User Topic: Three Deal Breakers
Member # 28362
Default  Posted: 12:31 PM, October 7th (Monday)

I am reading a new book for me. "Intimacy after infidelity". Authors are Steven D. Solomon, PH.D. and Lorie J. Teagno, PH.D.

In this book they state that Infidelity is not a dealbreaker.

The three dealbreakers are:

1. One or both parnters were never in love with the other.

2. Over a long period of time(7-10 years) so much hurt and anger were inflicted by one or both partners that it killed the love that once was there.

3. One or both partners refuse to own their part in the difficulties in the ltlr and or they sincerely refuse to work on their contributions to the relationships problems.

This has me very confused. Aren't these three dealbreakers many of the reasons for the infidelity to begin with? Woulnd't this make an A a deal breaker?


Posts: 828 | Registered: Apr 2010
Member # 26928
Default  Posted: 12:34 PM, October 7th (Monday)

I think it is nuts for someone else to define what another person's dealbreakers are.

Only YOU can decide what is a dealbreaker- not a line in a book, a post on a website, etc.

Me - 42
SorryInSac (WH#2) - 47. DDay 7/12/14
Married 4, together 7yrs total
Status - Stick a fork in me...

DD(21), DS(18, PDD-NOS)
6 Furkids - 4 dogs, 2 cats

WXH (serial cheater, 12+ OW) - Legally married 18yrs

I edit often for clarity.

Posts: 6540 | Registered: Dec 2009 | From: California
Member # 33226
Default  Posted: 12:41 PM, October 7th (Monday)

I think it is nuts for someone else to define what another person's dealbreakers are.
I agree, Gaby.

Dallas - I know a lot of members have expressed in the D/S forum over the years that the A was not the deal breaker, it was the issue that lead to the A, or the lies that accompanied the A, or their WS' disregard for their BS' health and safety, or the damage that was inflicted on the kids, etc. etc.. But I have also seen members post that it was the A itself.

I think their blanket statement is inaccurate.

You can call me NIK

"If you carry joy in your heart, you can heal any moment."
- Carlos Santana

Posts: 25774 | Registered: Aug 2011
Member # 39166
Default  Posted: 12:44 PM, October 7th (Monday)

Aren't they basically saying a marriage won't work if any of these is true:

1. One or both have never loved the other

2. One or both no longer love the other

3. One or both can't be bothered to make changes to show they love the other?

That it is possible to work through it, if both want that, but both need to want it?

[This message edited by Softcentre at 12:45 PM, October 7th (Monday)]

Me: BW
Him: STBXWH 'The Arse' likes strong but broken OW
OW - EA - 'Holy Chick'
COW - Suspected EA/PA 'The Ambassador'
COW - Susp EA 'The Baker'
COW - EA/PA 'Fat Bottomed Girl'
COW - Susp EA 'MiniMe'

Posts: 1062 | Registered: May 2013 | From: UK
little turtle
Member # 15584
Default  Posted: 12:44 PM, October 7th (Monday)

My guess is that the authors of the book are saying that just because there is infidelity in a relationship, that doesn't mean the relationship is over. However, the authors believe that if one of those deal breakers is present, then the relationship is over.

1. You can be with someone that you don't love without cheating.
2. The hurt and anger could be from abuse of some sort (physical, verbal, emotional).
3. It takes 2 people to make a relationship work.

I agree with Gaby. You have to choose your own deal breakers. For some people, infidelity is a deal breaker. For others, they want to reconcile. No one can choose for you!

Failure is success if we learn from it.

Posts: 4209 | Registered: Aug 2007 | From: michigan
Topic Posts: 5