SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

BFTG, she woke up on D Day like the coach who gets the ice bucket thrown on them in 20 degree weather. I had a PI bust them almost in the act. No getting out of it. I got one "its not what you think" on the phone and i hung up. I also didn't come home for a few days to let her stew.

She was pretty much mortified of what she did, and terrified I was going to tell everyone, especially our daughters. I also proceeded to systematically get all of the details out of her over a period of days. Not sure in hindsight if that was a death note for us.

Her first time was probably like most here. It crept up over a series of days where they would meet and flirt. She always thought she had a handle on it and it would never go beyond that. then he kissed her, and she kissed back and they screwed that day. It was probably easier as she knew I was out of town. According to her she was a mess and sick about it. She promised herself it wasn't going to happen again. But it did. She said that every time was going to be the last except it wasn't.

After I turned down the business idea it got personal for him. He had her move it to our bed, up the kinds of acts, said awful things about me. she swore to herself that it was going to end with the job, but who knows. they both had really flexible schedules so it could have gone on for years.

She did most everything she could. took the punishing words I said. tried to get us into therapy. Became almost a stepford wife. I could do what I wanted without a peep from her. She pleaded for me to talk with her, but I just couldn't do it. I was really the rug sweeper. The whole thing was just so humiliating for me. I know I have an issue with pride, and it was in full force here.

I just could never make the jump back to see her in the same way. She and the whole marriage was just stained. We had it pretty good. Not perfect but good. Ours wasn't going to be one of those here that this would be a catalyst for something better.

To directly answer the question, I loved her still in my heart, but what she did just violated everything to my core and I just couldn't live with her anymore. And I couldn't live with the cold guy I had become.

[This message edited by waitedwaytoolong at 5:17 PM, March 22nd (Friday)]

You have to be able to see your partner as more than one person. There's the person who will hold your head in the pillow and smack you ass, and there's the person who will bring you tea when your sick. And those people CAN BE the same person. You don't need to have a nursemaid and an AP. And I think that I'm much better at that than my wife is. I can have the craziest, kinkiest sex you can imagine and still see the person as a loving/tender woman that I just got done doing some XXX stuff with. Where I think my W has trouble with that, both for herself (how can I be a slut with him and his wife) and for me (how can I let him do that with me and still have his respect). And this is where compartmentalization is a good thing, because you have to be able to be both (or all) those people to be able to fill the needs of most people in a marriage. The mother who kisses her children on the cheek on the way to school becomes the wife who's begging "f**k me harder" 20 minutes later. And I think that a lot, a WHOLE lot of people have trouble wearing all those different roles.

RIO - This right here I think is one of the best pieces of advice my father ever gave me. He told me to know deep down that when I do marry I needed to understand that all men want a marvelous cook in the kitchen, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public.

It may sound terrible but it isn't. Although he was crude in his delivery, I fully got the message. I see a LOT of men and women who have difficulty with this concept.

RIO - This right here I think is one of the best pieces of advice my father ever gave me. He told me to know deep down that when I do marry I needed to understand that all men want a marvelous cook in the kitchen, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public.

Your father was/is a wise man. Yes, this is exactly what I want/wanted, a "lady" for everyone else a "freak/whore" for me. Frankly, I think this is a near universal "want", although, I risk running afoul of the rules by saying it, I've never met a man who didn't want it. It's why, over, and over, and over, I hear the same story. Love my wife (the lady), but need some sex on the side (the whore). I think it's far easier for women to embrace the "lady" role in a M than the "whore" role, hence... Well, this thread, my cheating friends, and a whole lot of pain for women who want to be "wild" in bed but feel they can't with their H's (and they go wild with the AP and spawn the kind of self-doubt that I literally would not wish on my worse enemy, including the AP, as amazing as that sounds).

when I do marry I needed to understand that all men want a marvelous cook in the kitchen, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public.

And, I think men need to understand that every woman is an autonomous person and may not fulfill, either because she chooses not to or can't, all his "wants". If the woman he marries doesn't fulfill all his "wants" he doesn't get to go out and fuck a side piece because he doesn't have all he wants.

ETA: One of the most bizarre things my FWH said to me, literally on d-day,

FWH: "I always tell everyone what a wonderful, amazing cook you are!"

Me: "Awesome. That makes up for you fucking that slunt for all those years. Good to know."

[This message edited by SisterMilkshake at 8:17 PM, March 22nd (Friday)]

Sister, you missed the point and got defensive instead.

