SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

DaddyDom, standing ovation for that. I think part of why you don't see many WSs stay is that so few truly have the courage and strength to face themselves head-on and put in the work required to become better people. Those who have done that and are here to help others are not the norm, so good for all of you. It really would be great if there were more.

Also, it's important not to read anything here to imply that SI is about R. Someone above wrote that that the purpose of the Reconciliation forum is to help couples reconcile - that's the 'purpose of the R forum', not the 'purpose of SI'.

Sisoon makes a very good point. This place is about getting out of infidelity. So if you read "She slept with my dad, my best friend, and my sister" or "He has cheated 15 times" and you don't read a lot of R advice for them in JFO, I mean...at a certain point I'd feel like I was enabling someone else's abuse by saying "Your WS needs IC. Have you directed them to our Wayward forum? You don't need to make any decisions now. Your marriage can come back from this." Sometimes the right answer is helping that BS leave an abusive relationship and absolutely not recommending their WS come here to spy on them. I get that it doesn't help to insult anyone and I genuinely hope that's not something I do. But yes, if you read anything I post to someone married to a sex addict or serial cheater, you won't see a lot of R advice in my feedback. My personal ethics won't allow me to do that. That doesn't make me anti-R. I have friends in R and they have spouses who are a lot more like those here who stay and give advice. They had to earn it and actually become good and safe partners. I am anti-passing the hopium pipe to a BS based on no evidence that they're married to a good person. That isn't my place. It is the WSs place to convince the BS that there is any good reason to give them another chance.

I am a bit more blunt than some others are. That probably works for some people better than for others. For me, when I got here I treasured every 2x4. I needed them so badly. They were a breath of fresh air to me. I had been gaslit and lied to and minimized to by my XWH, so straight-up bluntness was music to my ears. I needed that much more than I needed hand-holding. I needed others to speak truth to me. I craved it. I needed the validation that this really was as bad as I felt that it was. That I wasn't crazy for feeling like my entire world had exploded and that this really was that level of trauma. Those who were blunt and honest and real did me so much good. I also needed the gentle compassionate empathy. Some here (looking at you, ISSF) were so good at doing both at the same time and I cannot thank you enough. I think we have a good mix here of both.

BSs come here traumatized and gaslit. They come here lied to and confused. Their WS is not R material right out of the gate or they wouldn't be WSs in the first place. DaddyDom is right on. They won't become R material by being treated with kid gloves. If you want the absolute worst version of my XWH, coddle him and be gentle. The bit of progress he made before I left all came from me dumping tons of 2x4s all over him and refusing to comfort him.

Infidelity is an awful thing. People stay here in agony for years and sometimes they lash out. That's real. It may not always be helpful, but it's real. It's probably unavoidable on any site that deals with a trauma of this magnitude.

I don't actually know whether I'm a source of irritation for anyone on this thread, but if I am, feel free to call me out. I can take blunt as well as I can dish it out.

[This message edited by DevastatedDee at 10:06 PM, Sunday, November 14th]

I hate the idea of hashing it out with her in writing on a public forum.

I don't think it's a terrible idea for couples to post. That is, if they're both comfortable with it. Unrepentant WS's tend to get exposed pretty quickly which is a pretty good side benefit. I remember one guy who was a fairly blatant narcissist got all mad and stomped out of here after just a few days because his usual shtick wasn't working here at SI. That's not real comfortable for the BS, but it does tend to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Here's an off topic thought.... I got to wondering if people could easily find us. I'm using Google so that's the search engine I checked, and I started typing in various key words. I couldn't find this place as a page 1 result without using "forum", "discussion", or "message board". Things like "infidelity advice", "cheating husband", "adultery wife" ,"what to do if spouse is cheating" were all a no go. Even "infidelity support" failed... ouch! I'm no techie, but that doesn't seem good. Do people still search for "message boards" these days?.. particularly when they're reeling from dday and not sure what they're looking for?

Thank you. I feel that this has turned into a valuable discussion regarding the climate of the site. I actually find myself nodding in agreement to many (not all) of what is being said here from a variety of perspectives.

