SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

There’s a worthy book out, Surviving the Survival, that is worth a read. It’s about how people who have survived the immediate trauma deal with the longer term. Some do well, some don’t, and it identifies the strategies for those that do well.

Sisoon makes some interesting and thought provoking points.

I don't think there's ever a situation on SI that calls for recommending R or D. The best we can do is help someone figure out what they want and what is achievable, and/or confront people with the inconsistencies in their thinking, and/or share one's responses to what a member posts, and/or share one's experience.

The thought experiment that launched this thread was to test our own assumptions regarding infidelity. I laid out a thought process I'd had that I found rather striking after I thought about it quite a bit. It's a logical pathway that seems hard to dispute. Whether it leads to calls for R or D is really beside the point. I didn't post it as a call for one or the other. I posted to test whether it is true that adultery is abuse. So far the thought experiment seems to be holding up.

Regardless, I invited people to draw their own conclusions.

Intentionality

Has no one here had the experience of doing something wrong, hurting someone close, and then realizing they should have known they would hurt someone before they committed the hurtful act?

I think that's yet another reason why this thread is so important. We can and should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. By which I mean, we can and should specify degrees of harm, degrees of intentionality, and the extent to which things like false narratives, neglect, bad hamster rationalizations and more are utilized by unfaithful spouses to scaffold up a case for deeply transgressive behavior.

Let's say you said a harsh word to your spouse, but you're the faithful spouse. We can judge intentionality, we can judge later realizing it hurt them and so on. We should also judge degree of harm. Let's say the faithful spouse immediately realized the harm, went to the spouse, apologized for the harsh word, took complete responsibility for it and so on. Well that would be one thing. And we could judge the episode on the basis of degree and intentionality and how the offending spouse handled the aftermath.

Let's take gaslighting as another example. Can we consider the intentionality of such an act or set of actions? I think we should. The unfaithful spouse can claim they weren't *trying* to hurt their faithful spouse by gaslighting them, but this requires a suspension of disbelief that most logical thinking persons find a bridge too far (and by the way, this is among many reasons why BS's war internally with massive cognitive dissonance).

There aren't really very many options for considering an unfaithful spouse's motives for gaslighting. One option is that they simply lack human empathy necessary for understanding the pain they are causing. Okay, that's fine. In which case, we have a deeply disordered personality on our hands, a person who is probably unsafe at any speed as a life partner. Or they knew it was hurting their spouse but quickly weight the costs and benefits of such harm and decided it was worth it for their own selfish ends. Literally "ends justify the means." In which case, we also have a deeply disordered personality on our hands, unsafe at any speed.

There are probably other options I haven't outlined here, but I think we can reasonably say that one option probably isn't that the gaslighter is just a really fabulous amazing person who didn't understand what they were doing was causing pain and that it was a big misunderstanding about communication. I think we can safely assume that isn't one of the options we're left with.

We can consider the level to which talk therapy can "re-order" such a personality, but we also must weigh the long-term costs, the long-term outcome of whether such a person can be truly "fixed" (in other words, maybe it's a feature of their internal software, rather than a bug) and so on.

Any reasonably intelligent person (and we can put the vast majority of unfaithful spouses in this category) knows this has been on the top 10 list of no-nos in almost every human culture, past and present, for at least 5,000 years. CS Lewis referred to this commonality of the objective "moral law" in the human experience "The Tao."

Adultery is considered so transgressive and toxic for a set of very good reasons, which every single betrayed spouse here learns about and knows about firsthand. The toxicity of adultery is right up there with other horrific transgressions including murder -- and as we've outlined here it is tantamount to physical abuse and is a form of rape.

Thus, we MUST ask ourselves plainly, with unvarnished dialogue, about intentionality. The reason BS's ask about intentionality is that we all know we didn't do such a thing, and that we clearly understood why it would be so damaging to do.

There was a "brake" on us one might refer to as conscience. If there wasn't such a brake on unfaithful spouses, we as BS's naturally find this a very troubling realization. It means something inside the unfaithful spouse is deeply dysfunctional and that the worldview which they've been walking around with all their adult lives is skewed and false.

None of these realizations are particularly good options for us.

I know it offers discomfort to talk about these things and makes people squirm, but that's not the point. We must be willing to look it all squarely in the face with radical honesty.

Abuse?

I think the terms one uses affects one's thinking and behavior, and I think it's relatively easy to abuse 'abuse.'

