SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

The distinction I am drawing here is in my intent. If I lay down and clearly communicate a boundary that I have, I am not telling the other person that they *must* do A, B, or C. I AM telling them what I am willing to tolerate or not. Whether they choose to respect my boundary is their choice. Whether I choose to tell them to fuck off if they don't is my choice.

It is NOT controlling to have a reasonable cause to effect, or a reasonable consequence for a behavior. Ex: If I drive over the speed limit, I could get a ticket. Reasonable consequence for a (poor) choice I make. If my partner decides to stick his bits into a strange woman's lady garden, it is a reasonable consequence for that poor decision-making on his part that I will no longer entertain being in a relationship with him. That ain't me being a controlling bitch, that is an imminently reasonable thing for me to have a personal boundary about. What is not reasonable would be for me to tell my partner "You will spend a minimum of $4500 on my gift every birthday, anniversary, and Christmas, or I will leave you." Sure I could say that and I could choose to leave someone for that, but that one IS controlling and is a demand, not a boundary IMHO.

Saying "You will do act A, B, or C or I will divorce you" is absolutely your right to make a boundary for yourself about if it is something you feel that strongly about - no one gets to tell someone else where they get to put their lines down. The difference here (for me) is that when I lay a boundary down for myself, I don't give a flying shit what choice the other person makes about it. My boundary is not about THEM, or trying to control the outcome of their choice or behavior, it is about ME making choices for MYSELF that protect MY mental/emotional health and well-being, regardless of what someone else is doing.

Exactly. You are not attempting to control a person's actions, you're only attempting to control their effects on you; if that boundary has an indirect effect in restricting their actions, it does not amount to "controlling" as a colloquialism (which I believe it is reasonable to infer we are using). They still have meaningful choices to exercise their free will just not to my detriment.

Problem is this, my wife did all this with the OM, and then turned around and said "I didn't even want to sleep with him, I just wanted him to keep paying attention to/liking me" (translation, deliver kibbles). How is what we're doing now any different?

You should ask her that question. I mean, really, why can't you ask her that? She should be more than willing to go over the answer with you. You still might not know for sure but you might have a better gut for it.

I can only tell you that dynamic did exist with the AP in my case but it does not with my husband. BUT I was more transactional with my husband prior to the affair and I have worked to change that. (Not about sex really). But, the I did things more out of obligation or because I didn't feel like he would love me if I didn't continue to do those things. That was all in my head. Now I do things from my heart and I give freely without worrying about if it's enough or if it will be rewarded.

Same acts, same frequency, I'm delivering the "kibble" now. It's the same thing. And, to be honest, I'd kind of prefer to leave money by the nightstand, at least then we all agree it has value. The "kibbles" I'm delivering feel like Monopoly money to me, not because they aren't true, but because I feel like they have no value.

There are a lot of problems in this. One, your WS should have worked to fix whatever needy/external validation issues she has. Secondly, you shouldn't have to do this for her until you are resentful of it. Third, you obviously think they do have value in that they give you sex. This is all very transactional, and some simple communication and mindfulness to work on that as a couple can be done here. I think a lot of times this burden you carry is because you won't burden her with it, and that's very backwards to me.

At least if I dropped a 100 by the nightstand, I'd feel like it was an equal trade. I'm saying it this way intentionally, not because I feel like my W is a prostitute, but because I feel like I'm visiting a prostitute. I realize that's a strange distinction, but I don't see her that way, but I do see myself that way, if that makes any sense at all.

No it doesn't. It sounds disturbing to me.

Except, of course, it's my W, and, unlike a prostitute, I really do care about her happiness. So, it's really hard to know what to do and make of it all when you're confronted with the harsh reality of "words for sex" that's present in at least some (and I think a lot) of affairs.

The way things happened in the affair should not equate in any way to what is happening in your marriage. If your wife has done work on herself she should really not want anything that resembles the affair. You also should not feel pressure to deliver anything that simulates what was happening in the affair. You should be building something entirely different with each other, and that takes lots and lots of communication.

I really think we're trying to draw a distinction that does not exist. My "boundary", "I will not accept any further communication with the OM". You think that's not "controlling"?

No, we all have choices. I could choose to continue to talk to AP, I can just not choose to talk to AP and keep my marriage. You aren't controlling what I do, you are controlling what you will participate in.

