SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Maise - don't worry, I'm not offended in the least! My conflict avoidance has been largely "cured" by my WH's actions, and it's resonated over to my own life (work, etc). I am not so fearful of the outcome - and I think that's what it comes down to. My WH (claims) he was unhappy before the A and said nothing, because he was fearful that I would say I was leaving him or otherwise not satisfied with him. I was afraid of saying "this is not acceptable to me" because I was afraid he would say he was done post-A (ultimately he did just that). But what can you do really?

Someone posted on here that telling the truth is the ultimate letting go of the outcome. You can control telling the truth but you cannot control someone's reaction to it. It is simply impossible to do that. Once you grasp that, letting go of the outcome and leaning into potential conflict, is easier (not easy, but easier). Of course you have to couple that with not being an asshole.

I think avoiding conflict in the affair arena is harder as sometimes (a lot of times) the WS doesn't know what they want for an outcome so it is easier to just do nothing and avoid creating an outcome when you don't want one (aka cake eating). My WH now wants the outcome of my leaving because he is tired of dealing with the aftermath of the A to the point where it has "soured" him against me. My hurt and responses to his actions aren't worth it to him - plain and simple. He's also afraid that he "puts in the work and I leave anyway" and that's losing control - he would rather be the one to decide (because he still see himself as the prize - and there is nothing inherently wrong with putting yourself first - we preach that to BS all the time on here - but it can't be just you or it's not a relationship at all).

Gunnut,

IMO conflict avoidance is merely one of several or many symptoms that can lead to an affair. I don't think all cheaters are conflict avoidant though. Those cheaters that are just in it for a little extra (no ego kibbles, just out and out sex) come to mind. He/She just wants a little Strange. That type exists out there. These folks are still broken in many ways, but don't necessarily have C.A. personalities. Some do, some don't.

RIO,

Just a general question, what is your definition of conflict?

A confrontation is "a hostile or argumentative..."

Conflict avoidance is "method....to avoid directly confronting an issue"

I ask because when I think of the definitions, as a male I've never though the pursuit to be a "conflict". Never in my pursuit of the big "O", has the denial or discussion of sex ever turned into an argument (until Post D-day) nor have they ever turned hostile. I try, she says no, I move on. No conflict in my book, rejection? Sure. I won't lie it kinda of hurts your pride a bit, but certainly not a conflict.

I know I'm probably looking at the literal definitions of how I view conflict and/or Marian Webster, but was just curious how you defined it, so I can see how you got to your POV.

Sorry if this was a T/J

2 responses.

-Firstly, I agree with the statement about women not needing conflict to get sex and men do require it. Men need to at a minimum, to compete with other men to gain the attention of the female. Sometimes the situation already removes that boundary. Like more women than men in an area, but those are extra factors.

-Second, the reason lots of cheaters are conflict avoiders is because those people typically have poor boundaries. A person more prone to conflict will hold boundaries firm and step up to the challenge of said boundary. A conflict avoider will possible "redirect" an inappropriate conversation which doesn't inform the receiving party that the conversation was inappropriate in the first place. Which makes further inappropriate activity proceed until the cheater realizes they have already sacrificed so many boundaries.

I totally get the resentment part. My wife once said to me during a rough spot, while the A’s we’re going on but years before I found out; that if I really loved her I would know what her needs were and she shouldn’t have to tell me. I told her that if she felt that way, she should have married a clairvoyant, because unless I’m told by you I can’t know what’s on your mind and that became a further example of my insensitivity. She vacillated between outright abusive aggressiveness and passive aggression and I think running around behind my back was her way of getting even with me for situations that I wasn’t even aware of.

It’s so maddening that she stonewalled, shut me out and gave me the silent treatment and then had A’s because I wasn’t there for her. I know it isn’t even sort of true and the A’s we’re ALL on her, but it’s still maddening.

Yep Gunnut, we were all supposed to be mind readers. How dare us!

My WS is conflict avoidant, passive aggressive and a Narc.