The more energy a person puts into thinking in terms of abuse, the less energy is likely to be available for healing, IMO.

Calling infidelity 'abuse' mixes the focus up. The WS has one set of problems to solve. The BS has another set of problems. Healing requires focus on oneself. When 'abuse' is in the picture, the picture is about the effect of one person's actions on another, and that takes the focus away from the work that's needed for healing.

Further, if one sees oneself as 'abused,' it's too easy to fall into self-pity, and once in self-pity, it's hard to get out.

I disagree fervently. I'm sure you're not surprised. You make several assumptions here I don't think stand up to scrutiny. One does not follow from the other.

I do agree we should be careful with our language and we have been here on this thread. Abuse was used with great care and it's difficult to argue adultery is not abuse.

I instead think using this clear term brings clarity and focus, rather than obfuscation. Avoiding the term offers obfuscation and probably some level of false comfort.

And it simply does not follow that one would wallow in self pity as a result of considering adultery as abuse. Because adultery is abuse, we can test your assumptions against other forms of abuse, and in that light, the assumptions don't hold up very well. We wouldn't say that victims of other forms of abuse are necessarily wallowing in self pity. Nor would we say that being a victim of domestic violence automatically breeds resentment (although if not resolved it certainly can, which was the point of a film like "The Burning Bed").

EDIT TO ADD: Interesting side note here, but accusing victims of domestic violence of harboring resentment, wallowing in self pity or "asking for it" used to be pretty common until more and more domestic violence victims started speaking out against this and movies like The Burning Bed and books etc started combatting these wrong-headed notions.

I would say by being very clear about adultery being abuse, we can have a sort of "MeToo" moment in society about adultery -- and I believe that is desperately needed at this time. Rampant adultery in part enabled by texting and social media is wrecking families and damaging our society.

Whistling past the graveyard helps no one.

Sometimes one gets to choose the words one uses. When one has a choice, one might as well use the words that help most.

When one has work to do, it's better to choose words that give one the power to do the work, not the words that give power to someone else, one's abuse.

Hmmm, this seems a little vague. I would say one ALWAYS has the choice as to which words one uses. But I was very careful to use the word "abuse" and it is not a metaphorical. I did lay out metaphorical thought experiment in the OP which I found rather striking, but you'll note that in the opening prelude, I outlined a logical "proof" for the literal consideration of adultery as abuse. One and the same. Consubstantial if you will.

And your question about what implications one draws from this fact is precisely one of the reasons why I started the thread. I think it's important to challenge ourselves to think deeply about these things and spend some time with it, even if it provides discomfort.

It certainly is uncomfortable to think of adultery as abuse and a form of rape (taking away autonomy and agency, exposing a faithful partner to life threatening disease, making them participate in a multi-sexual relationship without their knowledge or consent, etc.) It creates a sense of dawning horror and revulsion, I'll warrant.

But that discomfort should not be a reason to turn away.

[This message edited by Thumos at 12:43 PM, October 2nd (Friday)]

This thread led to a fairly important realization for me this morning.

My WW had just gotten her pap smear results and wanted me to see that it was negative for HPV.

I told her thanks for the update. I also told her I hoped she could understand my perspective that, aside from whether she actually contracted something in the past, it was the willingness to place me in harm's way for life threatening and life altering disease that I struggle with.

The rationalizations about whether her AP looked clean and shiny or how she was deeply familiar with his life patterns offer cold comfort and feel like minimizations.

Then after thinking about it a moment, I realized something fairly profound and it goes to Sisoon's point on intentionality.

It was this: my wife has in the past gone to lengths to assure me she would never have put me at risk and how she knew her AP well enough to "know" he was clean and disease-free.

I'm sure you can see where I'm heading with this.

I also have one VAR conversation, a short one, in which she is startlingly knowing, cold, calculating, intimate, guilt-free with her AP, chuckling about the sex with him and sharing quirks and mannerisms with him I had thought were exclusive to me, but of course now realize are just a standard part of her repertoire.

Some people have never heard or seen this actual side of their WS's, and they only know about it in a tertiary way because the affair has been exposed. But people like me have. We've either read text messages or been privy to conversations. We can extrapolate and quite suddenly the mask has been ripped away from our unfaithful spouses and we see the real person.

In any case, when I put that VAR convo together with her strenuous efforts to assure me she did indeed consider an STD risk, I'm left with a pretty startling conclusion about intentionality.

