SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

Then we started getting the "Red Pill" posters. Yuckkkkkikk!!!!!! And, now we have what we have. An evolved form of Red Pill, misogyny, and just plain male pov mixed together? IDK. Don't care for it much, though.

Sadly, I think this trend is just a reflection of society, both genders seem to be "arming up" and becoming more and more militarized. On one side we have "kill all men" or "men are defective women", on the other side we have incels (including violent/homical) and "the red pill". Incels are the "give up and angry" group where "the red pill" is more the "Just get a bigger gun" group.

It's sad to see, it really is. And the results are easily visible in statistics, marriage stats, birth rates, marital happiness, etc. When men and women stop working as a team and start weaponizing against one another, lots of things start to break. And I don't see anyone actually trying to head this off, I see both sexes becoming more entrenched.

I've only read about half of this thread, so apologise if my reply isn't encompassing everything that's been said.

I’m an old-timer who only checks in occasionally. While this is gut rather than statistic based, I think there’s always been a tendency towards advising BH's to divorce. I remember reading a thread very early on in which a BH was told over and over that his wife (who seemed to be in the middle of some kind of genuine mental health crisis) needed to be dumped immediately. Nothing she did was good enough. The poor guy really did want to give her a chance and was basically talked out of it. And at that point, BWs vastly outnumbered BH's, so most of this advice was coming from BW's--some of whom, ironically, were taking endless amounts of shit from their own WH's. So, I don't think it's an entirely new phenomenon.

I do think that as the makeup of the site has changed (and I'm inclined to think it's a good thing that men are feeling able to seek support and advice) there does seem to have been some red-pilling of both the conversation and the terminology that often seems to break down into men vs women instead of BS's supporting each other regardless of gender.

I find the tone different in other ways, too, though, so it might be a more general change. When I look at JFO now I wonder if new posters are given a chance to process the utter shock of where they’ve found themselves before being hit ‘hard truths’ (she’s a whore, he’s a serial cheater who will never change) and a to-do list (file for divorce). And I’m not saying it’s bad advice, it’s not, but most of us aren’t ready to be told we need to file for divorce while still reeling from d-day. Funnily, though, when I look back, I wonder if that change in tone came about less from the BHs than from a very prolific BW (who I haven't seen on in a long time) who seemed to delight in swinging the 2x4s.

I absolutely know that the intentions are good. No one wants to see a BS dragged deeper into the infidelity shitstorm. We all want to help a newcomer avoid the mistakes we might have made. But the truth is, everyone needs to come to this in their own way in their own time. And while there are commonalities in all affairs, no two people, no two situations are the same. Their WS isn’t your WS.

Sorry - think I strayed from the OP

[This message edited by brooke4 at 8:37 PM, August 14th (Friday)]

cheatstroke,

You can’t have a stop sign asking only for helpful comments, as that is much to subjective..

You didn’t answer my question though.

What is the motivation to post something you know is harsh or isn’t going to be helpful?

What is the motivation to post something you know is harsh or isn’t going to be helpful?

I suppose it's motivated by seeing someone who you think is thinking wrong about something, and so you post something that you think may steer them to a different way of thinking. If it's not going to steer them necessarily, maybe it will steer someone who is reading who is thinking like them.

Let's take everyone's favorite example of someone posting something that is harsh or isn't going to be helpful:

“go ahead and stay if you’re alright with being a cuck”

What would be the motivation for making this statement?

A cuck or cuckold is someone who is complicit in their partner's sexual infidelity.

Supposedly this is a fetish fantasy among certain men. They get off on being humiliated by seeing or knowing that their wife has been with other men.

However, the fetish fantasy does not work at all if the cuckold is being humiliated against their will.

Virtually all BH's that come to this site are being humiliated against their will.

So, they are not a cuck.

However, if the BH is making pronouncements about how they are being humiliated against their will, and are also making pronouncements that seem to indicate that they love their wife so much that that they aren't going to do anything about it, then someone may be motivated to make the statement “go ahead and stay if you’re alright with being a cuck”, even though they know the BH is not a cuck, but they think he is thinking like one, and needs to be steered into a different way of thinking.

But I've got a few questions too...

Isn't this whole thread about trying to control what someone else does - post, comment, help, not help, be harsh, not be harsh, whatever it is they do?