Regarding moderators cracking down. Without threadjacking my own thread too much, I would like to give you a glimpse from the other side. Moderating the forum is not my full time job. I am in patient care in skilled nursing which has been a difficult and tiring career over the past 18 months. I have a child with BPD, a mother that passed away last year and a MIL in my facility trying to recover from Covid. Life is never simple, not for me, not for most people. During the times I am not dealing with work or family, I am here. My time here is purely voluntary. Despite how it may seem sometimes, moderators do not make decisions unilaterally. We have 10+ forums and subforums to look through daily. That is a lot of posts to scour through. It is near impossible to hit every post along the way. When we do find something that needs addressing, it goes up for discussion so results may not happen immediately.

I will make it a point to post more on a thread when actions are being taken, as I understand that when things are handled strictly via pm it appears there is inaction.

In the larger picture, however I ask you as a community to be the change you want to see. Counteract the BTW crowds and those with an agenda with kindness and support. Be the louder voice.

We can not weed them out simply because they are voicing their opinion. That would be censorship. I can, however take action with namecalling and shaming.

I am taking what you all are saying to heart and I hope you all are doing the same so that we can work together.

On another note, CT I have alerted your post to MangledHeart. I’m no techie either so I don’t know if that is something that can be addressed.

I encouraged my WW to register and participate. She did so and made a few threads in the WS forum. She received a few 2x4's and was asked questions she preferred to avoid answering. The truth from an unbiased third party (or 20) was too much for her to engage with or hear and the answers to those questions carried a lot of weight so she dipped.

That was a bit over a year ago. Since she left SI, I brought it up once and her reasoning for leaving SI is that she doesn't want anyone to figure out who she is in real life.

.....

I didn't even bother attempting to debate it with her. It doesn't matter anyways as I don't feel the need to coerce R or actions from her. She'll do what she wants and she'll show me what's in her heart.

In hindsight, if I had known she wouldn't make the most of SI I wouldn't have introduced her to it.

Honestly, as much as this should be a safe place, there really is no such thing for a betrayed. Especially one who pursues R. We will never be free of judgement. It was beyond eye opening for me to realize how hypocritical people can be, even here. I needed to grow some thicker skin. I needed to see that even the members of my own club were going to throw stones. It has better prepared me to deal with the real world.

At first it was easy to be bothered by aggressive comments. Hell, someone told me my husband sounded like Chris Watts, and I should fear for mine and my children’s lives. Never mind his affair had been over for years, but hey let’s just say whatever we want! Then I actually started looking into these people’s backstories. Some pro D advocates no matter the situation. Who make it sound like they immediately tossed their cheating spouses to the curb. Turns out their spouses never stopped seeing their APs, even after being given several chances. Glasshouses and all that.

Being a betrayed sucks balls. It’s absolutely unfair we are one of the only victims of a trauma who are judged as harshly as we are. But it’s the reality of our situation. There’s no escaping into some utopia where we are all patted on the back and unconditionally supported. Again, especially if we choose R. So if you’re going to stay with your cheating spouse, the best thing you can do is learn how to ignore rude comments that don’t serve you. To get stronger. To OWN your choices. To better understand the intentions of others, and know they aren’t always coming from a genuine place.

Anyways, I’m not sure anything can be done to put a stop to the BTW crowd. They are a very real part of choosing reconciliation here and everywhere.

DaddyDom's post is gold and frankly all of his posts on the Wayward forum are. Zug may have left a hole but I think Daddy does a pretty damn good job of filling it by walking that line of compassion and tough love.

I read on multiple advice forums. Some aimed specifically at infidelity. Some more general. The interesting thing about finding SI is that it's often handed out freely to BS on other sites as the best place to consider R. Why? Because the posters on other sites are so incredibly harsh on BSes. R isn't floated as an option on most other sites unless VERY specific criteria is met - i.e. first time cheating, short or ONS type PA, WS immediately confesses on their own, WS immediately shows full award winning level remorse, etc. That's part of why SI has more posters in R that other sites and why we have so many posters who lean R or are pro-R under the right (but much more forgiving than others) circumstances. If anyone believes that SI is anti-R or has a large crowd of anti-R people, PM me and I'll gladly show you a couple of other infidelity related sites that will make our most controversial threads look tame. So many of us came here with the attitude that cheating was an immediate deal breaker and that attitude prevails in other places where the posters are a mix of BS, WS, and people who have not experienced infidelity personally. Perhaps worse, there are sites where BSes have received scathing PMs for snooping or doing anything that we would consider SOP for protecting yourself at SI. There are places that believe that if a BS has to stoop to checking up on the WS, VAR, polygraph, post nup, or any other trust building or safety net that could help a BS feel more secure in R, that the BS is almost as bad as the WS and should D and get help themselves. And these are from sites that are easily Googleable and well known. Even ones talked about on SI some times. They are the most likely places a BS who doesn't know about SI would go and alternatively the most likely sites where they will get a post or PM with a link to SI.

