact has to weigh more than intent. It can cause more harm to try using intent as a reason to avoid dealing with impact or to convince yourself the impacts are lesser because of it.

could you explain more about how telling someone they are hurting people with the way they talk to them is a pissing match?

Hi torso, thanks for the response.

I don't think that letting someone know that their words or actions has caused pain is a pissing match. Ideally, the "perpetrator" would simply recognize the pain they've caused and try to assure the injured party that they won't do it again. But here we are on SurvivingInfidelity.Com, where people did and do things according to their own intents.

The reason I am pondering intent is somewhat philosophical, but why should one perceive pain when no one meant to inflict it? I know this might rub people the wrong way, and I apologize in advance. It's just something I've been pondering.

The reason I am pondering intent is somewhat philosophical, but why should one perceive pain when no one meant to inflict it?

Why would one who didn't mean to inflict pain disclose what their plans were beforehand then?

Whilst I understand this perspective, sometimes what someone wants isn't in their best interests. Sometimes what someone wants isn't good for anyone.

I'm not suggesting that anyone limit their advice to what OPs want to hear. What I am suggesting is that we approach each BS with curiosity about their preference towards D or R, evaluate if their situation and WS are compatible with that preference, and then move forward with advice and support. Yes, sometimes a BS will desire R and it's just most likely not a good idea for them, in which case gentle discouragement and logical reasoning can be useful for them.

Ongoing abuse is not to be tolerated, especially when physical health and safety are at risk. If a spouse is being abused, whether physically, emotionally, financially, fidelity-wise, what have you, we still need to help them evaluate whether they are safe and whether their spouse is likely to continue abusing them...

For example, if my H ever hit me (not that I think he's at all likely to) then I would want to see him in more regular and intensive therapy and probably an anger management program, and I would probably temporarily separate myself and our child from him while he was in recovery. I would set a boundary that if it ever happened again, we would need to divorce. But I wouldn't immediately want divorce. I wouldn't find someone telling me about how I don't respect myself and I'm staying down in the dirt and refusing to look in the mirror by not divorcing him to be helpful or supportive.

We should absolutely warn BS about things like rug sweeping, ongoing disrespect, failure to maintain boundaries, etc. That doesn't mean projecting our own desire, principles, and boundaries onto them and trying to convince them to D or R when they don't really want that.

I challenge those initial impulses because we see the alternative play out on this forum every all the time: individuals returning four, five, or ten years down the line, filled with profound regret and wishing deeply that they had taken a different path. They spend precious, irreplaceable years exhausting themselves to rebuild something that was never actually viable, only to end up having to start completely over a decade later.

I think that's simply a risk one takes when trying to R. There's no guarantee it will work out. What we try to do here is keep tabs of which variables that, when present, will most likely produce success for a given couple attempting R, and which will result in failure. I think there are plenty of members that are neither pro R nor pro D; they are pro healing and pro individual. The advice generally seems to me to be well rounded. Also, I'm sure there are just as many folks who immediately D and end up regretting it and missing their spouse for years and years, and struggle to heal through the heartbreak (though we're probably less likely to hear from them.)

There is no easy way out of infidelity.

@HouseOfPlane I'm really sorry, I know it's a tangent, I've just got to ask why do you say infidelity is not always abuse? Or do you mean it's not always severe abuse? I don't want to get into an argument or debate about it, it's just it's something I'm wrestling with a lot and trying to wrap my head around, and I think you're the first person I've seen on here voice that opinion and I would really like to understand.

Thank you to those BS who have shared their experiences here. I always appreciate hearing about additional data/perspectives/recovery or divorce outcomes.

Retrospected,

It's also up to the BS to decide whether the ends justify the means.I personally don't mind calling it an indignity to have to ask your partner to cut off contact with the AP. But everyone has their own equation in this cost-benefit analysis.

I agree with this.

All this, pissing matches included, has lead me to be contemplating the the notion of intent. I know there are exceptions (one active poster's partner straight up told them that they did it to punish them), but most waywards didn't "mean" to hurt us despite all of their why's. At what point do we factor intent into the equation?

If I had to guess, I would say a WS who cheated with the specific intent to harm their BS would be a worse candidate for R than one who had a "slippery slope" A and their BS was simply collateral damage... We could consider compartmentalization, guilt, and the degree of faulty rationalizations made (such as "what they don't know won't hurt them") as well. But I would need more data to support or reject that hypothesis.

The reason I am pondering intent is somewhat philosophical, but why should one perceive pain when no one meant to inflict it?