Which is that she very much thought about exposing me to life altering or life threatening diseases, but decided to plow forward nonetheless. And she decided to have unprotected sex very much aware of the risks, very much aware of the possible consequences, very much on her mind. And that she planned out the precise circumstances and did it in our home.

She very much INTENDED to do this. She saw an opportunity, she wanted it, she thought about the consequences including harm to me, she decided to go for it, she never thought she'd be caught doing it.

It's really not much more complicated than that.

It also occurred to that given this level of forethought and planning, the odds that she's done this before with someone else are at least even if not higher than that she suddenly decided to have sex with another man after being married to me for two decades.

Thank you Sisson for sparking this realization and helping me cut through the white noise of my WW's rationalizations!

[This message edited by Thumos at 10:23 AM, October 2nd (Friday)]

There are probably other options I haven't outlined here, but I think we can reasonably say that one option probably isn't that the gaslighter is just a really fabulous amazing person who didn't understand what they were doing was causing pain and that it was a big misunderstanding about communication. I think we can safely assume that isn't one of the options we're left with.

I do not want to go on record as to defend any gaslighting behaviors. I do not believe I engaged in that specific behavior so I may not understand the mind of someone who did.

When I think about some forms of gaslighting, to me it's simply working to continue a lie. Lies are often a misguided form of self preservation due to wanting to influence the outcome.

In my own experience there were things that were hard for me to come to terms with internally so therefore I could not cop to them to others. Once, someone pointed out in the forum that I was a bad mother for having done what I did. I couldn't accept that immediately. I slowly grew to take accountability for it afterwards. I could not accept because I have defined a major part of my life as being a mother and I prioritized that strongly. To have to give up that image of myself on top of all the rest of the shame I was processing was more than I was able to accomplish emotionally. There are lots of examples of that along the way that are simply blindspots one has about themselves.

If I had lied about the affair and carried on lying about the affair, the intention behind it may not have been to harm my husband. It would more likely have been to try and get him to believe I am not as bad of a person by minimizing and omitting details. And by not admitting it to myself. It's still wrong. YES. But, is it intentionally malicious? I doubt it. It would have been I screwed up royally and prioritized self preservation and hope to keep the marriage over the truth. The understanding of what that inflicts to the other person lacks great empathy.

And, it speaks nothing about what the BS's boundary or reaction should be. That's a completely different topic.

The reason I fully confessed and continued to answer my husband honestly was selfish and not because it's what he deserved at the time. I had read here and understood enough that I decreased my chances significantly of keeping the marriage by lying. I didn't have a lot of empathy or even remorse at that time. I had a lot of guilt and regret and shame. I wish I could say I was more noble, but I use that as an example of how people are more realistically motivated.

The WS not being able to heal those issues enough to be able to take the other person in is often what prolongs everything. It's a herculean effort that I don't know if I could ever express to you. I state all this because there are all sorts of things we do out of our own motivations without fully taking in what that means to someone else.

People often (mostly) do things because of themselves and it really has nothing to do with intentions towards you. I do think there are people who are diabolical, who truly gaslight. However, I think that term gets used pretty loosely on this site at times. Gaslighting and lying are not the same things with the same kind of intention behind them. And I do not think the majority of people are all that diabolical.

Now, to the argument of if intention matters. I would probably say NO, it doesn't matter in terms of whether you deserve forgiveness. Noone is entitled to another person's forgiveness. In fact, some of sisoons writing was more about why the forgiveness might be more important to the person giving it. Why some of these things brought up the way they were can actually be a hindrance of your own progress. You can do nothing further than divorce your wife, all that remains after that will still remain to be dealt with.

So, It may matter more towards whether its easier to forgive than someone who purposely did things intentionally to you for the sake of just being evil and malicious.

If you asked me if someone who punches their spouse in the face or forces sex upon them is malicious it's very difficult to argue that they are not. You may still be able to see past that in that they were alcholic, or they had rage issues caused by xyz. It's still possibly forgiveable, it doesn't mean you have to remain married to the person.

I tend to believe there is a group of us, and it's large (maybe not the majority) who are really not malicious people who ordinarily lack all empathy. Not many people are all good or all bad. I tend to think you feel your wife is not all bad. You are making this black and white argument because you are still seeking clarity and resolve over your decisions.

