SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Yes, they have morals but it can be easy for their moral compass to be skewed by mitigating factors.

I don't think it's as surprising as you'd think - if their "morals" are based on following the rules of their religion, and then they break them, I believe it means that they haven't truly internalized them so that they are core values (or principles) by which they conduct their lives. They are merely rules put forth by some external entity - a deity, a religion, a social expectation, etc. Once these rules/values/principles become part of one's core that the breaking of them is not possible, then it becomes internalized, their moral compass is aligned with their values, and to betray these hardwired values simply isn't possible.

Say you're in a room with one, or ten, or however many, of the sexiest humans you can imagine, and you could have amazing sex with any one or more of them, and no one would ever know (I know...but let's pretend that that's a guarantee for the sake of the argument). Would you do it? Your spouse wouldn't find out. Of course, YOU would know, but since there is no risk of your spouse discovering it, would you be okay with doing it? I mean, they are very sexy, very sensual, and they all really, really want you. Does it matter if your spouse hasn't been paying attention to you lately? Could you convince yourself that maybe your spouse wouldn't care?

Or say you find a wallet with $500 in cash. There is an ID card in the wallet, and the owner lives just around the corner. Would you return it? What if the owner is a well-known generous philanthropist, or what if she's a well-known jerk who has a reputation for ripping people off? What if you'd just been hit with an unexpected bill - say your car needs tires - and you just don't have the money. Would you keep the money and return the wallet? I mean, no one would ever know, right? Is there any combination of details where you'd consider keeping the money instead of returning it?

In my mind, it's not about whether my spouse would or would not learn of my infidelity. It's not about whether I needed the money. It's also not about whether I could get in trouble. TO ME, how I would respond in both of these situations is solely about what I value. I like good sex, but I don't value it if I have to compromise my values. I also like money, but not at the expense of my integrity.

This is why we say that actions > words, and especially, patterns > actions > words. I can tell you that infidelity is wrong, but if my actions don't unequivocally back that up? I am not being authentic; I am not living in integrity. And when people like that are exposed? Wow - we weren't expecting that!

Integrity is what you do when no one is looking, right? Would there ever be exceptions to things you truly value? I know that there are likely to be some gray areas in certain instances. Would infidelity be one of them? Is an RA a betrayal of one's values? Why or why not?

...so anyway, when a religious figure cheats? To me, it just means that they're a hypocrite, but worse because they used their position and their platform to espouse and call people to moral behavior - and presumably, even to judge others - when they did not hold these values deeply enough to adhere to when they were tested.

But as life progresses we sometimes will alter our boundaries to interpret our moral or core belief differently depending what we wish at the time.

Neither are strict and rigid both can be manipulated.

Morals? Sure. But if it's a core belief or value, deeply held, and the sort of thing you hold your own self accountable to? Then it would be rigid enough that you do not compromise your integrity.

The difference is whether it's just a rule - even a good rule (most of the time?) - you think you should follow, or something that you hold sacred on a deeply and profoundly personal level.

[This message edited by BlueIris at 3:13 PM, September 27th (Wednesday)]

There's a lot of good stuff in here. Some conscious, rational, processes of thought and scrupulously logical deliberation. Carefully defining what morals mean, what integrity means, and things like honor and loyalty.

This is what I think some people fail to do when they reach a crossroads in life.

Which road to take? How to do decide? What do I need to know? Is this the right thing to do?

As a comparison, and maybe not a very good one, but how often do we see betrayed spouses hesitating or debating with themselves on whether or not to inform the OBS? I know I did. And I know that I thought long and hard about it. I THOUGHT about it. I didn't act impulsively (although I did fuck it up initially).

I don't know what stops people from thinking before they act, but they often do it.

[This message edited by Unhinged at 3:17 PM, September 27th (Wednesday)]

My reaction to this question is this. My WW does not have the strength of character and moral fiber that I ascribed to her. Did she ever earn that place in my head where she was a woman of strong moral conviction and character? To be honest (and with the help of hindsight and clear unattached thinking), no. She is not the person I thought I was married to. But I am guilty of assigning qualities to her that, had I not been clouded by love and codependency, I probably would not have. It's not a super fun conclusion to come to, but it's the truth.