I'm about as confrontational as it gets

that if I really loved her I would know what her needs were and she shouldn’t have to tell me.

Sorry this made me laugh. What a bunch of horseshit

Don't agree with the idea that the man is usually up against many conflicts in the pursuit of an A. If you put yourself out and try your luck with lots of random ppl, maybe, but that's the same for either sex.

My WS is extremely conflict avoidant. I used to think he was just extremely laid back, as I've seen him argue over politics etc with his dad, but that's obviously not the same thing.

He didn't come up against any conflict whatsoever in his relationship with the AP. She started as an over friendly friend, he met up for a drink (as a friend) when he was resentful with me but not saying anything to let me know his feelings), was invited to her place, where she gave very clear signals. And kept going back for more. He was completely up for it, didn't put himself in a position where he'd be knocked back, so no uncomfortable conflict whatsoever. I'd bet most A (as opposed to ons) go along those lines.

Back to the original q. It's pretty simple in WS's case. He was resentful at me but too conflict avoidant to have a conversation about that and try to fix it. So he went looking for someone else to have a relationship with, and she was easy. Was then too conflict avoidant to do anything more than cake eat, until she pushed for more.

His conflict avoidance is a massive trigger now.

ETA: I think if you are conflict avoidant, you have a habit of avoiding things and justifying them to yourself, which makes it easier to come up with excuses and justifications over the EA/PA, and therefore a conflict avoidant person will be more comfortable than a non conflict avoidant person with being in an A and the lies involved, because they are accustomed to being less honest with themselves, too. This is just based only WS, no offense meant to other CA ppl who disagree :).

[This message edited by Justgetitoverwith at 5:00 PM, September 10th (Tuesday)]

Don't agree with the idea that the man is usually up against many conflicts in the pursuit of an A. If you put yourself out and try your luck with lots of random ppl, maybe, but that's the same for either sex.

I don't agree. First off, the very act of "putting yourself out there" is almost 100% of the time going to generate conflict. Sure, if all people say "yes, I'd love to be your AP", you're right, no conflict at all. But I think that we're being deliberately obtuse here, that's simply not how it goes for any man I've ever known, AP or dating. It's a constant effort, working through the angles, logistics, and the "right" things to say. Does sex occasionally fall from the sky, or did it for me? Yes, every now and again, I suppose it did, or it was exceedingly easy to move from "Hi" to "Lets get naked". But that was a massive outlier and none of those women were married, they had nothing to lose sleeping with me.

If a woman starts "trying her luck with multiple people" she's not going to make it very far. How many guys will she have to ask? 1? 5? IDK the answer, none of us do, but I can promise you, it's not anywhere near the number for a man. It's just very different, women are the "snipers" of the dating/sex world, one shot, one kill. Men are more often the carpet bombers, at least I was, if I wanted to be successful. And most "pick up" material basically boils down to "engage with more women in a sexual way". Increasing your chances with any one woman is very hard. It's much, much easier (and more successful) to engage more women than it is to move from a "no thanks" to a "yes please" with any one woman. There you go, I just saved you a lot of money on pick up books.

Just a general question, what is your definition of conflict?

In this context, I'd define it as "I want something that you don't want to give me" and I'm going to convince you to give it to me.

I try, she says no, I move on. No conflict in my book, rejection? Sure. I won't lie it kinda of hurts your pride a bit, but certainly not a conflict.

This is pretty much exactly what I'm talking about. And I can see your point, it's not classic "conflict", but it's also not something I can picture a conflict avoidant person really enjoying (rejection). And it's going to take a lot of rejections to get a "yes" when you're fishing for AP's as a man. Unless I'm terribly mistaken, I can only imagine it as "harder than dating" and that took, at least for me, a ton of "no's" to get to a single "yes". And, maybe I am wrong, maybe married women are more hot to trot than unmarried ones. I suppose that could be true, I certainly know that there are some men who pursue married women exclusively because "it's easier", but.. Man, that really makes me sad in a ton of different ways.