I have boundaries, I have limits and there are things I will not do sexually. Period. If my H doesn't like that, he was free not to marry me. He knew my boundaries well before we got married so he knew what he was signing up for and what out on the world buffet he was giving up when he asked me to marry him. That said, if I told him my die hard boundaries (swallowing for example because I just can't) and then I did it for someone else, that wouldn't actually be a boundary I held firm to now would it? That would not be a NO, it would be a NO, NOT YOU.

Both partners need to be their most open sexual self with their spouse, whatever that is on an individual basis. Anything less is a cheat to both partners. We are all free to have areas we don't want to or just can't go to. We all have them. It's just not right to give your spouse your less than your all, whatever that all is specific to you.

I get really hung up on the idea that women who have affairs and give bj's or swallow or other things they won't do with their spouse before or after the A are "debasing themselves". That may be true in a limited number of cases but it for darn sure is not true in all cases. I think a lot of spouses who cheat do wilder things with the AP because 1. - new sex is hot, 2 - illicit sex (to the cheaters) is hot, and 3 - They can let go with abandon because it is an escape out of their regular lives. They don't necessarily have to worry about the AP respecting them in the morning. Respect is not a part of affairs. It is a part of marriage.

[This message edited by KatyaCA at 7:54 PM, March 22nd (Friday)]

And, you assumed I was being defensive whilst missing my point. I was more thinking about the "marvelous cook" whilst reading the statement you shared. I know a lot of woman who can't or aren't able to cook. If a woman is a bad cook and you want one, you don't get to fuck a sidepiece. Same with sex, if you don't get everything you want in the bedroom, you don't get to go out and fuck a sidepiece.

I feel people can confuse, and I am talking about marriage in general and not specifically about a marriage with infidelity, what one "wants" and what one "needs" in their marriages.

My FWH had a lot of "wants". His wants were selfish and self-absorbed. Fuck. That. Shit.

eta: fixed sentence for clarity

[This message edited by SisterMilkshake at 7:57 PM, March 22nd (Friday)]

If you want your wife to be an amazing cook and the woman you love can't or doesn't cook. You need to learn to love fine dining restaurants.

I don't disagree with anything you said and frankly, when my dad told me that, the cook part of it was the last thing I took from that particular conversation.

My FWH had a lot of "wants". His wants were selfish and self-absorbed. Fuck. That. Shit.

My H too Sister. I told mine to grow the F up and stop acting like a teenager. I also told him that if he had to have some of those wants he could leave. I let him know I loved him enough to let him go but that I love me enough not to ever let him come back.

Frankly, I think this is a near universal "want", although, I risk running afoul of the rules by saying it, I've never met a man who didn't want it. It's why, over, and over, and over, I hear the same story. Love my wife (the lady), but need some sex on the side (the whore).

You are taking bullshitting lessons from your dawg buddies. There are millions of men who are content to fuck the wife. Some want boring missionary, some want it all, but they pretty much want it from the wife.

My ex was the duplicitous one, the "lady" who impressed everybody who was bored with responsible behavior and wanted to play both sides. There's another one other than your WW that you claim is the only one.

when I do marry I needed to understand that all men want a marvelous cook in the kitchen, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public.

I am not looking to be argumentative but I have been thinking of this off and on all evening. The first thing I want to say about this statement is it is a generalization. I don't feel any one can speak for all men. Second, what about all those BW's that were all these things and were still cheated on? And, there are lots and lots of women that fit the bill of being a marvelous cook, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public, many are members here. We fulfill all our WH's wants, but he wants more.

I am not sure what you mean by that a lot of people have a lot of difficulty with this concept. What I feel more people have difficulty with is that we were good husbands and wives and fulfilled all the needs and wants (in many cases) and we still got a WS.

ETA: And, I am not even going to get into how sexist I feel the statement is. I am sure there is a feminine version of what culture/society believes woman want from men that would be just as sexist.

[This message edited by SisterMilkshake at 10:08 PM, March 22nd (Friday)]

I am not even going to get into how sexist I feel the statement is

It is. I get it as a concept that many men feel this way, I just think it ruffles feathers because it objectifies women to be "chosen," as if men are out shopping at The Wife Store. I know that men don't mean it this way; it's considered practical advice. But it feels a bit lacking in empathy and connection with that cook/whore/spokesperson you plan on selecting for this role of a lifetime.

On another note, the "great cook, whore, show piece" also feels like wish list stuff and nothing like real marriage. Last time I checked, I might be considered superficial if I dislike that my spouse gains a ton of weight, isn't the conversationalist I envisioned, hasn't earned any great promotions or raises, and doesn't have a desire to do much more than sit on the couch and watch sports. So I think we have to be careful imagining that we should all have a perfect spouse in every way. Real relationships and the word Perfect do not share a same sentence.