I tend to believe despite the abuse your wife inflicted by having an affair could have been worked through. Its the aftermath that makes it unsurmountable. Do I think your wife intentionally abused you? I am not really sure, I didn't think so until you had your heart issue. It would be difficult to understand how one could know they caused this much stress to another person and still not fess up. But, at the same time I can see she probably continued to justify that the heart issues were unrelated to her. Your wife has been in denial a long time, to the point that she has continued to be after you stating your intentions for divorce.

Is it abusive or cruel of you to continue to be intimate with her? We can all justify our behaviors however we wish to, but being with someone sexually who you know is hoping that you will stay seems on the black and white type of level as cruel. We all have the capability to be unintentionally cruel when we are not fully healed. And, while I just drew that as a parallels, I want to make it clear that no I don't really feel like you are abusing your wife. I do not think you are a bad man or being cruel. I do not think that behavior is in any way comparable to hers.

I can look at that example and even this post you just made and understand there is NO malicious intent. You are just trying to mentally strengthen your stance on divorcing a person you still really love. That is a position she inflicted upon you and you are really just doing the best that you can. You are looking for relief. It's completely understandable.

So what it boils down to is there is a compassion piece that may just be to dangerous to you emotionally to engage in. And you are making these inflexible black and white arguments (mostly referencing your last posts) likely as your own need for self preservation and moving forward. You are still struggling with being the bad guy, and you are not. The truth is even if she had been a model WS, she is the one broke this marriage. You have a right to whatever it is you want, no justification needed.

[This message edited by hikingout at 10:44 AM, October 2nd (Friday)]

It also occurred to that given this level of forethought and planning, the odds that she's done this before with someone else are at least even if not higher than that she suddenly decided to have sex with another man after being married to me for two decades.

Maybe. Maybe not.

We have been married a little longer than you guys. I would say if anything had been captured during my affair it would not sound much different than any of this. Of course it's her repertoire, if it's something we have been like for decades. Wouldn't it have been maybe more disturbing if she had been completely different?

I have definitively, and unequivocally never even came close to cheating on my husband prior to my affair. Not one boundary. Yet I was a smug, know it all asshole through my entire affair.

Does that mean anything? Maybe not. I am obviously not her, and there are many differences in our stories. But, it is entirely POSSIBLE this was her first.

[This message edited by hikingout at 10:56 AM, October 2nd (Friday)]

Funny you mention the willingness of your wife to expose you tomp STD, Thumos. I had just been thinking about that issue. I came across some of my XW' s writings where she documented her desire to " stop my destructive habits, smoking, drinking, sex with strangers".

And, I realized that she did not give a shit about my health.

I , often wonder how cheaters justify this. I mean even if we were to accept their often false narrative about try their unsatisfying marriage, their deficient spouse etc. do they think this justifies, potentially, killing their spouse with a deadly disease?

Okay, hiking out, on the gaslighting piece, what if a WW was able to completely convince a WH they had falsely accused them, then went on to encourage them to seek psychiatric help for their paranoid delusions and planted the idea that they should consider being on an SSRI (a medication they didn't need) for anxiety and their obviously incorrect paranoia?

Would that qualify as contemplating harm? Would that qualify as intentionality?

[This message edited by Thumos at 11:05 AM, October 2nd (Friday)]

I know I was not asked, but, hell yes, that is evilmas fuck.

You are making this black and white argument because you are still seeking clarity and resolve over your decisions.

There's some truth to that. I don't think I'm making a black and white argument here, though. I'm stress testing our assumptions to see what comes up. It's an interesting discussion and interesting to see what people react to.

Does that mean anything? Maybe not. I am obviously not her, and there are many differences in our stories. But, it is entirely POSSIBLE this was her first.

It is possible, and also l likely probable. After all, my gut instinct had never roared at me like that in our nearly quarter century together. On the other hand, as you know, betrayal upends the betrayed's sense of reality and also makes us question everything, including the reliability of our gut instinct.

When gaslighting has happened, it's even worse.

I guess this epiphany I had this morning is so helpful because my WW still, to this very day, denies she planned having sex with AP in our home.

Yet there are numerous countervailing winds against this proposition by her.

For one thing, I think you would agree that as a woman you would rarely put yourself in a circumstance, certain timing, setting etc with a man in a certain way unless sex were on the table and had at least some forethought put into it. Unless you were an extreme risk taker, you wouldn't want to find yourself in a certain position relative to a man, alone, if you weren't willing to have sex with him and signaling to him that availability.

