SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

DRSOOLERS posted on another thread in JFO about requiring NC and how it ultimately amounts to needing to police a WS so that they don't continue crossing lines, whether due to "moral bankruptcy" or lack of control over one's sexual impulses. (Being a WS and not being able to respond in JFO, and also not wanting to TJ, I'm posting here.)I hadn't really thought about that before, and it does make some sense.

But I do want to add a few thoughts. The first is that a WS is often stuck in limerance or the "affair fog" on DDay. Whatever the WS is receiving from the AP can feel pretty addictive, and I imagine for some, hard to give up. For those people, I think an outside force demanding a hard stop to the affair relationship can be necessary to cut through the fog. Kind of like an alcoholic being required to stop drinking cold-turkey in order to detox from the alcohol and get back in control of their lives-- the intervention and renouncement is how the addiction is broken and kept broken.

I would not be able to say exactly what percentage of WS would voluntarily initiate NC without it being explicitly required of them by their BS, but I bet the percentage is low.

The second is that affair partners who are aware of the betrayal (especially the ones who are also partnered) are equally morally corrupt, and it's important for the WS to distance themselves from those kind of individuals going forward, if they are intent on recovering and changing themselves. Not only should you want to be away from that kind of potential influence/enablement, but you shouldn't want those kinds of people in your life to begin with.

The third is that think NC benefits the BS because there is simply no more interaction for them to worry about constantly. It would really suck to wonder if your unfaithful spouse is acting appropriately or cheating again every time they're interacting with the "former" AP. Obviously it's just a bunch of unnecessary stress and triggering for them to continue having any sort of contact. Once broken out of the affair fog, if there's any chance of reconciliation, the WS should develop that empathy for their BS and not even want to cause that stress by interacting with the AP. But, in case that empathy isn't immediate, the BS ought to demand NC as a condition for potential reconciliation, if not to police their WS, but for their own well-being/peace of mind.

Maybe all of this is like, "Yeah, duh." Just thought I'd get it out there anyway.

ETA: I think what is important to consider is the WS's relationship to the boundary of NC over time. Initially they may feel like their spouse is policing them, and they're only maintaining NC because their BS won't "let" them. Then it may become that maintaining NC can be difficult at times, but they know it's important because they don't want to hurt their BS any further. Then maybe it becomes, "I don't even want contact with AP because s/he isn't someone I want in my life, even if I'm perfectly capable of behaving appropriately around them," in which case NC doesn't even feel like a restriction anymore...

In other words, does the initially imposed NC require *continual* policing by the BS, or does it *eventually* become naturally, effortlessly, voluntarily, self-imposed by the WS? If the former is true, reconciliation probably has a low chance of success. But if the latter is true, I'd imagine the chance of reconciliation is higher.

[This message edited by GotTheMorbs at 7:29 AM, Friday, August 14th]

Just for context, this came about when: I literally started writing out the standard, formulaic advice about the critical importance of NC in reconciliation, and as I was typing it, I stopped, stepped back, and realized the disturbing implications of what I was actually advocating. I then started to unravel these implications and grew more and more alarmed by them. This is probably not a great revelation to all but I'd simply not thought about it this way.

Your breakdown of limerence, the addiction mechanics, and how a unfaithful partner hopefully matures into self-imposed No Contact seems spot-on to me psychologically. I don't dispute that’s how the engine works when a couple somehow manages to pull off reconciliation.

Where we part ways isn't about how No Contact works, but the absolute absurdity that it needs to be explained to a grown adult in the first place.

Comparing an unfaithful spouse to an alcoholic needing a cold-turkey intervention is a simile I entirely expect, but that’s precisely my point. If your spouse is so completely out to lunch on their own ego and hormones that they require an explicit direct order to stop talking to the person they were shagging behind your back, you aren't in a marriage anymore. You’re running an adult daycare centre.

I have zero issue with someone who wakes up on D-Day, looks at the carnage, gets hit by a wave of basic human shame, and cuts the affair partner off instantly without being asked. That at least hints at a lingering pulse of moral self-awareness.