If so, OK, maybe we do agree, but, when the boundaries are about the affair, NC, timelines, better/kinkier sex.. While everyone has a CHOICE, I think it's clear we've crossed into the "trying to control" area with a lot of these things.

It is okay for someone to say "I would say that we have not been sexually compatible over the years. I am willing to work on building a new marriage with you, and I am willing to work on things that you have been unhappy with. As part of the new marriage I would like for us to really work on building a new sex life together"

The WS can choose to say "okay, I do want a renewed relationship with you. Here are a few things I also think we could do better" and then proceed to create a vision of what our marriage could be together and talk about how to implement some of those things.

WS can also choose to say "I don't think I have that to give". But, as a boundary you can still decide if you are willing to be married to someone who can't provide a level of effort towards something that is important to you.

Everyone has free will, and can protect their own happiness. Sometimes being happy means you aren't going to be with that person any more because you don't want the same things.

[This message edited by hikingout at 3:54 PM, February 27th (Thursday)]

You should ask her that question. I mean, really, why can't you ask her that? She should be more than willing to go over the answer with you. You still might not know for sure but you might have a better gut for it.

I have. Her answer is "But I really do want to do it with you". Which, of course, is the "right" answer, but, you think she told the AP anything different? I don't. Never asked, but, I sincerely doubt her answer to him was "I'll f**k you for some kibbles". I have a feeling, no, it was more "I really want to sleep with you" until, of course, the entire thing is re-written into "for the kibbles".

One, your WS should have worked to fix whatever needy/external validation issues she has. Secondly, you shouldn't have to do this for her until you are resentful of it. Third, you obviously think they do have value in that they give you sex.

First point, agreed. I really don't care, it doesn't bother me to do it. I think it's silly, but it's not something that grates my nerves to do. It's a neutral for me. And third, yes, of course, I know they have value because of what they can get me, but I don't see the value for the receiver, particularly when, especially in an A, the "value" in the thing your received is almost certainly counterfeit. But, point taken, I know that "kicking game" to women is a valuable skill, and I know that women find it attractive. It's like makeup, is knowing how to put it on well valuable? Well, it is if it helps you get the man you want, or change the way that other people perceive you.

No it doesn't. It sounds disturbing to me.

It's disturbing to me too. Let me try a little harder. I feel like dropping a 100 on the nightstand, at least I'd be providing something that has value to both of us. The 100 can buy me something I want, and can buy her something she wants. The words have 0 value to me, I feel guilty trading words for sex with her because I'm not providing something that's equally valuable to both of us. A 100 dollar bill would take that guilt away.

I am not telling the other person that they *must* do A, B, or C. I AM telling them what I am willing to tolerate or not. Whether they choose to respect my boundary is their choice. Whether I choose to tell them to fuck off if they don't is my choice.

The more I read in explanations, the more I think we're trying to draw a line that doesn't exist. Nobody can legally *make* their spouse do anything. All we can do is react. You must go NC. You don't, I'm out. Did you "make" them do it? Or did you setup a boundary and follow through on it? If the difference is "make" vs "give them a choice" well, there's no difference for any R I've ever heard of. Nobody "makes" their spouse do anything, they lay down what they want/need and the spouse reacts. At the risk of blowing this thread apart, that's why the comparisons to rape for "You will give me sex equal to or better than what the AP got" is a false equivalence in my eyes. You have a CHOICE to go NC, a choice to give a timeline, and yes, a choice to provide awesome sex to your BS. Don't wanna do it? Fine, there's the door.

Exactly. You are not attempting to control a person's actions, you're only attempting to control their effects on you; if that boundary has an indirect effect in restricting their actions, it does not amount to "controlling" as a colloquialism (which I believe it is reasonable to infer we are using). They still have meaningful choices to exercise their free will just not to my detriment.

Well, let's try to find a situation. Provide a scenario where you've taken the other persons free will away from them. When most people say "controlling" they are talking about a W who doesn't want her H out drinking until 2AM, a VERY reasonable thing, but he still has a choice. We always have a choice, we may not like our choices (no more 2AM bar crawls or no more wife), but we have it. The only situations I can think of where we don't are illegal (gun to head situations).