If someone is pitching a baseball and accidentally hits you in the face with it, does it still hurt? We expect our spouses to execute caution, think carefully and rationally about their actions, be loyal and protect our hearts. Infidelity is a failure to do that. I hurts regardless of the WS's intent... I remember prior to DDay thinking that it would "hurt" my husband IF he found out what I was doing. That it would be better to swallow my guilt and take the secret to my grave rather than confess and actualize the "hurt." I didn't comprehend the extent of it. The sheer INTENSITY of pain and devastation on his face when he confronted me about it on DDay was... Overwhelming. Shocking. It instantly made me think, "Oh God, what have I fucking done!?"

And really, I should have known better.

[This message edited by GotTheMorbs at 8:40 AM, Tuesday, August 18th]

@HouseOfPlane I'm really sorry, I know it's a tangent, I've just got to ask why do you say infidelity is not always abuse? Or do you mean it's not always severe abuse? I don't want to get into an argument or debate about it, it's just it's something I'm wrestling with a lot and trying to wrap my head around, and I think you're the first person I've seen on here voice that opinion and I would really like to understand.

Oh man, deep question.

I think of abuse as something I intentionally do to you.

There is zero doubt in my mind that the vast majority of WS don’t want to get caught. In fact, zero doubt in my mind that the majority of WS don’t get caught. If they do get caught, they’re not happy about it. That is pretty much the opposite of intentional abuse.

I wonder if the desire to call it abuse is a desire to be important in the story. I am important, they did this to me, it was intentional. I am at the center of this.

The truth for a lot of cases is probably that you weren’t even thought of at all. Maybe that is worse. No, probably that is worse.

Both are stories that you tell yourself in order for things to make sense. I think the second one tends to be more truthful, at least to the extent that any story we tell ourselves is true. Better to delay letting the story put down roots because once it does, you see them through the lens of that story, to mix my metaphors. Better to suspend judgment and just watch them, see them as they are. Watch them as their own little story, "look at me I have two people clamoring for my attention I am the king of the universe" gets blown up.

[This message edited by HouseOfPlane at 1:02 PM, Tuesday, August 18th]

I think people can be unintentionally abusive.

Consider someone with control and insecure attachment issues. Maybe they start complaining about their spouse's best friend, how they spend so much time with her instead of him, and can't she just make more time for him? And he genuinely believes the sentiment, even if the reality is she spends a perfectly normal amount of time with her best friend, and it's really his subconscious fear of losing her that's driving his request. Eventually he convinces her to stop seeing her best friend at all, and then all of the others, and then her extended family, and suddenly she's socially isolated. Maybe he convinces her to stop working, too, because he's got a good job and she doesn't need to work, and why would she want to be away from home (and him) if she doesn't have to be? Then he just gets progressively more controlling and there's no one around to put a stop to it. But he didn't ever consciously thing "First I'll isolate her, and then I'll have ever more power over her..."

Just hypothetically speaking. I also think a lot of people with anger management issues who engage in domestic violence don't intend to beat up their spouses; they often lose control of themselves and act without contemplation. Many of them experience guilt and shame afterwards and promise they'll never do it again...

Same thing with some cases of infidelity. I think it's abusive, even if unintentionally so.

@HouseofPlane thank you for explaining, I appreciate you sharing your take. I strongly disagree with you, both about whether affairs are abusive and about why some people (myself included) believe it's important to label them that way. I don't want to hijack the conversation any more than I already have - but thank you.

Intended to leave this thread but this ones too important to ignore, heres the counter points RE: abuse

Oh man, deep question.

I think of abuse as something I intentionally do to you.

As opposed to all the accidental cheating that happens? Intentionally engaging in an act that violates your partner, breaks your vows, and risks their safety is intentional, regardless of whether you hoped to hide it.

There is zero doubt in my mind that the vast majority of WS don’t want to get caught.

Not wanting to get caught has never been the defining line for whether an action is abusive. Consider financial abuse: a person secretly spending joint marital assets—whether on a gambling addiction or lavish spending—desperately hopes they won't get caught. They might even rationalize that their next big bet will pay it all back. Does the desire to keep theft a secret make it any less abusive to the victim?

In fact, zero doubt in my mind that the majority of WS don’t get caught. If they do get caught, they’re not happy about it. That is pretty much the opposite of intentional abuse.

Hiding a harmful act is not the opposite of abuse; it is standard operating procedure for most forms of abuse, including covert emotional, financial, and psychological abuse.

More importantly, it completely ignores the issue of informed consent. A betrayed partner consents to intimate relations under the explicit understanding of mutual fidelity. When a wayward partner secretly engages with outside sexual partners and continues to sleep with their spouse, they strip that spouse of their autonomy and expose them to potentially life-altering or lethal STIs without their knowledge or consent.

Removing someone's fundamental right to informed bodily autonomy, simply because you think you can hide the risk from them, is precisely why this falls squarely into the realm of severe abuse.