We're never going to be perfect. We will never be the right place for everyone. We should keep in mind what about SI makes it what it is when also considering changes to it so that we don't dilute the good here in order to make it more palatable to the few. IME, that's the quickest way to lose veterans of a website who may feel alienated or pushed out by the restrictive nature of new rules/climate. Who wants to keep posting when every post elicits an argument about how they worded something vs the value of their message? What I've witnessed is that SI is best for people, BS and WS, who are ready to act. The people who struggle most when posting tend to be people who aren't ready to change what they're doing but even then some posters really do need a heap of 2x4s to take a baby step and some posters benefit more from reading and reflecting than getting advice for themselves. Posting online in general, on SI or anywhere, may not be the right call for everyone especially if they are not in a place where they can accept advice or weather criticism. That is true of any advice site.

I agree that it's fair to ask that mods respond to graphic posts and ones where particularly aggressive or heated name calling is used against a BS's WS. I also think that a thread poster should be allowed and encouraged to ask that a mod remove a post if it is especially triggering for them. Not because the poster broke a guideline but simply because of the specific nuances of the post were too much for the BS at that moment. In a case like this, no punishment should be given but a polite PM would be sent to the poster whose post was removed asking them to kindly respect the poster's wishes to not read that post. IMO, it's rare that anyone on SI wants to hurt others with their posts and even blunt but fair posts come from a place of love and desperately wanting things to be better for the BS. But I also understand from threads like these that some posters just can't handle certain topics or ways that love was communicated while in a vulnerable and high emotionally charged state even if the post was not malicious, descriptive, or mean spirited in any shape or form. Even if the post was clearly meant to be helpful and would read that way to others, it may make certain BSes feel better about continuing and re-reading their own thread if they had that option. It also might be better for other posters to get a courteous, nonpunitive heads up from a mod that doesn't place the responsibility on the thread maker themselves to reach out to someone who just triggered them. Also, since I see complaints on both side of this issue - too much BS anger vs not enough support for BS anger - could we consider opening a new subforum for rants that is BS only? I'm sure some of us would be happy to test out our lexicon of douchebaggery where applicable and blow off some of that steam where others and WS don't have to read it.

One thing I have not seen mentioned but would like to spread awareness of is posters who take over a thread by replying to every post in a baiting/argumentative way. I'm not talking about one or two posts with a dissenting opinion because that diversity is important. I'm talking about threads in which one poster is monopolizing the conversation and arguing with anyone who posts which leads to long T/Js and other users getting baited into an argument when normally they wouldn't stir the pot. IMHO, it's these situations that either escalate into a big brawl of side A vs side B where punitive measures need to be taken, threads need to be closed, OR the thread simply dies because no one feels comfortable posting anymore including OP who was usually just someone looking for advice or support regardless of what side they're on. I'm not including discussion threads in general aimed at debating certain topics. I'm talking about threads in JFO or general made by a BS or WS who was not opening the floor for a debate but because of the content of their thread, someone felt the need to start one anyways and suddenly everyone's angry and triggered and the OP is left twisting in the wind because they are no longer receiving advice or support. Back when forums were hopping and dinosaurs still roamed the earth (figuratively), we'd call this behavior "flame waring" and people who did it "trolls". I don't know if anyone who does it does so maliciously, hopefully not, but I think mods and posters should be aware of it and either report it or ignore it and not get baited if they come across it. Try to focus on what's helpful to the OP and if you suspect a poster is flaming in the thread, you don't have to respond to them just because they quote you no matter how tempting they make it.