I will not permit "x" to be done to me is not the same as I will not permit you to do "x," even if a third party consents.

Again, distinction without a difference. Any "x" can be phrased either way with the exact same outcome. "I will not permit my sex life to be lackluster" -> "I will not permit you to keep withholding sex". Even really crazy stuff, "I will not permit myself to be the guy who's wife goes out with her girlfriends 1X a month" -> "I will not permit you to go out with your girlfriends 1X a month". We're playing words with friends here and honestly, I think saying the same thing just in a "nicer" way. Delivery matters not to me, content does, and I realize that's not most or even many people. I HATE it when people water something down to "I will not permit myself to be with a woman who's doesn't sexually value me", when the real thing is "I'm leaving if I don't get the goods like the OM got". The first one sounds better, the second is far more accurate, IMHO.

???? There’s a big difference between: if you want to sleep with OW, I’m leaving and you can do whatever you want, and not only will I divorce your ass but I’ll ruin your reputation by doing “x” if I hear you are dating her once we are divorced.

Boundaries simply let the other person know that x, y, and z are not ok with you and that the relationship will be over. It is matter of fact. It doesn't require anger, threats, judgments, or negotiation. The other person can rage against the line you've drawn, and honestly, I'd explain that raging against my boundary is crossing my boundary, so "good luck and goodbye."

Prior to the cheating in our M, during the massive dysfunction years, my H absolutely believed in the transactional idea of marriage. I could tell in the way he handled his obligations, in the choices he made. He would, for example, do the dishes when it wasn't really his turn, or he'd grab my feet for a foot massage. Then half an hour later, he'd grab my ass. I knew what he meant. "I did my part, now you do yours." I did not like living this way. At. All. It felt manipulative. Sometimes I said no, that I wasn't in the mood or whatever. And he pouted. Because hey, he did extra and I didn't pay up. Bullcrap. Then don't do it.

I have another friend at work who tries something similar, buying me gifts to make sure we're besties. "Sit by me. Eat with me. I got you that notebook, that plant, that Starbucks." No. Absolutely not.

Prior to having clear boundaries, I allowed guilt to get to me. People pleasing. So I caved many times with different people, essentially allowing people to get whatever they wanted in their time frame. My needs were not considered. I was not consulted. I did not agree to this "transaction." But I was given something, so I "owed them."

That shit has ended.

There's a new sheriff in town, and she has boundaries.

I tell my H, "Do what you do because you feel like it, because it's fair, or because it's right. And leave it at that. If you have a need, don't be conflict avoidant or passive. Speak up. Own it. Tell me how you feel. I'll do the same." And that is how we now operate: clearly communicating, participating responsibly, and not keeping score or "checking the receipts."

Our boundaries are now a whole other category, mostly concerning major disrespect (no cheating, no lying, no hiding). Our relationship is symbiotic, but not transactional. And it never will be again. Toxic. I loved what ChamomileTea wrote a couple pages back. Spot on.

I have. Her answer is "But I really do want to do it with you". Which, of course, is the "right" answer, but, you think she told the AP anything different? I don't. Never asked, but, I sincerely doubt her answer to him was "I'll f**k you for some kibbles". I have a feeling, no, it was more "I really want to sleep with you" until, of course, the entire thing is re-written into "for the kibbles".

I have to say I agree with all of this (change the sexes for me). I believe when WS say they've done the work and realised it was the attention they were after all this time, the more sex, the more varied, the more kink etc, the more attention was received but now they realise that and can admit the sex was bad! Can I say what a load of bull, I firmly believe that's shame talking. It's ok to admit you wanted the attention but as we've seen from the reactions to the few WS who've admitted to liking A sex (especially WW) there's likely to be a mob posting in about 30secs. So they go with not liking it because they're ashamed.

As for transactional relationships, I'm a fairly cynical person and believe all relationships have a transactional side to them and yes that includes the parent child one.

It was bad. Very bad.

I'm willing to take a lie detector on it.

. It's ok to admit you wanted the attention but as we've seen from the reactions to the few WS who've admitted to liking A sex (especially WW) there's likely to be a mob posting in about 30secs. So they go with not liking it because they're ashamed.

It's the "right answer". It's cannot be proven (well, except for those who caught it on video, so sorry for you) either way.