If a man is truly conflict avoidant, it's going to be hard to parlay that into sex with a new woman because, except in limited instances, there's always conflict there.

Interesting POV. My fch is very conflict avoidant and passive aggressive. He had no trouble pursuing me. I don't understand the idea that there is conflict there. There was no conflict. We didn't argue or fight or disagree about sex. I'm really not understanding this at all.

He didn't seem to have much trouble dating other women, either. He wasn't a payer or a lady's man, but he had plenty of girlfriends and such over the years.

What he had trouble with was telling me when something bothered him. He wouldn't say anything negative even when I asked. He would expect me to know what he wanted even when he told me the opposite. He did not want to make waves in our M. Ironic how that turned into him cheating. Pretty much guaranteed to make waves.

I also wonder if an affair is a conflict avoidant’s way of torpedoing a marriage that they’re tired of, but too cowardly to take a stand and end it themselves. Is it anybody elses experience that their conflict avoidant partner would avoid the large tough issues but, be over the top with aggression on the smaller issues or petty gripes ?

My fch is very conflict avoidant and passive aggressive. He had no trouble pursuing me. I don't understand the idea that there is conflict there

Pursuing a woman may be difficult for some men who lack assertiveness, but I agree with this ^^^ that this is not conflict avoidance. These are different characteristics.

My husband had no trouble dating and occasionally pursued one night stands, but he is the most conflict avoidant person I know. His entire family is somewhat assertive, very successful in life, yet I have never seen any of them get upset with each other about anything in 25 years. No matter what idiotic or insensitive thing one of them might do, no one will ever say a word. No matter how they might let you down, back out of something, not pay their fair share, or make a joke at your expense, the talk of the weather just continues. The worst part about it is that they are so accustomed to stuffing their feelings and hurts and needs that they have no idea that they are upset! They are completely detached from their emotions after growing up observing that nobody had any!

So how do they cope? How does one get stuck cooking all the food while the other siblings sit around watching tv or drinking cocktails on the 4th of July and NOT say a word about it or even seem to care? Depression, passive agressive snark, alcoholism, cheating, and codependency. I wouldn't be surprised if they have other hidden vices. That's how they cope with their feelings. They drown their feelings in escapist behaviors or unhealthy depression spirals, not even understanding why they feel depressed.

Many people on SI make comments about "He says that's why he did it" or "How do the whys matter?" or "She says the A was about the sex" or whatever, but there are many people like my H's family who are completely unaware of how they feel about things or why they do what they do, so their answers are incomplete and shallow. They are totally detached from their internal needs, so their coping behaviors can be very dark and absolutely inexplicable, but they are a result of these hidden feelings. They just cannot name their feelings and see their poor coping behaviors as a result of those hidden feelings, so that's why you can't trust the answers without some significant IC.

I will ask my H, "Are you upset about your sisters backing out?" He used to say, "No, why would I be?" Now, after years of therapy, he says, "I am pissed!!!" He is feeling his feels now. The problem is that he is still completely unable to actually tell his family what he feels. It's this type of conflict he fears. He can't do it. The words won't come out. He gets tongue tied. So obviously my H continues to struggle with expressing instead of avoidance, showing what a toxic condition this is. It can sabotage your happiness forever, forcing you to self-medicate because you simply cannot draw boundaries with the people that matter to you. So you feel hurt. A lot. Cue the unhealthy coping strategies.

Conflict avoidance comes in many shapes and sizes, but in my experience, it begins with the first family. If you have good boundaries with your first family, say No when needed, can disagree respectfully with everyone, feel like your needs matter equally, and feel valued, you won't be conflict avoidant or suffer low self-esteem. But if any of your relationships in your first family made you fearful, kept you quiet, hurt you, devalued you, or simply did not make you feel good or good enough being you, you will carry that toxic baggage into your marriage and other relationships. If there was one parent you were not allowed to respectfully disagree with, you will struggle with conflict avoidance in similar relationships. If it was your domineering father, for example, you may be conflict avoidant with your husband. For my H, it is his entire first family, so all interpersonal conflict is a challenge.