And isn't it the mantra of SI that you can't control what someone else does, you can only control yourself?

My point is that you CAN'T only control yourself. You CAN, ALSO, control your own web site.

Software is available to help prevent new BS' from seeing posts that are harsh or unhelpful.

It sounds like you don't want to use it, because it would be too subjective, and prevent potentially good posts.

You're in charge of things here, WalkinOnEggshelz. What you say, goes, for the most part.

What would YOU propose, here in the year 2020, not 2001, to help prevent people from making posts that are harsh or unhelpful?

Cheatstroke

I have a colleague that manages a school webpage. He told me that he had software for picture-content to prevent nudity and porn. That software caused an issue when it refused to publish pictures from a cooking-competition school event. Apparently, a sundae with vanilla ice-cream and a cherry triggered the algorithm for a breast and nipple.

I think content control would be even tougher here on SI. There are instances where a BS talks about their spouse’s cuckold fantasies for a valid reason. There are instances where some of the terms might be relevant and even appropriate. Heck… my username would probably trigger some algorithms!

There are guidelines and this forum is moderated. Us guides and many other users point out when we think someone breaks a guideline. I perceive a reluctance from the admins and mods to ban users and they give people a lot of leeway. I think most get at least one or more warnings. That’s probably because the mods and admins believe something most of the BTW group doesn’t: the ability of a person to change.

I suppose it's motivated by seeing someone who you think is thinking wrong about something, and so you post something that you think may steer them to a different way of thinking. If it's not going to steer them necessarily, maybe it will steer someone who is reading who is thinking like them.

Don’t you think that this motivation is still an attempt at being helpful?

What is helpful can be rather subjective. What is helpful for one person may not be helpful for another. I love that we have so many personalities from various backgrounds and experiences that come here to share in order to heal. I believe some people need a firmer approach while others need a softer one, particularly when it comes to waywards. I also believe that you can’t come in knowing what you really need.

None of us knew how infidelity would impact us (BS or WS) until we were actually here. There is no way of knowing how many parts of your life it touches until you are living it.

We can not censor people. Well, I guess we can but that’s not what we want here. It is however, important to remember that in most cases there is a genuinely hurt human being on the other side of the screen. We are only getting a small snapshot of their life, their marriage, their history. We can tell them what our experience is with infidelity, how we wish we had done it differently, how it looks to us based on the information they have provided, etc. Too often we make assumptions and lash out with cruelty.

I think the purpose of posts like these are to have people check themselves every now and then. Sit back and ask yourself “is what I’m posting meant to help or is it harmful?” Is it behavior that we would tolerate IRL, or would we call someone out for it?

It shouldn’t matter what year it is, 2001 or 2020. This is should be a human issue. Shouldn’t matter the gender, race, religion, or political affiliation. These are people who are hurting and need help. If you show that person compassion (and I get that comes in a lot of different forms) that’s all I can ever ask.

If technology worked perfectly, guides and mods would not be necessary. I also imagine, technology would have filtered out a lot of amazing members as well.

Don’t you think that this motivation is still an attempt at being helpful?

I'm sorry WalkinOnEggshelz, I think I misunderstood your question and point-of-view.

I am one who actually DOES think that this motivation is still an attempt at being helpful:

I suppose it's motivated by seeing someone who you think is thinking wrong about something, and so you post something that you think may steer them to a different way of thinking. If it's not going to steer them necessarily, maybe it will steer someone who is reading who is thinking like them.

I was under the impression that YOU were the one who thought it was wrong, that it was misguided, and were going to tell me how wrong my thinking is.

I do NOT want censorship, same as you. I think people should be allowed to post and if it's out-of-line, it should be removed.

But when I saw this thread and saw how upset everyone was about new BH's getting harsh and unhelpful posts, I offered up the suggestion of new software, because I thought it might be a way to help prevent the BH's from seeing those harsh and unhelpful posts.

I do not consider myself to be in the BTW crowd. Maybe other people think I am but I don't.

I was actually surprised when I saw this post by CT because it describes pretty much to a tee what I think a new BH should probably do:

If I could only give one bit of advice to the newly betrayed, it would be: "File for divorce. Mean it. And if the WS can catch up and effectively convince you otherwise, then consider R."

If I could only give one bit of advice to the newly betrayed, it would be: "File for divorce. Mean it. And if the WS can catch up and effectively convince you otherwise, then consider R."