The interesting thing is that I have found that I think that I can still love her despite this new understanding. But will I ever trust her? Only time can tell, I think.

WS here, and I apologize ahead of time if I repeat anything already said as I haven't had a chance to read ALL of the responses just yet.

Hell, my wife was one of those people who never missed class in school -- because she knew she was 'supposed' to be in class. She is by the book kind and caring, an incredible mother who never missed a beat when raising our sons. Her work crews would lay down in traffic if she asked them, because she actually cares for them and enforces a safe working environment for them - a rare thing in her industry. The list goes on and on. So, yeah, her poor choices were a huge surprise.

OldWounds made a very good point here. Being compromised or deficient in one area does not necessarily indicate an entire lack of ethics or morals. For example, being a cheater is still a far cry from being a bank robber or murderer for example.

I don't mean to get too far off track here, but I should also mention that morality is very much a paradigm as opposed to a something with a solid definition. If you ask the people of a warring country about the "enemy", they will tell you that the enemy has no morals and kills without guilt, so when they return fire, shoot and kill the enemy it is simply for the moral reasons of protecting their families, freedoms and homeland. Ask the other warring country the same question and you'll likely get the same answer. Each feels that the other lacks all morality, while insisting that their morality is intact. This makes morality a shaky subject since each person defines morality based on their own experiences, beliefs, and terms.

I can really only speak from my own experience here, but I'm not sure if morality is the problem. I think most adults have a basic sense of what is right and wrong, and in most cases, will adhere to those beliefs. So it is not that they don't "have" morals, it is that, for some reason, they have chosen to step outside of those morals.

For example, if we were talking about willpower as opposed to morality, we could look at a person on a diet who sneaks in a donut now and then, and judge that person as having no willpower. At the same time however, that same person could probably be trusted to not grab your wallet off the table, not molest an attractive person in the street, or maybe simply to not eat YOUR donuts. A lack of willpower in one area does not constitute a lack of willpower altogether. I believe it is this way with morality as well.

In my case, my sense of willpower and morality were counter-balanced by a broken system of learned poor coping skills and fear-based responses. In the abusive environment that I grew up in, doing the right thing often resulted in a punitive or negative result, whereas bad behavior was often rewarded and praised. It is not that I didn't know the difference between right and wrong, but when things got really bad, I defaulted back to my learned coping skills and reacted in ways that protected and empowered me as a child, but in my adult life, were abhorrent and damaging.

I believe that most WS's are broken somehow. There is something in their background or makeup that permitted or even encouraged them to step outside of the lines of their fidelity and act out in ways that defy who they are and what they value. While this brokenness will be unique to each person, it is imperative for them to discover the origins and roots of the problem, or it will continue to haunt their lives and relationships over time.

As the betrayed spouse, the difference might not matter. The end result is that the wayward spouse betrayed and hurt you in ways you probably never even imagined you could be hurt. As such, you are not required nor even expected to understand or fix your wayward spouse. Lack of morality or a broken person? Does it matter? That is a decision that only you can make. All I can suggest to you is that it might help to make that decision with as much information as possible.

For example, a child may grow up picking their nose and eating it. It's gross to be sure, but the child doesn't really know any better, and it becomes a "normal", a way to manually and orally soothe themselves when stressed. At some point, an adult may point this out to the child, and suggest that they stop doing that, and so the child does so and over time gradually comes to understand why it is gross and to not do it. Under periods of stress however (as an adult) the person may go back to what they know, their "normal", and seek to manually or orally soothe themselves. Such a person might over-eat, or get massages, or even subconsciously pick their nose. While most people wouldn't look at an over-eater and think, "Hey, that makes total sense because that person was a nose picker as a kid", having that information helps to make a lot of sense from an otherwise hard to explain behavior. Stress occurs, the urge to soothe themselves is overwhelming, and at some point, the sub-conscience begins to poke at the amygdala (fight or flight) and the nose-picker starts to make excuses and justifications that allow them to soothe themselves by over-eating. Do they know eating that way is bad for them? Yes. Do they know it may shorten their life? Yes. Do they know it will make them look and feel crappy? Yes. Do they know it may even affect their marriage, or cause their kids pain? Yes. But the urge to do it overrides everything, and they end up telling themselves that it's not that bad, or they deserve it, or they can stop anytime they want, or that they simply don't care. Call it what you will, but the person has lost their self, and probably doesn't even understand why they are doing what they are doing, until it is too late, and maybe not even then. In the absence of a larger stressor, or in the absence of the knowledge of what drives their disorder, they may not be able to see, understand or stop their own, damaging behavior.