I too thought that phrased that way it is sexist. When he first told me that, I believe I came back with misogynistic. It was not a short conversation because I too resisted such a sexist idea. That said, in our further conversation on the topic, he clearly indicated that men want their life partner/spouse to let go, to be free and to be her best sexual self with her husband. Don't you want that from your husband as well? For him to be his sexual best (best meaning most free, most intimate, most curious, most adventurous) with you? The point is greatest intimacy and no holding back with your spouse. The ONE person you should give your all to but in a way that is personal and private between just the two of you hence the lady in public comment after. Whore has bad connotations and women hate to be called that word. I get it, I do too. I don't really think my dad meant whore in a derogatory sense though. I think he meant sexually open, free, adventurous and somewhat wanton with regards to her husband and yet not that way in public or around others.

Look, sexist or not it is a very short synopsis for how a lot of men feel. My dad probably should not have spoken on behalf of all men but I really didn't take the "all" part literally like you are. I took it as a generalization for most men. All is a bad word to use because there are always outliers in any situation. You are looking at that statement as a BW. I was addressing the BH's and how they feel about their wives stepping out and cheating or giving her best to another man or feeling like she has essentially shown them that the OM is plan A (given her best or most adventurous sexual self). Frankly, I want my H to be a whore in the bedroom with me too and a gentleman in public.

I am all three of those things and my H is WW, I am the BW. I get your outrage. I just think it's misplaced or that you aren't understanding the concept. Or maybe you are just outraged and we can agree to disagree on this.

OIN - We all have criteria when dating and moving into a more serious relationship and during the time we are dating we are all shopping at the spouse store if one of our goals is to fall in love and get married.

I have friends that saved themselves for marriage and wanted a spouse that had done so as well. Is that wrong? I have the opposite opinion and was adamant that I was sexually compatible with the person who would be my husband. The only way to do that is having sex before you get married. Neither of those viewpoints is wrong. They are just particular to each person and they are both wish list type of aspects to what we want in a relationship.

I wanted a man who had good career prospects, was smart, motivated and who I could build a relatively successful life with. It all comes down to compatibility. BTW - I wouldn't marry a man who had no ambition and sat on the couch all day watching sports. That is not a compatible mate for me and knowing that does not make me superficial.

Not outraged. How ridiculous. Annoyed by stereotypical sexism and women that buy into it and pass it along. Yes, we can agree to disagree.

Her first time was probably like most here. It crept up over a series of days where they would meet and flirt. She always thought she had a handle on it and it would never go beyond that. then he kissed her, and she kissed back and they screwed that day.... She promised herself it wasn't going to happen again. But it did. She said that every time was going to be the last except it wasn't...He had her move it to our bed, up the kinds of acts, said awful things about me. she swore to herself that it was going to end with the job, but who knows. they both had really flexible schedules so it could have gone on for years.

Back to the earlier discussion about this, clearly he was giving her something that was stimulating the pleasure centers in her brain. Affirmation, perhaps? Saccharine flattery? Or maybe she just thought he was hot and craved him physically, or she was turned on by the idea of being sexual in the ken of all of those other men? Maybe a mixture of those sorts of things.

The point is, she was getting something out of that exchange that felt so good to her it overrode the logical part of her brain that told her she was destroying her marriage and family, and it also subordinated her desire for you. I think you used a phrase such as "in over her head", but I would not give her that. She wasn't raped. She chose this, and in so choosing she even silenced her own inner constable. Thus, the night you went down on her after she had sex with him, she chose that. She knew sex with you would almost certainly involve you going down on her. She had ample time to stop you, but did not, and the reason she didn't is because it would have threatened to blow up her good thing: by which I mean the thing that was bringing her a lot of pleasure.

I don't know if you discovered SI at the time of dday and had a long cathartic thread on "JFO" forum. Thus, I don't know if she ever owned up to the reality that she chose to serve that to you because, at that point in time, it was worth it to her. I can completely understand how you could never see her through a lens of unconditional love after that. What I would suggest is that, part of the reason this couldn't happen for you is that you could not believe that a wife who would make that choice would ever have authentic love and desire for you. Turning into a Stepford Wife is passive and ineffectual. That would merely reinforce the reality of the inauthenticity of her desire.

It is. I get it as a concept that many men feel this way, I just think it ruffles feathers because it objectifies women to be "chosen," as if men are out shopping at The Wife Store. I know that men don't mean it this way; it's considered practical advice. But it feels a bit lacking in empathy and connection with that cook/whore/spokesperson you plan on selecting for this role of a lifetime.