And, this wouldn't have worked for my situation at all. If I had filed for divorce my WH would have given up. He fully expected me to divorce him, he thought he deserved to be divorced, he felt I deserved better than him, he was ashamed and depressed and if I had filed for divorce he would have totally given up and gone a very deep downward spiral.

He couldn't believe I was willing to give him a chance. As soon as we were able to figure out what he needed to do to fix all that was damaged he did it. He was all in. Because I was all in on giving him a chance. One chance. Which is why I felt I had to divorce him (didn't) when he lied about throwing away fucking fish.

wOES,

My compliments to you as always.

Abusive people absolutely think they are helpful. If you weren't so messed up, they wouldn't have to be so hard on you.

Just sayin'.

It shouldn’t matter what year it is, 2001 or 2020. This is should be a human issue. Shouldn’t matter the gender, race, religion, or political affiliation. These are people who are hurting and need help. If you show that person compassion (and I get that comes in a lot of different forms) that’s all I can ever ask.

Exactly.

I think content control would be even tougher here on SI.

Bigger, I totally agree. What I'm talking about though is a software button that the new BS would click. Then and ONLY then would there be any content control.

It could be programmed so that the BS themselves could use words like "cuck" and "fuck" in their original post, but the posted REPLIES that have those words would be filtered out. It could also catch people using "c u c k" , etc.

People posting replies could still say "c word for man who is complicit in his wife's infidelity" in their comment instead of "cuck", but who's going to type all that out when they're in flame mode?

Again, this would ONLY be enabled when the BS wants it, kind of like the Stop Sign in Wayward Side.

If the BS unclicks the button, it disables the filtering and people can post whatever they want, provided it's within guidelines.

Thus it could make the mod's job easier AND help prevent new BS' from seeing harsh and unhelpful posts.

If the BS unclicks the button, it disables the filtering and people can post whatever they want, provided it's within guidelines.

Thus it could make the mod's job easier AND help prevent new BS' from seeing harsh and unhelpful posts.

I guess my question would be - the issue that brought up this thread is that people may not even realize they are being unhelpful. So, a stop sign would not deter them from posting, right? In essence, the point of this thread was "hey think a minute about the new BS and what its like in their shoes and see if you can spare them some harshness". And, it was met with 20+ pages of people saying "But it is helpful" or "what are you talking about" and total defensiveness.

I am in agreement with you, most posters, even the ones who post vulgar stuff that would be really hard for a new BS to hear, believe they are being helpful. Do you see the problem?

The 'cuckhold' thing, whether meant simply as a description or as a 'shock' insult can be confusing . . .

A cuck or cuckold is someone who is complicit in their partner's sexual infidelity.

I believe that's more of a North American kink or fetish definition, but it's newer, and doesn't really fit.

The traditional definition makes more sense, and is based on the behavior of the cuckoo. The cuckold does NOT know of their partner's infidelity, and therefore could not really be considered complicit. Generally this is male. Cuckquean is the female version.

Those who know and allow their partners to sleep around would be 'wittols', but I don't know if in the case of a wittol, what their partners do can be called 'infidelity'. This is the problem with the fetish version of cuckhold . . . if the person is complicit, and indeed may find it arousing, then there's no secret, and it's not really infidelity (or at the very least, not cheating).

'Cuckhold' as an insult indicates the person is clueless, and unaware of what's occurring under their very noses. So, if they ARE aware and trying to end the problem, it doesn't make much sense to say '. . . live your life as a cuckhold.'.

[This message edited by c24j at 12:15 AM, August 31st (Monday)]

Cheatstroke,

I have been a programmer professionally for the past 27 years and started programming as a hobby as far back as 1984.

What you are suggesting is technically not a difficult task, but it does add an extra layer to the comment section that will require integration and Dev. time. It's not cheap, but it's not technically difficult.

I have filter code right on this machine that can be easily applied for the purpose. I can even sell it as a service by exposing the functionality as a REST web-service.

The problem is not with the filter code, the problems is with the policies.

You have a problem with the term "cuckold" or "cuck". Technically my filter can even derive, to a huge statistical percentage of accuracy, the context of the term you wish to filter.

Take the word Beard. It can be a beard for a gay person to appear straight or the facial growth of a hirsute gentleman.