What bothers me the most about it, I know quite a few cheating men. I've never heard anything but "rave" about the sex. Literally, never anything else. Now, granted, these are all men, so I firmly believe that has a strong impact on it. But if you pursue OW/OM/AP support forums, "the sex" is often a topic of discussion there and, no, it's never "for the kibbles" it's the "best orgasm of my life", "took my breath away"... I could go on, I won't. You've got the idea.

As for transactional relationships, I'm a fairly cynical person and believe all relationships have a transactional side to them and yes that includes the parent child one.

I prefer to think of that as "realistic" rather than cynical. And yes, I agree with you.

it's the "best orgasm of my life", "took my breath away"... I could go on, I won't. You've got the idea.

Do you believe they are being honest?

Do you believe they are being honest?

I have no way to know, but, knowing myself, sex with someone new, danger, forbidden fruit, going against cultural norms.. All things that enhance a sexual experience for me. I've heard enough men say it, yes, I believe that many of them had some pretty spectacular sex (at least for them) with the AP.

Why do you ask?

Was just curious to know what you believed. For me, I hear folks make claims like that and think, well of course they’d say that. It’s the right answer. It follows the line of doubling down. If you are going to betray someone and yourself, it better be worth it. Hence, the right answer.

Now in that situation I'd be less likely to believe it. I'd see it like locker room talk or old war stories that have gotten exaggerated with each telling. In fact I'd be more inclined to believe the sex was average in those cases.

He would, for example, do the dishes when it wasn't really his turn, or he'd grab my feet for a foot massage. Then half an hour later, he'd grab my ass. I knew what he meant. "I did my part, now you do yours." I did not like living this way. At. All. It felt manipulative. Sometimes I said no, that I wasn't in the mood or whatever. And he pouted. Because hey, he did extra and I didn't pay up. Bullcrap. Then don't do it.

Yeah but... but... you owe him now!! Oh yeah, I have done this fucking song and dance too. And then when I didn't put out or wasn't enthusiastic enough or didn't do exactly what he was in the mood for, I'd get the silent treatment, or get snarked at, or have him turn his back on me in the bed. And wouldn't you know... THAT is why he and his schmoopsie are such a great match. Fuck that shit. My orifices are not here for your amusement dude... there's an actual person attached to all of them. And if you don't like that, go to the toy store and get the fuck outta my face.

Yeah and I am *absolutely certain* every single guy's AP was a porn star look-alike and stunt double. And if you believe that, then I have some shares in a bridge I might could interest you in!

[This message edited by EllieKMAS at 10:02 PM, February 27th (Thursday)]

Was just curious to know what you believed. For me, I hear folks make claims like that and think, well of course they’d say that. It’s the right answer. It follows the line of doubling down. If you are going to betray someone and yourself, it better be worth it. Hence, the right answer.

Fair point. I guess, for me personally, I don't operate that way. If I wait in line for 4 hrs for a fancy dinner, unless it REALLY blows my socks off, I'm probably going to tell you "Was not worth it". In fact, I'm probably going to tell you that about a lot of things I've done in the past, yes, whatever it is was highly important to me at the time, but, looking back, even though I nearly killed myself to do it, it was not worth it. Some things, however, still are worth it, they were hard to get, some came a high personal cost or caused lots of bad things to happen, but, I'm not going to lie to you and tell you "It was terrible". It wasn't, it was awesome, and, if not for the price I had to pay to get/do it, I'd still be doing it today. Also, I really don't think that most of the guys I know see this as a "betrayal of themselves". It's much more a "boys will be boys" thing than some deep existential angst. Honestly, until I got here, I never saw a guy "struggling with" his affair, his why's, his deeper demons or internal battles (well, I did, but not in relation to the affair). The "why" always went without saying, it was (and kind of still is) obvious "why". Until d-day comes around, I really don't think there's a whole lot of reflection and deep thought going on here; when d-day hits, yes, of course, I'm sure they start digging for "better" answers than "She said yes", or at least they start looking for a better answer to provide to their BW's.