Actually, it's the opposite. Men present, women choose. In nearly every relationship, that's the pattern, men proposition women and women decide, based on their suitors, who they like best. So, yes, I get that it ruffles your feathers, but, if they're going to be ruffled, think about what it's like for a man for a moment. When I was actively dating, I'd say it took 10 "nos" before I got a single "yes". And if you look at the current generation dating, Tinder, there's research out there that looks at the "swipe right/left" between men and women. And, no surprise, a lot of men swipe right a LOT more than women do, in fact, most men I know who use it just "swipe right" on everyone. Because the goal is to be the "chosen one" and the more chances they get, the more likely they will be that guy. Dating, for me anyway, was a game of numbers. I figured out quickly that I was going to have a low "conversion percentage", most women I approached were not going to be interested and will NEVER be interested in me. So the goal isn't to convince that woman otherwise, the goal is numbers. Because eventually someone will be interested, it just takes a wider net.

This also applies to A's for men, I know how many women I had to approach as a single, good looking, well off guy to get someone to say "yes". How many people you think I'd have to approach as a married, somewhat less good looking guy today to find an AP? A LOT of people. I find it near impossible to believe that most A's are "first try home runs" for male AP's, yes, of course it happens, but unless the woman is the one who initiated the A, it's real likely that a male AP has heard "No" from a lot of potential AP's before he finds one "yes".

And, there are lots and lots of women that fit the bill of being a marvelous cook, a whore in the bedroom and a lady in public, many are members here. We fulfill all our WH's wants, but he wants more.

A lot of happy men cheat. I know my share (although, TBH, almost all of them complain there's too much "lady" and not enough "whore", but still, they are usually not desperately unhappy, those men D, they don't cheat, in my experience). It doesn't change the fact that IMHO, most men still want this (lady in the street, freak in the sheets). Just like most women want tall, handsome, confident, wealthy. And yet, even women who have that cheat, just like men. It's not an antidote to cheating, but it is a recipe for a happy husband/wife in many cases.

When he first told me that, I believe I came back with misogynistic.

Men having preferences and/or desires from their partner is NOT misogynistic. I realize it reads that way, and, honestly, I'm not sure why (because, honestly, I read it and it strikes me wrong too). But there is nothing wrong with desiring something from a partner. It's in no way anti-men that my W only find men over 6' tall attractive, is it? Or that she likes men with blonde hair? Why would it be misogynistic for me to say "I like tall, thin women who have small boobs"? And yet, even as I type that, it feels wrong to say. But why? Sorry for the TJ, but as I was typing it, I realized, there's nothing wrong with what I'm saying, and yet, it feels VERY wrong to say it.

I think he meant sexually open, free, adventurous and somewhat wanton with regards to her husband and yet not that way in public or around others.

I can't speak for you Dad, but that's absolutely what I mean when I say it and what I think when I read it.

Last time I checked, I might be considered superficial if I dislike that my spouse gains a ton of weight, isn't the conversationalist I envisioned, hasn't earned any great promotions or raises, and doesn't have a desire to do much more than sit on the couch and watch sports.

Not by me it's not. I don't consider that superficial at all, I see it as a reasonable list of requirements that you might have for your H or someone you date. If it's not stuff like this, what the heck are you supposed to "want" in a relationship? And, superficial or not, right or wrong, what you listed is, in fact, what many people DO want in a relationship. In shape, smart/make good conversation, well paid, motivated beyond screaming at the TV. It might be wrong to say that today, just like it's wrong to say "Lady in the streets, freak in the sheets" but that in NO WAY alters the fact that is what you (and I, respectively) want. I can lie to you, even lie to myself and say "no, that's not what you want", but.. It is, in fact, what I want.

^^ Agree

I find the statement the father made offensive, too. Maybe not misogynistic, but definitely sexist. What kinds of advice do men get about how to be a good husband, provide?

What kinds of things could you want from a relationship that aren't superficial? Well, the obvious one is love. There's also respect, common interests and beliefs, honesty, integrity, loyalty, compassion. I could go on. I think you get the gist.

With that said, I still want a physically attractive and fit mate (among other things). Of course, physical attractiveness is subjective. That's not really superficial if you look at it from an evolutionary perspective. Men want women who physically appear to be capable of bearing and nourishing offspring. Women want men who appear to be able to provide for and protect those offspring.

What kinds of advice do men get about how to be a good husband, provide?