This is not to say they aren't liable for the bad behavior. A child molester may be simply repeating the abuse that was done to him as a child, and for that he has my utmost sympathy. But that doesn't mean I'm going to let him anywhere near my child. In a similar way, a wayward is responsible for their actions even if those actions are a result of their brokenness. THAT, in my opinion, is where the morality really steps in. Perhaps the lack of morality is not in committing the crime, it is in not owning it? (At least, once it is understood.)

For what it is worth, you might consider this... Let's assume for a moment that all of a wayward spouse's bad behavior (the affair, an addiction, a temper, trouble sharing feelings) is the direct result of some broken wiring from their childhood, and that through IC this broken wiring can be identified and repaired, good as new. Theoretically, the person would not only be "the person you married" again, but since the broken part(s) were fixed, they may actually be a better person than the person you married! Just food for thought.

Hardroadout, Your words are too kind; thank you. 💖 There are so many good people on SI - if I've got to travel this horrible road, I'm so grateful to have the wise counsel and fine company of people like you and Dem (who has saved me so many times) and psychmom and ...well, too many to name!

What about the waywards that bash other waywards? My WS did an enormous amount of that. I really thought he valued fidelity the way he talked of other waywards. And what do you think about waywards who certainly value the fidelity of their spouse? My WS would have lost his mind had I done what he did.

That's a good question, and I'm not sure I know the answer. Do you mean WSs who bash them before they, too, join the wayward ranks? Or after? If before, maybe it's that they "know" it's wrong but they haven't yet been tested. It is so easy to judge others' actions; we tend to be a lot more...understanding? tolerant? of our own imperfections. If you mean after, like WSs on the wayward forum, maybe they're trying to find the tone and approach that will shock them back into reality? Or maybe they are speaking to the new wayward as if they're actually, instead, speaking to their old self, in a self-admonition kind of way? I don't know.

And yeah, my H asked me if I was cheating; he said that he didn't think he could handle the thought of me with another man. He just didn't mention that he'd recently had oral sex (and wanted to and was prepared to have PIV sex, but she changed her mind at the last minute) with OW1, and that he had a crush on another woman at the time. So...yep, go figure. At a minimum, that's about as inauthentic as you can get, right? No self-awareness, and a stunning inability to hold themselves accountable - especially to themselves - for actions they would not tolerate in others. To me, that's because they know it's wrong but in a way that allows them to make an exception in their unique and extraordinary cases. Rules are made to be broken, as long as they're doing the breaking; everyone else is expected to follow them.

So here is the question that flows from that....is a person who WANTS to moral/have internalized values a good person? They don't have morals/internalized values yet, but they want to? What does that make them?

Faking it 'til they make it? Gosh, I don't know! But I think that it's certainly a good start, seeing the ...er, value in having solid core values?

It's such a complex thing to untangle all of this, you know? We want the WS to figure out their whys - which are never good enough because many BSs also had terrible FOO or whatever, and yet we aren't the ones posting behind a stop sign in wayward.

I think that many of these folks will have to do "the work" to unpack what happened and to sort of reset and reorient themselves going forward. They'll need to process any FOO issues, including reframing certain beliefs they've held onto even when the evidence suggested otherwise. They'll need to confront themselves and really look at what they did and work through why they thought it was okay and...I don't know ...sit with it, I guess, until they reach that point where they "get" what happened - where their earlier issues held them back, how they allowed themselves to betray such a primal relationship, what and why they valued <whatever it was> OVER their marriage and spouse, etc., and if they really, really do that? I think - I hope - that the process sort of organically produces a person whose values and choices and actions are all aligned with what they want and what they profess to be.