Just as a side note, my AP was someone I grew up with and knew well. His father was a bully, so he was never allowed to disagree with his asshole father without being severely punished. He became a huge stuffer of his feelings, became very passive aggressive and somewhat depressed, the very low-simmering depression. It is my impression that his wife is a lovely person and he has a good M, but his Whys revolve around not getting his needs met with his siblings. (I honestly don't know exactly what they are, but I am guessing his need to be heard, validated, feel good about himself) He is so out of touch with his true feelings and so very conflict avoidant, so he has no clue why he hurts. It was obvious to me that he was depressed and that his wife was in no way the problem. It actually helped me to see my own issues and Whys in comparison. Conflict avoidance is not just about resentment of a spouse AT ALL. It's frequently about siblings, bosses, children, and parents, too. An A simply offers validation while not confronting the real reasons you are not feeling good about yourself due to avoiding those areas and people.

Conflict avoidance is almost always a HUGE component of cheating, imo.

[This message edited by OwningItNow at 5:14 AM, September 12th (Thursday)]

My Wh is conflict avoidant . He was sexually abused as a child. I wonder if that’s where he developed his conflict avoidant personality. I do believe his conflict avoidant personally has a played a role in his cheating. The average person would never think wh is conflict avoidant bc of his chosen career.

I have come to believe that R is much more difficult with someone with this personally trait.

Is it anybody elses experience that their conflict avoidant partner would avoid the large tough issues but, be over the top with aggression on the smaller issues or petty gripes ?

This is a classic conflict avoidant behavior. It's a way of shutting down the conflict almost immediately. My fch would either walk away or get extremely anger. Either way, he left me with no way to engage with him in a reasonable manner.

there are many people like my H's family who are completely unaware of how they feel about things or why they do what they do, so their answers are incomplete and shallow. They are totally detached from their internal needs, so their coping behaviors can be very dark and absolutely inexplicable, but they are a result of these hidden feelings

This was (is) my fch. He was completely detached from all of his emotions except anger. And, he didn't know how to express anger in a healthy way. I'll never forget one time when we went to a counselor for marital issues (years before his cheating). He went in wanting to talk about my problems with anger because I expressed it. He left with a book recommendation on anger for himself. The counselor had concluded in less than an hour that my fch was the one with anger issues. He was pissed, of course.

He has been working on recognizing, accepting, and expressing his other emotions. It's hard for him, but he's getting better. We can have actual reasonable discussions now about things we disagree on. He recognizes when he starts feeling defensive and corrects himself. It's been quite pleasant to not only finally be heard, but also to hear him.

RIO,

I totally get where you are coming from now, someone with a conflict avoidance personality and low worth/self esteem surely would have rejection issues.

It almost (still no excuse) that the WS gets so far out of control in the affair they almost don't know how to get out of doing/saying certain things because of these dynamics.

A shit show for sure. Thanks for replying.

...except that conflict avoiders often present themselves as Victims, and they hook Rescuers, with whom they happily slide down the slippery slope.

No conflict, just 2 game players playing sick games and finding each other.

RIO seems to think men want sex and women don't, so men have to be aggressive and fight through obstacles.

I think most men and most women want sex. Most men and most women, then, simply have to find people who are agreeable to sex with them. Finding a fit is not conflictual, IMO.

I imagine both models are true for lots of people ... but I tried it both ways, and my experience was that finding a fit was a hell of a lot more fun....

[This message edited by sisoon at 11:36 AM, September 12th (Thursday)]

This is pretty much exactly what I'm talking about. And I can see your point, it's not classic "conflict", but it's also not something I can picture a conflict avoidant person really enjoying (rejection). And it's going to take a lot of rejections to get a "yes" when you're fishing for AP's as a man. Unless I'm terribly mistaken, I can only imagine it as "harder than dating" and that took, at least for me, a ton of "no's" to get to a single "yes". And, maybe I am wrong, maybe married women are more hot to trot than unmarried ones. I suppose that could be true, I certainly know that there are some men who pursue married women exclusively because "it's easier", but.. Man, that really makes me sad in a ton of different ways.