IDK, maybe it's just me; but the standard "setup" of an affair, secrecy, stolen encounters, often stuff in public, often the "full" sexual menu, someone new, very high danger.. That's like a cocktail of all the things together that tend to lead to "wow" sexual experiences for me. Not to say that I don't have "wows" now, I do. But that's mostly because we've recreated from that list above the things that you can do in the bounds of marriage (stuff in public, full menu, etc) ourselves. Well, the OM had that stuff too, PLUS the secrecy, danger, and of course, the "someone new" aspect. It's very, very hard for me to see how that couldn't have been "wow" for him.

I'd see it like locker room talk or old war stories that have gotten exaggerated with each telling.

Clearly locker room talk, no argument there. However, in my experience, "locker room talk" is generally not very complementary to "on the side" or "FWB" women. It's not like these guys spend time waxing poetic about the love they have for the AP. Even in high school, locker room talk was "So and so gave me a BJ". It's not really about the relationship, it's about the acts and how they were.

Yeah and I am *absolutely certain* every single guy's AP was a porn star look-alike and stunt double.

Look alike? No. Stunt double? No question about it, that's exactly what she did. Is my situation unique? I don't think it's "all", not by a long shot, but I do think it's relatively common. I think the biggest difference in my case, my wife went "porn star" with the AP and not me, in a lot of other cases, wife was "porn star" with the H and the AP, or the AP was treated like the H, so there's not much point in comparing the acts.

My "boundary", "I will not accept any further communication with the OM". You think that's not "controlling"?

This difference is in what you do next. Controlling would be to then take away her phone, go everywhere with her or not let her leave the house, etc. Not controlling would be making the decision to leave if NC is broken.

Do you see the difference? One is about controlling her behavior. The other is about controlling yours. You state a want and let go of the outcome because you can't control that part.

If you're really trying to understand a different perspective, it's helpful to stop talking and just listen.

RIO, how do you know if your W is being honest? You go by her track record. She's proven to be a liar. She's admitted that she had sex she didn't want to get something in return. You have essentially told her that if she doesn't give you these things, your M is over. What makes sense to you? Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

She's admitted that she had sex she didn't want to get something in return. You have essentially told her that if she doesn't give you these things, your M is over. What makes sense to you?

She has CLAIMED she had sex she didn't want to get something in return. "Admitted" would be a huge stretch, that's not admitting anything, that's basically the absolute best way to say "I banged his brains out" but "craft the message" that the BS is most likely to accept. That would be like a WH "admitting" that he never stopped loving his wife; that's not an admission of anything, it's a great way to diffuse the situation and the "right answer". And I use that analogy because, in many cases, I think it's true (that the WH does still love his wife/loves her much more than the AP/etc), just like I think it's likely true that my WW did have sex to get things in return. But that's not an admission of anything other than "I know the right answer to give". And admission would be "The sex was amazing", something that is clearly NOT the right answer but something is clearly also, at least in some cases, true.

To the above quote, what makes sense to me? She's doing it to keep the M, that's what makes sense to me. Never did it before with me, did it happily with the OM, I made it condition of R, now I get it. Seems pretty logical to me that it's done out of desire to keep the M.

This difference is in what you do next. Controlling would be to then take away her phone, go everywhere with her or not let her leave the house, etc. Not controlling would be making the decision to leave if NC is broken.

Do you see the difference? One is about controlling her behavior. The other is about controlling yours. You state a want and let go of the outcome because you can't control that part.

I do see the difference, but, I never "took her phone away". What your setting up as the difference between those two situations is in the first example, I'm physically doing something (taking her phone, not letting her leave the house, going everywhere with her) where in the 2nd, I'm stating "this is my boundary, and I'm out if it's not met/adhered to". Thing is, except right at the beginning (where I went full James Bond and had her tracked more closely than the British royals), everything I've done I feel falls into the "setting a boundary" category. It's been "if you don't do this, I'm done", not "I'm going to force you to do this". However, that said, I don't see a ton of distinction between those two, again, absent physical force or a gun to the head, "You do this or I leave" and "This is my boundary, I need this in my relationship, and I will not let you cross it" are, for all intents and purposes, the same statement.