On finding SI:

When I needed SI I couldn't find it. I couldn't find the other big sites either. I did find one site that provided some support, but it wasn't based on reality (for example, give the WS one chance, and only one chance, to write everything down). Luckily a WS showed up and was attacked, even though she looked contrite. Someone wrote something like, 'Go to survivinginfidelity.com. They think WSes are human beings.' Since I wanted to R, and since I could R only with a fellow human being, I came to SI.

My main search in 2011 was 'infidelity forum'. For the last few years, SI has been the first site listed for that search in both Google and DuckDuckGo. IOW, there has been some progress.

*****

Maybe we can make things better by reminding posters to write about what they know. We actually know only what people post, and posts can give only bare outlines of a sitch. No one here can possibly know from a BS's post what went on in their WS's mind.

Perhaps we can ask for self-awareness from posters. If a post inspires passion, the responder probably has been triggered. That's can be a good thing, if the response is not an attack. For a triggered response to benefit anyone, however, it needs to come from an 'I' perspective - something like, 'I'm angry/sad/scared/ashamed based on such-and-such a post, and I want to respond by saying...' or 'My experience was ____, which is different from the post above.'

The problem is defining a guideline that is clear and enforceable. Maybe just defining a guideline that is clear is the hardest part.

I can recognize a lot of attacks that I think are illegitimate ... I just don't know how to describe them in a way that can be turned into a guideline. And if the mods are too strict, we'll almost definitely lose the diversity of opinion that makes SI so valuable to members and to lurkers.

[This message edited by SI Staff at 4:50 PM, Monday, November 15th]

Generally speaking, I think there are many valid reasons why a BS shouldn't disclose SI to their WS. Among them are:
-It is detrimental to the BS to share this safe space with someone who is an unsafe partner and is currently lying and/or abusing them. Many WS will use SI as a means of manipulating their the BS.
-The BS could be receiving valuable legal and investigative strategy advice that would be undermined if their WS was privy to that information.
-It's nearly impossible for couples to avoid reading each other's posts. As a result, both the BS and the WS are less honest and forthcoming, which consequently diminishes the value of the advice they receive because that advice is based upon incomplete or inaccurate knowledge.
-BS will often feel compelled to white knight their WS when the WS is receiving criticism (rightly or wrongly) that the WS finds to be upsetting.
-Some couples will inappropriately use SI as a colosseum to duke out their disagreements in lieu of communicating with each other in real life.

The only circumstances in which I think the BS should share SI with the WS is if the WS has already done a lot of substantial on his or her own and just needs an additional resource for support and advice. For example, one of the most active users on the Wayward forum was a WW who was introduced to the site after her affair was over, she had proven her commitment to rebuilding the marriage, and she and her BS were in MC.

As for why the Wayward Forum is a ghost town, I don't think it's because the WS were scared away by 2x4s... in fact, in the days when Zugwang and other "hard hitters" posted regularly, and there was less tone-policing on the part of the moderators, there was a lot more active participation because WS were forced to challenge their old ways of thinking. There are many other sites that where a WS can go to be coddled, placated, or receive watered-down advice, so what is the unique value of SI if it only offers more of the same?

Lastly, why is the onus always on the BS to provide the WS with infidelity-related resources? Why is the WS incapable of doing their own research and finding it on their own?

Excellent post,Blue.

There are many other sites that where a WS can go to be coddled, placated, or receive watered-down advice, so what is the unique value of SI if it only offers more of the same?

This is an interesting theory. I've only been around here about 2 years, but it does seem like the older wayward forum offered a bit more tough love than it does now. Heck, even most BS's like me tend to be pretty restrained if we offer comment to a WS in the wayward forum. Another working theory is that they've been 'run off' the minute any BS's chime in and there is an immediate crowdsourced attempt to get that stop sign up as quickly as possible. Maybe it's true that they are overwhelmed by the commentary and head for the hills. Or Maybe they simply don't see it as having enough of an edge to challenge them?

For what it's worth, my wife tried to join the site earlier this year, and I'm thankful the site owner's asked me if I wanted her to join. I said no. I felt she was potentially trying to work her way into a situation where there would be a tit for tat. It seemed like it would be counterproductive and really awful for me -- because SI has been an important place where I can go to share my thoughts, test my own thinking and really dig deep into a lot of the issues I'm dealing with as a BH.