To claim no forethought would be even more stupefying if there had been weeks of heavy petting and deep kissing leading up to the penultimate moment.

For another the circumstances of when they had sex are simply too pat for it not have been planned. It was on a day they were both off work, on a day when their mornings were both free, on a day when I was scheduled to be out of town thousands of miles away, in the middle of the week, etc.

The level of planning and forethought has always been obvious -- yet she continues to deny this.

It insults my intelligence, as Al Pacino observes in "The Godfather." It suggests a lack of accountability and reason, as Jack Nicholson observes in "As Good As It Gets." And it's an attempt to move on because "these are not the droids you're looking for," as Sir Alec Guinness observes in "Star Wars."

EDIT TO ADD: In case it wasn't clear, the last paragraph is just my cute way of working in cinematic references. Of course I don't think women lack reason and accountability. It's just a funny one liner from a movie, and it seemed to fit as part of the joke.

[This message edited by Thumos at 12:39 PM, October 2nd (Friday)]

People often (mostly) do things because of themselves and it really has nothing to do with intentions towards you.

Hiking, this is true for a lot of interpersonal interactions. Things like someone cutting you off in traffic, that really has nothing to do with you as a person, it's not a personal thing at all, you just weren't a consideration.

That is not the case when it's a close personal relationship, especially a marriage, and the person actively chooses some behavior that will negatively impact you. Then, most definitely, you were a consideration and that's part of the rub. That person knew there would be fallout if the behavior becomes known to the other, they just didn't give a shit. They did the math and determined the risk was worth the reward.

If a WS has built up resentment and uses that as a chunk of the rationalization for cheating then how in the hell does that not point to intentionally choosing to harm the BS? There is a "fuck you" aspect to a lot of affairs from what I've read here. A remorseful WS that's had a change of heart has to reframe that in some way. Usually in the way you've described above. It just doesn't sit well with some betrayed folks. Me included.

So many WS have grown to resent, even hate their BS. I, definitely, think thre is a big FU attached.

My XW went as far as boasting about various physical attributes of one of th h ed men she was involved with.

I think she was motivated to both hurt me, and provoke me so as to gain credibility for or her narrative if I reacted. That is pretty evil.

Yes, and it's hard to interpret unprotected sex in the family home -- especially when considering the attendant gaslighting -- planned on a certain day, etc. as anything other than an act of deep disrespect. That's not all it was, but that had to be part of it. Hard to conclude otherwise.

Okay, hiking out, on the gaslighting piece, what if a WW was able to completely convince a WH they had falsely accused them, then went on to encourage them to seek psychiatric help for their paranoid delusions and planted the idea that they should consider being on an SSRI (a medication they didn't need) for anxiety and their obviously incorrect paranoia?

Would that qualify as contemplating harm? Would that qualify as intentionality?

I would definitely qualify that as gaslighting.

I would say the most likely motivation is to not be caught that you had an affair.

I would not rule out malicious intent, because that is highly individual.

There's some truth to that. I don't think I'm making a black and white argument here, though. I'm stress testing our assumptions to see what comes up. It's an interesting discussion and interesting to see what people react to.

Your response to Sissoon was the piece I was talking about. I think he triggered some defensiveness in you. Not a criticism at all, it's understandable. I am more reflecting back in hopes it might benefit. I think this whole discussion has been fascinating.

[This message edited by hikingout at 12:19 PM, October 2nd (Friday)]

Hiking, this is true for a lot of interpersonal interactions. Things like someone cutting you off in traffic, that really has nothing to do with you as a person, it's not a personal thing at all, you just weren't a consideration.

That is not the case when it's a close personal relationship, especially a marriage, and the person actively chooses some behavior that will negatively impact you. Then, most definitely, you were a consideration and that's part of the rub. That person knew there would be fallout if the behavior becomes known to the other, they just didn't give a shit. They did the math and determined the risk was worth the reward.

/quote]

You took what I had said out of context. I didn't say my affair had nothing to do with my husband. I was talking about lying, and coming to terms with what you did in the aftermath. How we hold on to the need to feel we are good people The point of that whole post was intentions and motivations.

Now, did I say before my affair "I am mad at my husband so I am going to go have an affair"? Nope, I absolutely did not. My actions were a result of my own lack of character, issues that I had not resolved, self talk, etc...all internal world stuff. I am not excusing the behavior or even saying a BS has to accept the behavior.