Okay, but I am going to say this - I don't think that's how this happens. What you are talking about is kind of a generalization of a male serial cheater. I had an affair with a male serial cheater.

It is my belief that a lot of serial cheaters, based on my own experience with one, intrinsically understands how to find the woman who will do what he wants. I don't know if it's cognizant in nature, or something that is more instinctual. I think probably both. The instinct comes from "it takes one to know one". They see the insecurity because they have it too, but they cover theirs with charm and façade so you don't see it exactly unless you are looking.

They plant seeds with many women. I can look back to conversations I had with him 2 or 3 years prior that were in passing and completely professional that by the time I walked away he hadn't said anything overt but I knew he likely was open to cheating on his wife. It was very clever actually. I am almost positive that these seeds yielded women just taking him up on it, or reveling in the attention until lines started to be crossed. I don't think any conflict ever occurred whatsoever. He was just open ended, under the table and eventually if he caught someone who was susceptible in that point in time he often scored a ONS experience. I had never cheated before, it took a lot more than had he met a fellow serial or occasional cheater. Most of his conquests were one and dones.

It's not as if they go around asking the question or any of that stuff. There is way too much at risk with being direct like you might have been when you were dating. They have a spouse they have to hide it from, there are professional implications of making unwanted advances, etc. So, no, they have to plant these seeds all around in a very non-descript way and then the women who are interested have to signal back. I think in a lot of these situations they feel like they could tell you with a straight face "Well, she started it". But, that's not what happens at all...the message was received and there was a signal returned, even if it's a mixed signal they understand it could esculate so they will put down a few more. I think some of the ego part for the male is to be able to say "she wanted me", not "I chased her down and got her to agree to something she didn't want to do." I don't think cheaters think like that. That's why I don't think it's a conflict, it's more of an act or routine that yields a certain amount of results. And they know which ones to plant a seed with - they are looking for signs of crisis, insecurity, state of flux.

And, before anyone thinks I am saying that I was preyed upon, poor me, not my fault...I am not saying that at all. I made the decisions I made, doesn't matter how they the opportunity came about.

[This message edited by hikingout at 12:48 PM, September 12th (Thursday)]

I also wonder if an affair is a conflict avoidant’s way of torpedoing a marriage that they’re tired of, but too cowardly to take a stand and end it themselves. Is it anybody elses experience that their conflict avoidant partner would avoid the large tough issues but, be over the top with aggression on the smaller issues or petty gripes ?

I think it was some of that for me. I didn't wasn't over the top aggressive about anything. There was no conflict whatsoever in my marriage ever. I don't think we ever had a major fight the entire time we have been married. I suppose there could be a bickering moment when one of us was hungry or we are driving in the car and can't find what we are looking for or there are massive traffic delays...so no not the last part, but the first part I think was true to some degree. I don't know what percentage of conflict avoiders (who that is one of the most pronounced part of their issues) were also the ones who had the exit affairs? I consider mine to have been an exit affair. I don't know if I thought I was lobbing a torpedo,that would have taken more thought and while I was having an exit affair in my mind it was always he wouldn't find out. Very illogical, but I don't think you will find many who can point at logical thoughts by people who conducted affairs.

almost (still no excuse) that the WS gets so far out of control in the affair they almost don't know how to get out of doing/saying certain things because of these dynamics.

I can see this. I've said it about my fch. He was so conflict avoidant that he couldn't say no to anyone. When the MOW started he was afraid to tell her to stop. He didn't want to lose his ego kibbles.

Like HO, not saying he was a victim that she preyed upon. He was a weak, pitiful something or other. I lost total respect for him because of that.

I, too like HO, believe that the MOW in my sitch knew exactly what to look for in an AP. She saw the weakness in my fch and pounced. She played him so easily. Some people are really good at recognizing promising targets.