Something like that. My H is probably a lot like psychmom's - I think he's still winging it a lot of the time. And I don't mean that in a disrespectful way, but just that he hasn't yet confronted all of the FOO and other stuff that led him to cast aside what he thought he believed in, and place value on things (including the OW) that shouldn't have been important to him at all (hell, that he should have seen as fake and gaudy baubles instead of the valuable gems he told himself they were instead).

But honestly? I really don't know, except being receptive to these lessons - and having the humility to accept that you are still on your own learning journey - is a crucial first step, I think.

I think my WS is winging it too. He wants so very badly to be the good man, husband, and father he said he was. He, too, used to dance around things. But in so many other ways, he is a very good person. He doesn't kill bugs!

I meant waywards that are actively cheating, yet bash others. And I think maybe you hit it on the head. They know it is wrong and would not tolerate it from others, but they don't hold themselves accountable.

Daddydom, thank you for your post. There is a lot there to think about. I think many waywards do use the As as horribly harmful yet temporarily soothing coping mechanisms.

Count me in with the theory that otherwise good people can loosen their boundaries and do terrible things. My wife, even after what she did is fundamentally a good person. I saw that in our marriage prior to the affair and even after. I watched how she raised our kids, tended her ailing parents, supported me when mine were sick.

All that counts for a lot. Was she some monster underneath waiting to appear? I don't think so. Was she lost, going thru a mid life crisis, and willing to do things that were unspeakable? Yes. But I would still count her as a good person.

This does not excuse what she did, or even explain it. It didn't ultimately overcome my inability to forgive her actions. A big part of that is not her, but my own moral code of what I can live with with. I couldn't look at her without thinking about what she did. I don't look at her as a monster though.

That said, there are plenty here that in my opinion are monsters. the ones who have a D day then go ahead and cheat again. The ones that flaunt their AP. The ones that put their kids into the mix. There a good and bad people that cheat. Just like anything else.

So... you called me out on the go to journaling thing. It was such a shock that I had to ponder this myself.

I was left with my own questions:

If I shit on the hood of this one guys car this one time, was that because I had no morals or because I thought it was funny enough to justify? Where is the line between the two? At what point does my need to fulfill my need for chaotic entertainment outweigh the standards of behavior either society or myself set? How far is too far for a joke? Would I do it again if I had the chance?

But then, you know what happened? An image of the hood of that newly painted trans am appeared in my head. Complete with the real turd right where airbrushed bird would have shit. And I thought to myself. 'Well, that was worth it.'

I mean, I know that story doesn't answer any of your questions at all. But I hope it distracts you enough from your rabbit hole for you to realize that you make your own answer. That's part of what being human is. We answer to ourselves first, and then God, god, family, friends, police, whoever/whatever else after.

That's one of the things dealing with infidelity so hard. Because we answered to ourselves and came up with commitment. Our spouses answered otherwise.

[This message edited by Notthevictem at 7:04 PM, September 27th (Wednesday)]

psychmom...wow...

set himself "above" others in his thinking

I could have written that exact phrase about my wife. This is why I of her refer to her as being self-righteous. She is a recovering black/white thinker. Used to believe that people were either "good" or "bad" based on what she knew about them. If you did anything on her "list" that meant you were a bad person & that she was above you. Not until she did what she did was she aware that there is a while spectrum of grey in the middle. That led to part of her belief that what she was doing wasn't wrong (because she was "good" then she couldn't possible be doing anything "wrong").

[This message edited by CaptainRogers at 10:52 PM, September 27th (Wednesday)]

Hmmmm....I believe that at the time at the least the wayward does not share the same set of morals as others do in regards to infidelity.

My WW was pretty blunt. She basically said that she knew that she should not cheat, she knew that i would be devastated if i found out. But she wanted to have sex with other men more then those thoughts. She simply cared more about getting laid with random guys then her morality.

In my situation at least, i believe that their were other issues under the surface inside her. but, the simple fact is that she did not value me or our marriage at the same level as i did, at a level that was unacceptable to me.

100%. Same here except instead of men, it was a woman almost half his age who treated him like a door mat.