You may want to allow for one context and not the other.

All this is technically easy with an existing code-base such as what I have.

Now the honest truth. I will not license or implement my filter code for reasons other than what I originally wrote it for. To protect children.

Children are the only ones in my opinion who deserves to see the world through a protective filter.

Such filters to my mind and when applied to adults is censorship and I can not detest anything more than any form of censorship .

Okay, I do detest infidelity and a few other things more, but it ranks up there.

If the policy for policing language in the implementation of my code is to keep anything from an adult for any reason including fragile feelings, I will not license it.

I have lost a great deal of money by standing by this principle and frankly I feel good for having done so.

[This message edited by DictumVeritas at 3:21 AM, August 31st (Monday)]

We can tell them what our experience is with infidelity, how we wish we had done it differently, how it looks to us based on the information they have provided, etc.

This, so much! To me, it's much more helpful if people stick to their own experiences, thoughts, feelings, and actions. It's also what every therapist I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot over 35 years) has told me is the way to get people to really hear you. Being harsh or extreme or shocking is more likely to make others feel defensive. People can't hear and process what you're saying when they are defensive.

I totally get feeling fed up with someone who keeps going in circles. When I start to feel that way towards someone, I usually stop reading and posting on their threads. I feel like I can't be helpful, so I excuse myself.

Too often we make assumptions and lash out with cruelty.

This drives me crazy! I can't stand assumptions. Part of my H's problem is that he assumes so much. He doesn't ask for clarification. Then, he acts on his assumptions and gets butthurt when he's wrong. No one can know what is inside someone else's head or heart. You can only know what they tell you and what they show you.

I don't find it helpful at all when someone makes assumptions about me and my situation and jumps to conclusions and starts giving me advice that is either completely off base, or that I didn't ask for. Focus on what is actually written rather than trying to read between the lines. Then, comment based on your own experience, rather than telling someone else what they should do. MnshO

We can tell them what our experience is with infidelity, how we wish we had done it differently, how it looks to us based on the information they have provided, etc.

To me, it's much more helpful if people stick to their own experiences, thoughts, feelings, and actions. Being harsh or extreme or shocking is more likely to make others feel defensive.

What I can see on the forums is that it's usually the newer members who try to give advice to "novices" in the harshest, almost cruel way. I think it's in part caused by their own unresolved anger, lingering hate and disgust. As if they were trying to get back at their own WSs by encouraging others to treat theirs poorly. More seasoned participants usually state their ideas in a more detached, matter-of-factly manner. It's a foregone conclusion whose approach is more useful.

I totally get feeling fed up with someone who keeps going in circles. When I start to feel that way towards someone, I usually stop reading and posting on their threads.

Yes, some people seem to come here with a clear idea of what they want to hear instead of wanting to be told what they need to hear. Some of them are possibly too deep in denial and need time to snap out of it. Others don't even want to wake up to reality and they probably quietly disappear, never to be heard from again.

c24j, Thanks very much for sharing.

You have a problem with the term "cuckold" or "cuck". Technically my filter can even derive, to a huge statistical percentage of accuracy, the context of the term you wish to filter.

I've seen at least on member tell a new member BH in essence that he needs to D his W NOW because his W has decided to spend her life fucking strange men. If the new BH doesn't D now, it's because he is complicit in his W's decision and activities and because he is getting off on his role as 'cuck.'

I can't imagine a situation in which the above statement would be appropriate on SI, but 2 X 4s are sometimes quite appropriate, and some 2 x 4s are ...um... colorful.

I think a filter can identify statements that are questionable fro mods to consider, but I don't think an algorithm can actually make good decisions on SI.

[This message edited by sisoon at 9:32 AM, August 31st (Monday)]

Sissoon, I can agree with a algorithm even based on my filter code or similar being used to flag posts to human moderators based on policies.

That can definitely be done.

What I can see on the forums is that it's usually the newer members who try to give advice to "novices" in the harshest, almost cruel way.

This was me. I got banned from the WW forum for lashing out. I refused to take down my comment. I still stand by it. I'm sure it's a good thing I can't post on there. I don't have anything kind or helpful to say to them.

I joined in 2014. I took a break for about a year or two in 2016-2018. I immediately felt a difference in the atmosphere here. It's much more harsh and sexist. From what I've read, it all started to change when the founding wayward died.