Yeah, basically. Make a lot of money and be a good father to your children, that's the advice (in so many words) that I got. Treat her nice, don't drink too much, listen to her. I got that advice too.

What kinds of things could you want from a relationship that aren't superficial? Well, the obvious one is love. There's also respect, common interests and beliefs, honesty, integrity, loyalty, compassion. I could go on. I think you get the gist.

I'd agree with that list, but, IMHO, nothing on that list matters if attraction isn't there (physical attraction). I know a lot of women who I had a lot more in common with than my W. Probably were more honest, had more integrity (looking back now, I don't think I thought this before the A), etc. But it didn't matter because the physical attraction wasn't there. That's the thing that's difficult, it's a filter, and the first filter is "physically attracted" for me. And, unfortunately, often times that filter cuts out a LOT of people who have the qualities that I'd filter for next. Sometimes not, for example, most physically attractive people are active and enjoy physical activities, so, while that's a filter for me too, it's pretty likely that the "physical attraction" filter is going to have the same group as the physical activity filter.

So if it's me, I know what to do. If it's him, I know what to do. If it's her?? I've got no idea what to do. And I hate the feeling of not knowing how to work to repair something.... And that's an awful feeling, at least it is for me.

But it's absolutely crucial for your recovery to accept this truth - you cannot fix this on your own.

You can change your thought pattern to adjust to this reality, you can feel your feelings, you can figure out what you want, you can decide what you will do, but you can't fix your WS.

Sometimes the most appropriate response is simply to feel awful.

To believe otherwise is to live in a fantasy.

Manipulation

Words: "I'll never do it again, I'm so sorry"

Inner Monologue: "...Now s/he'll ... get off my back and finally just get over it"

Convincing

Words: "I'll never do it again, I'm so sorry"

Inner Monologue: "I really mean it...."

The thing about this is: I think the vast majority of people who say this mean what they say. They really don't want to repeat the behavior that got them into such difficulty.

That's one of the ways looking for actions, not words is so important.

Men present, women choose. In nearly every relationship, that's the pattern....

You say you asked 10 women to get one 'yes.' How many women did you not ask? That's you choosing. How many women did you not talk M with? That's you choosing. How many women did you agree to M? That's you choosing.

Women present. Men present. Women choose. Men choose.

[This message edited by sisoon at 9:26 AM, March 23rd (Saturday)]

Agree with Sisoon on all points.

What struck me while reading the last post is....am I the only one who feels physical attraction more after getting to know someone? I mean I can obviously see that someone’s attractive - male or female- but for actual active attraction to kick in it is after spending time with the person?

I dated two people based on physical attractiveness in my life - both were bottom barrel experiences. I did not find my husband attractive at first, people kept trying to push us together but I really didn’t see it. I spent some time with him based on the overwhelming suggestions and one evening I just felt that chemistry kick in. I can recall the specific moment, I know how he was seated, I know what he was wearing. I craved him. But I never in the beginning thought “he is hot, I have to get with him”. But the attraction really never wained. To this day if we are together I want to be as close to him as possible. Obviously, we aren’t up on each other or too pda, if we are with friends we fan out a bit more. But if it’s just he and I want to smell him, touch him, hold hands, etc. But before I knew him I would have just said “he has a kind face” or “nice blue eyes” Not oh gosh he is so hot or anything like that.

I prefer to be a whole person. In the bedroom. In the kitchen. Out in public.

I can enjoy cooking a great meal without being a "marvelous chef" to fulfill someone else's role expectations. I can enjoy great sex with my H without becoming a "whore" or "slut" to satisfy someone else's bullshit tropes about female sexuality. And I can enjoy the company of others at a dinner party without needing to put myself on display as a worthy female specimen.

Lots of people slice themselves up into little, inauthentic pieces, and then serve themselves up to others in a vain attempt to feel worthy. Women are encouraged to do this to a sickening extent. It is one of the many ways people become broken, fragmented, and lose touch with who they really are and what they really value. It is one road to infidelity. The A is just one more broken, jagged piece of "self"--derived entirely by external approval and validation.

So I think this father's advice, no matter how well-meaning, and no matter how accurately it reflects how men have been socialized to think about women, is extremely damaging. Extremely. For women, absolutely, but for men too, in the end.

Because truly intimate, fulfilling partnerships are not comprised of two people who are dancing around to perform a complex of shifting roles for another, in the hopes of gaining affection and approval as a reward. No. Real intimacy, and real fulfillment in M, comes in the authentic, vulnerable connections that arise between two, whole individuals, who are able to love themselves, and one another, as such.