People know that infidelity is wrong, but some still do it. And when they do, they usually feel pretty bad about it. But through various forms of cognitive gymnastics, cheaters are able to discount their past indiscretions to feel better about themselves. Since the negative consequences, at least in terms of how they feel about themselves, are diminished, maybe they do not learn from their mistakes – and might be susceptible to cheating again in the future -- you can see that here with many members that have a signature block of multiple d days

[This message edited by CaliforniaNative at 11:03 PM, September 27th (Wednesday)]

Whoever is without sin among you, let him be the first to cast a stone at her.

IMO, folks who condemn WSes as immoral and irredeemable justify or forget their own failures to maintain 'morals'.

I urge them to look at their heroes. Do they not see feet of clay? How much does that take away from their heroism?

My bet is their total condemnation of WSes is their way of maintaining a world view that doesn't stand up to analysis.

I believe and examined life is better than an unexamined one. If you totally and irrevocably condemn WSes - or anybody else, really - I urge you to ask yourself what writing people off so completely does for you.

How do you forget that all Jews, Christians, and Muslims owe something to King David?

I'm not condoning betrayal of any sort. I am just urging people to look at the whole person before condemning him/her, and I am urging people to allow for the possibility of redemption.

Allowing for redemption is not only healthier than total, irredeemable condemnation; it's more accurate.

[This message edited by sisoon at 12:00 PM, September 28th (Thursday)]

My wh bashed alot of other waywards too prior to his dday but while he was doing it. I said you really don't think you've done the same thing as x y and z... He looked shocked and like I was insane and replied because they always did the wrong thing....meaning they had left their spouses abd families because he confessed and stayed and took the shitstorm this redeemed him. He never realised the importance that his lying and chested spanned 3 times the length of time his friends had....yet he did the right thing....no you didn't you just didn't deal with it either way at least he stopped lying even if he left. At least he couldn't be that person for any longer (we don't know if he was caught or confessed) he looked shell-shocked then sunk into himself as if he realised the card he held that made him so entitled abd above rules was as fabricated as his justifications.

I believe and examined life is better than an unexamined one.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." -Socrates

So true! This is my point regarding the Rand quote. And I think this is a big part of why people cheat, lie, steal, etc., etc. They refuse, fail or it never occurs to them to examine their lives, critically, unscrupulously, honestly... authentically. If they'd done that, maybe, they wouldn't have cheated.

[This message edited by Unhinged at 2:32 PM, September 28th (Thursday)]

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

I think a person's answer to this question tells a lot about who they are. If I believe that "what you don't know can't hurt you" then is cheating when I believe there is zero chance my wife will find out really cheating? Or is it a harmless dalliance - is it "just sex"? But it's NOT cheating.

I think a person can believe they are of high moral character and still cheat. They can do this because they are willing to believe their own lies. Even when caught cheating they rationalize it with "but I meant no harm" & they let themselves off the hook. Their "remorse" is somewhat genuine because "they are truly sorry that they hurt you". They "never intended to hurt you - it just happened". And, of course, my favorite - "my cheating had nothing to do with you". These rationalizations are actually accepted as truths by many. Even counselors and authors spew this shit and BS's will swallow it and regurgitate it for others when they feel it's appropriate. It's meaningless drivel that is believed only by a desperate BS.

These rationalizations are there to help the cheater regain his/her dignity because, after all, they didn't mean to cause such pain. The real truth is that the reckless, selfish, careless behavior of a cheater shows depraved indifference toward their BS, meaning that their behavior is indistinguishable from an intentional act to cause hurt to their BS. This is a legal definition of depraved indifference and it fits infidelity perfectly. It is why all of this bullshit about "the affair wasn't about you" feels like a slap in the face to many BS's. I myself couldn't put my finger on exactly why that "it wasn't about you" phrase made me want to scream in anger until I remembered how the law views certain crimes. I don't believe anyone would ever utter the words "but my cheating wasn't about you" and expect it to sooth their BS if they understood the meaning of depraved indifference.

My bottom line is that no person who claims to be of "high moral character" would cheat on their spouse under any circumstance.