You had a revenge affair, so maybe there was some malice there that you are projecting on what I said. I don't know. You had real reasons to feel pissed off. My reasons for resentments really had more to do with blaming my husband for my problems rather than there really being something wrong with his behaviors.

If a WS has built up resentment and uses that as a chunk of the rationalization for cheating then how in the hell does that not point to intentionally choosing to harm the BS? There is a "fuck you" aspect to a lot of affairs from what I've read here. A remorseful WS that's had a change of heart has to reframe that in some way. Usually in the way you've described above. It just doesn't sit well with some betrayed folks. Me included.[

As has been layed out by others in this post, it's a SKEWED view of the BS. Usually because the WS has not taken proactive measures in communications and bringing up issues. I held resentments that in hindsight I can see I was blaming him for things that were not his fault. Was I aware of these resentments as a built up pile? No, I don't think I was. Look, WS tend to be not very self aware. My husband didn't have any responsibility over my actions or my skewed vision of him or our marriage. Those were all my own.

And, as I said, it doesn't matter what the intentions are, the crime is still the crime. The BS has every right to react to it however they want.

I think he triggered some defensiveness in you. Not a criticism at all, it's understandable.

As I think about it, I don't think so. He had a pretty detailed set of observations that I felt deserved an equally well thought-thru response. I don't find myself agreeing with him often, as he knows, but I wouldn't interpret that as defensiveness.

I understand I can be somewhat blunt in my language occasionally, but I also wouldn't mistake that for defensiveness. I do acknowledge I can be "pugilistic" about ideas; bad habit from my previous profession.

In any case, I'm glad this discussion is generating such detailed responses from folks.

Yet there are numerous countervailing winds against this proposition by her.

For one thing, I think you would agree that as a woman you would rarely put yourself in a circumstance, certain timing, setting etc with a man in a certain way unless sex were on the table and had at least some forethought put into it. Unless you were an extreme risk taker, you wouldn't want to find yourself in a certain position relative to a man, alone, if you weren't willing to have sex with him and signaling to him that availability.

I do 100 percent agree with this, btw. I planned and knew as well.

And, for the record, I am not at all arguing affairs are not abuse. On that point we also agree. I would not have thought that prior, but I absolutely see it is now.

As I think about it, I don't think so. He had a pretty detailed set of observations that I felt deserved an equally well thought-thru response. I don't find myself agreeing with him often, as he knows, but I wouldn't interpret that as defensiveness.

I understand I can be somewhat blunt in my language occasionally, but I also wouldn't mistake that for defensiveness. I do acknowledge I can be "pugilistic" about ideas; bad habit from my previous profession.

In any case, I'm glad this discussion is generating such detailed responses from folks.

Fair enough. When we read from an anonymous forum we can certainly read a tone that isn't there. And, I agree with him very often so perhaps that contributed.

[This message edited by hikingout at 12:27 PM, October 2nd (Friday)]

But, at the same time I can see she probably continued to justify that the heart issues were unrelated to her. Your wife has been in denial a long time, to the point that she has continued to be after you stating your intentions for divorce.

Is it abusive or cruel of you to continue to be intimate with her? We can all justify our behaviors however we wish to, but being with someone sexually who you know is hoping that you will stay seems on the black and white type of level as cruel. We all have the capability to be unintentionally cruel when we are not fully healed. And, while I just drew that as a parallels, I want to make it clear that no I don't really feel like you are abusing your wife. I do not think you are a bad man or being cruel. I do not think that behavior is in any way comparable to hers.

To your point, yes she was in denial on the heart issue. I asked her point blank, "what do you think is going on here? Why do you think this is happening?" Blank stare. Silence. Then I asked, "Do you think it could have anything to do with the fact you failed a polygraph and created a lot of theatrical nonsense around that a few weeks ago?"

So, yes, deep in denial.

On the sex thing, I have thought about this. If I've not been clear on this before, just to let you and others know I have been very upfront with her about this and have asked her several times if it is just muddying the waters for us to continue to be physically intimate as we're working toward an amicable divorce.

I have also been clear with her on my feelings regarding sex. Now, maybe she isn't listening to me and it's just going through one ear and out the other. But I have been consistent on this. So I think you'd be hard-pressed to categorize my behavior on that point as anything but radically honest and transparent.