I also experienced members saying awful things and calling me names when I was asking for kindness and support

Hmmm, in my experience, the moderators are pretty good at policing name calling and ad hominem. I mean, for goodness sake, I got called out one day for using the rather obscure word "harridan." So it's hard to imagine name calling in any sense has ever been a widespread concern here.

"your wife spread her legs so another man could penetrate her, and she came home with his DNA in her."

Actually what I think I have written in the past is "your wife schemed to be penetrated by another man, and then stone-cold lied to your face repeatedly while carrying his DNA inside her." I don't say anything about a woman spreading her legs, although naturally yes this is a part of male-female intercourse. But I don't feel the need to point that out.

Look, I'm not sure what the problem is here with this statement. This is meant to be blunt and visceral. It cuts right through the white noise and lengthy TLDR posts (of which I am also guilty) to the very essence of the issue, which is:

1. Scheming through countless willful decisions to have sex, shattering the marital covenant, perhaps irrevocably. I've also pointed out that the relatively new science behind genital microbiomes strongly implies that acts of sexual infidelity amount to a form of rape -- essentially, a faithful spouse has their genital microbiome directly changed permanently against their own will, without their consent, in ways that medical science is only now beginning to understand. This means that a faithful husband has been forced to share the male AP (and the male AP's other sexual partners) as a sexual partner without even knowing it, only to learn later this is the case. This is part of what I mean when I occasionally refer to the ramified, geometric progression of adultery.

2. Presenting a Janus face to the BH, while presenting another face to the AP, over a very long period of time. Even a period of many weeks of this Janus-faced behavior is so toxic as to be practically impossible to ameliorate. Thus the behavior is not some temporary form of insanity; it instead represents a flawed worldview and a deficient toolkit for adulting, which the WW is going to have to address one way or another, even if the couple divorces. I often go to great lengths to point out that a WS can fix this flawed worldview through an intensive process of what I term "metanoia" but short of that, the wayward will still be operating from the flawed worldview, the amoral algorithm, and the bad life philosophy.

3. What I call "the space alien effect" in which a WW or WH repeatedly lies right in the face of a BS over and over and over.

I only use this visceral, blunt statement when it is not only possible but highly probable that the WW has in fact had a PA (and I've yet to be wrong about this) and is in the process of actively gaslighting her BH and trying to pressure him into accepting a minimized and sanitized "noble lie" about her ugly behavior. This gambit unfortunately often works on a traumatized BH, so I feel that my own worldview and my own ethics demand straight talk in the opposite direction in these situations.

When a BH occasionally has detailed texts, recordings or other conversations between a WW and an AP in front of them, it almost always confirms duplicity of such magnitude that all the pretty words in the world aren't going to shine that pedestal back up.

We see this pattern so routinely that it shouldn't require much imagination to picture the same even in the absence of said texts and recordings.

The statement "schemed to be penetrated" cuts right to the brute facts of the situation, while the "stone cold lies while carrying another man's DNA inside her" presents a word picture that is highly, highly accurate from an empirical standpoint. I don't feel the need to sugarcoat the worse transgression any human can carry out against another, short of murder. In fact, I think it is a real disservice to betrayed spouses to talk around these horrific situations with euphemized, sanitized language.

These things paired together simply serve to cut through the bullshit in my opinion. I don't see why it's a problem, unless the problem is that it's a gut check statement that is effective.

The lies are stone cold, and a WW is in point of fact carrying another man's DNA inside her, often while she is simultaneously having sex with her faithful husband. This is one of the myriad of reasons why it is so gutting.

[This message edited by Thumos at 10:53 PM, Monday, November 15th]

I endorse what BSR said.

"DNA test your kids" or "put a VAR in his/her car"

Can you explain more about why you think this is bad or unhelpful advice? In most cases, the "fog" of an affair is so dense, and the BS is at such a powerful disadvantage, that a VAR is practically de rigueur to develop any actionable information. Information that is vitally important to a betrayed spouse's mental and physical wellbeing (one would easily argue life-threatening information in the case of STD's).