What about the waywards that bash other waywards? My WS did an enormous amount of that. I really thought he valued fidelity the way he talked of other waywards. And what do you think about waywards who certainly value the fidelity of their spouse? My WS would have lost his mind had I done what he did.

That's a good question, and I'm not sure I know the answer. Do you mean WSs who bash them before they, too, join the wayward ranks? Or after? If before, maybe it's that they "know" it's wrong but they haven't yet been tested. It is so easy to judge others' actions; we tend to be a lot more...understanding? tolerant? of our own imperfections. If you mean after, like WSs on the wayward forum, maybe they're trying to find the tone and approach that will shock them back into reality? Or maybe they are speaking to the new wayward as if they're actually, instead, speaking to their old self, in a self-admonition kind of way? I don't know.

The Adultery Co-conspirator bitched and moaned and condemned her sister-in-law (her BS's Sister) being an Adulterous Women in my kitchen numerous times as well as my living room while she was committing long term adultery with my SAWS in my very house. And had fucked my SAWS in my bed and in the living room on the floor less than 20 ft. from where she was bitching. All the while pretending to be a friend

Complete fuckedupness.

ISurvived

These rationalizations are there to help the cheater regain his/her dignity because, after all, they didn't mean to cause such pain. The real truth is that the reckless, selfish, careless behavior of a cheater shows depraved indifference toward their BS, meaning that their behavior is indistinguishable from an intentional act to cause hurt to their BS. This is a legal definition of depraved indifference and it fits infidelity perfectly. It is why all of this bullshit about "the affair wasn't about you" feels like a slap in the face to many BS's. I myself couldn't put my finger on exactly why that "it wasn't about you" phrase made me want to scream in anger until I remembered how the law views certain crimes. I don't believe anyone would ever utter the words "but my cheating wasn't about you" and expect it to sooth their BS if they understood the meaning of depraved indifference.

My bottom line is that no person who claims to be of "high moral character" would cheat on their spouse under any circumstance

I've had trouble with it had nothing to do with me. Especially when my heart is engaged. It is very depraved indifference indeed.

I think WS throw away their integrity and honor for some worthless ego kibbles and a fuck; as well as displaying depraved indifference for their betrayed spouse.

I think that cheating spouses' morals are trumped by their selfish neediness: the need for attention, recognition, admiration, the need to feel attractive and important, etc. Once the OP starts providing these things in a big way, addiction occurs quickly. Their brains actually produce "feel good" chemicals that cry out for more of what stimulates these good feelings. It's almost like a which came first, the chicken or the egg question, though. I thought the man I'd married had very high moral values. His first wife had cheated on him, which had hurt him very badly. Especially because of this, never in a million years did I ever dream that he would cheat on me, even though our marriage had been in bad shape for years. Saddest of all is that our grown sons discovered FWH's lack of morals when they discovered his texts to OW and then told me about it.

I think that cheating spouses' morals are trumped by their selfish neediness: the need for attention, recognition, admiration, the need to feel attractive and important, etc. Once the OP starts providing these things in a big way, addiction occurs quickly. Their brains actually produce "feel good" chemicals that cry out for more of what stimulates these good feelings. It's almost like a which came first, the chicken or the egg question, though. I thought the man I'd married had very high moral values. His first wife had cheated on him, which had hurt him very badly. Especially because of this, never in a million years did I ever dream that he would cheat on me, even though our marriage had been in bad shape for years. Saddest of all is that our grown sons discovered FWH's lack of morals when they discovered his texts to OW and then told me about it.

These rationalizations are there to help the cheater regain his/her dignity because, after all, they didn't mean to cause such pain.

I think that's true for at least some undiscovered and unremorseful WSes.

My experience is that remorseful WSes earn forgiveness and redeem themselves through actions.

Further, I know my W has done what good people do since d-day, but she still thinks she has not yet redeemed herself - she's still full of guilt and shame, and for all the energy she puts into her boundaries, she's afraid she'll somehow fail to maintain them in the future.

So, I ask those who see WSes as forever immoral, how should I treat her?

[This message edited by sisoon at 11:30 AM, September 29th (Friday)]