Perhaps it will help to use an example. Let's make it a commonly talked about one, anal sex; that was denied me in the M but given to the OM. D-day has occurred, you've gotten confirmation that it's happened, it's something that you want and is important to you, and a "deal breaker" you're not going to continue the M if you don't get it. So, given that, what's the right and wrong way to deal with it (now, note, this issue is long gone for me, and the way I dealt with it causes me pain still, to this day, so while I hope this helps me understand the difference, it's really more for other posters who are in this situation than it is for me personally). So, in that situation, what would be the "controlling" or

Controlling:

Not controlling/boundary:

[This message edited by Rideitout at 6:47 AM, February 28th (Friday)]

You know what's important to me? My boundary items as it were? Monogamy. Honesty. Loyalty. Trustworthyness. My wants? To have an H who expresses love and feeling for me and treats me with the same respect with which I treat him. I'm pretty fucking simple.

My posxwh sent poetry to his slut. Told her how much he 'adored' her, how bad he wanted her. Told her how 'stunning' she was. He did all that with an 18 yo he met 6 weeks before all this shit started and couldn't be fucking arsed to tell me, his WIFE, 'I love you', 'you look nice', fuckin nothin. I asked for all that from him for years while I busted my ass working and keeping a roof over our heads and got jack and shit.

What I didn't do was stick around for years after the A bemoaning what he said to her and not to me, staying stuck in a dysfunctional pattern of existence with him, which is what that would've been for me. Fuck that guy. I gave him his clothes and his truck (all of which I fucking bought for his ungrateful ass btw), and I kept my house and my pets and my honor and dignity. Is it the life I wanted? No of course not. But these were the cards that came up.

So he can go be free to do his polyamory thing or be with his slut or wtfever. He can trade his honor for some pathetic kibble from a fucked up kid. If that's the kind of transactional relationship he wants to persue? Yeah... I'm out. Myself, I think I'll go for ones based on mutual trust and respect and honesty from here on out. Just my 0.02.

Let's all just remind ourselves that boundaries only work whenever the other person is adhering to them openly. My ex and I had very clear "don't cheat on each other" boundaries, but we all know how that worked out. Boundaries are important, but they're nothing without some kind of "trust but verify" process. Which of course opens up a whole other set of problems: when is a person being paranoid and controlling, when are they being reasonable.

My posxwh sent poetry to his slut. Told her how much he 'adored' her, how bad he wanted her. Told her how 'stunning' she was. He did all that with an 18 yo he met 6 weeks before all this shit started and couldn't be fucking arsed to tell me, his WIFE, 'I love you', 'you look nice', fuckin nothin. I asked for all that from him for years while I busted my ass working and keeping a roof over our heads and got jack and shit.

I'm so sorry. Replace "poetry" with random kinky sex act, and we were in the exact same place. Couldn't be "arsed" (love it) to have sex with me, couldn't stop f**king the OM.

What I didn't do was stick around for years after the A bemoaning what he said to her and not to me, staying stuck in a dysfunctional pattern of existence with him, which is what that would've been for me. Fuck that guy. I gave him his clothes and his truck (all of which I fucking bought for his ungrateful ass btw), and I kept my house and my pets and my honor and dignity. Is it the life I wanted? No of course not. But these were the cards that came up.

And perhaps this is the "only right answer". Just GTFO and move on if your spouse does this "poetry for her, when's dinner gonna be ready for the wife". The more I read, the more I think that it's just perhaps unrecoverable, asking for it removes the authenticity, demanding it is wrong, waiting for it is soul killing. So what do you do? IDK. I honestly don't think any of us do, which is why these threads always get so much discussion and interest. Of course, there is one "right" answer, your POS husband could have realized what he did and started writing you some poetry. That, I think we all agree, is a positive outcome. But how many WS's can get there alone, without pushing, boundaries, ultimatums, 180's, and all the other mental gymnastics we go through trying to get what seems like a REALLY F**KING OBVIOUS point. "Treat me better than you treated the AP". Do we really need 100's of pages of threads for that? Do WS's really NOT know this shit? Or, are they making a value judgement, "My AP was worth writing poetry for, you are not". I think, sadly, we are all going to jump to the 2nd because it's the obvious answer. Also, I have a lot of difficulty believing my W "suddenly" knew "huh, men like anal sex" with the AP and didn't know it with me (before or right after the affair). That's a real stretch, of course she knew it was important, just like your husband knew poetry was important, that's WHY THEY DID IT for the AP.