It's also probably one of the easiest and cheapest ways to get the truth. Costs about $60-70 total with the industrial velcro strips included. The technology is gobsmackingly good. It's a heck of a lot more direct and to the point than hiring a PI, playing spy vs spy mind games with an active adulterer, trying to do random drop ins and drivebys and all the rest of the exhausting marriage police requirements. A VAR cuts right through all of that, and then can do double duty to protect a betrayed husband from a false domestic violence charge.

I'm certainly glad I used a VAR. I wanted to know the truth and not to be tortured by the uncertainty of constant anxiety attacks from being repeatedly gaslit.

As for "DNA test your kids" -- again, what is the issue? I'm not the first to jump to this recommendation in most cases, because I think most men can tell if their kids are their progeny. It's plainly obvious in my own case. But in many, many cases, this is practically a SOP and letting it go unsaid would be an act of active disregard for a betrayed husband. One might even suggest it would be an act of malice to leave it unsaid.

Can you explicate why it would be problematic for a betrayed husband to know for a certainty whether the children he is supporting are his?

I think the moderators are going to have to police the repetitive, mean spirited, unhelpful, and strong-arming posts with warnings and ultimately ban hammers. Posts that are rigidly "do this, not that," posts that demean a member or a member’s spouse as a human, posts that conjure up imaginary wrongs strictly to convince the audience of the "righteousness" of the commentator or his/her argument, all of those should be prohibited, per se.

This seems passive aggressive, and also quite vague. What is "mean spirited"? Suggesting a betrayed husband DNA test his kids if a WW is showing clear patterns of being a serial cheater? What is unhelpful, telling a betrayed spouse to use the one simple piece of technology that has more success at getting real information? What is "strong arming"? How would you define that? What is the rubric you would recommend the site owners use to revise the guidelines? What imaginary wrongs are being conjured if a WW has in point of fact carried out a physical affair?

It seems more like a recipe to ensure an ever-shrinking number of contributors and readers, further exacerbating the very problem you seem so concerned about.

Maybe it's just that message boards aren't that popular anymore with an increasingly younger group of betrayed spouses, so we simply don't see them here.

[This message edited by Thumos at 12:09 AM, Tuesday, November 16th]

So if you read "She slept with my dad, my best friend, and my sister" or "He has cheated 15 times" and you don't read a lot of R advice for them in JFO, I mean...at a certain point I'd feel like I was enabling someone else's abuse by saying "Your WS needs IC. Have you directed them to our Wayward forum? You don't need to make any decisions now. Your marriage can come back from this." Sometimes the right answer is helping that BS leave an abusive relationship and absolutely not recommending their WS come here to spy on them.

Well said as always, DD.

"Hmmm, in my experience, the moderators are pretty good at policing name calling and ad hominem"

I was not in any way placing blame on the mods for this. As WOES stated, they can't possibly read every thread. If anything it was on me for choosing not to bring it to their attention.

I wasn't saying that name calling was a widespread problem.

It was something that happened to me and I even had someone pm me to tell me what a horrible parent and role model I was.

I was trying to point out how people post from a place of pain and project and say really hurtful things when someone is at a very low point and looking for support.

It was something that happened to me and I even had someone pm me to tell me what a horrible parent and role model I was.

Got it. Sorry that happened. That sounds awful.

Thank you!!

It definitely makes you think twice about asking for help/support again.

I think most people here are kind and trying to be helpful.

Thumos, this is not the place to discuss your personal posts and argue their validity.

I guess I wouldn’t have done that but a previous poster specifically called it out and named it and inaccurately quoted it. So is that previous poster in the wrong as well? I decided to be direct and responsive.

Nekonamida, thank you for such a well thought out post.

We have several changes we are discussing, some of which you will have notice of within the end of the month.

BluerthanBlue, based on your criteria I never would have been a member but it was actually being a member that helped me.

Both of us posting and actively reading the boards provided us a spring board for some really open and honest dialogue. I am not saying there isn’t some validity to what you are saying for some, however it was not the case for us, a real live example here on SI over a decade out from DDay. I don’t think the onus should have to be on the BS, but I don’t think that help should be withheld either. As someone with remorse and zero tools in my belt, I was grateful to have this site.

[This message edited by WalkinOnEggshelz at 1:36 AM, Tuesday, November 16th]