However, if the betrayed partner has to spell it out like a chore chart for a toddler, we've entirely lost the plot. It's a angle I hadn't fully weighed up before because No Contact seems like such blind common sense, yet having to demand it really does reveal more than I had considered. The fact that refraining from contacting an affair partner has to be laid down as a negotiated boundary, rather than being an automatic reflex, is the exact reason the house is already burnt to the ground.

Look at what the betrayed spouse is actually expected to swallow while waiting for this evolution you described. They're supposed to sit there, completely traumatised, taking deep breaths while their partner slowly detoxes off the affair and grows a conscience in real time. "Oh, don't mind me, darling, you just take a few weeks to sober up off the affair fog and figure out if I deserve basic human respect."

Personally, I find that stance utterly incompatible with self-respect. That is fine, as many people are willing to trade away a bit of their dignity for the life they want to save, but I certainly wouldn't advocate for it.

I don't doubt that for the percentage of people who pull off reconciliation, the journey from forced restriction to genuine realization is how it happens. My point remains that having to demand the absolute floor of human decency from someone who promised to love you is a staggering tax to pay. Life is far too short to act as a parole officer for an adult who needs a written policy on why cheating is bad, even if it is only for a few months.

Some would argue a few months of playing warden is a small price to pay when set against a divorce. I can't argue with their math, but I know that I, and presumably many people like me, would end up hating themselves for putting up with it at all. Keep walking, get your peace back, and let them figure out basic right from wrong on someone else's time.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 9:59 AM, Friday, August 14th]

Well I think just about every WS knows cheating is morally wrong, the same way most drug addicts know that drugs destroy their health. But they're chasing that high, whatever they're getting from the A or the drug or the Bad Thing, no matter how high the cost. The BS who has to demand NC isn't waiting for their WS to figure out that the cheating is wrong, they're waiting for them to figure out it isn't worth it, to turn back to the marriage and choose their spouse over whatever the AP is giving them in that moment.

We've discussed on here before how BS can be split between the part of themselves that wants to maintain their principles and walk away from someone who has treated them poorly, and the part of themselves that still loves their WS and wants to keep the marriage, even after the betrayal. Attempting reconciliation, provided the WS demonstrates the remorseful behavior required of R, can be a form of self-respect, in that you're honoring what the latter part of you desires... It's a deeply individual thing, I think.

Like I said, I do think voluntarily, self-imposed NC probably indicates a higher likelihood of successful R than if the WS has to have it imposed on them. But that's also evaluating the WS right after DDay, when they're still psychologically a mess, and before they've had time to make any progress towards becoming a safe partner again... Well, that is, if they're caught in the affair or happen to blurt it out, rather than taking time to do some processing/preparation before self-disclosure (in which cases I imagine NC is generally self-imposed...)

I think it was around 3 hours after the initial confrontation on DDay that I sent the NC text to my AP (and part of that time was just having forgotten I had to do it, in the emotional chaos.) Unlike a lot of stories I hear, in my case, there was never any question in my mind about who I was picking. And honestly I don't remember if my BH directly asked me to go NC or not, but I already intellectually accepted that it was necessary to do it. That it was the right thing to do. Yet still, it was hard to send that text and cut myself off from my source of validation, connection, desire, etc. It took willpower, and it took willpower to maintain that NC for a while. But it's not hard anymore. I learned why it's important to H. I stopped wanting to know if AP had been lying to me or if he's still thinking about me. And H doesn't have to police me because I want nothing to do with that shitbag AP.

But I imagine it's different for someone who believes they've found a second true love, who are perhaps several months or years into their A instead of just a month...

Well I think just about every WS knows cheating is morally wrong, the same way most drug addicts know that drugs destroy their health

I'm not sure I fully accept that. Plenty of unfaithful spouses actively convince themselves they are entitled to the affair because their partner didn't invest enough time in them, help with the kids, or do their fair share of the dishes. In their minds, those perceived slights fully justify the betrayal, rendering it completely moral in their own distorted ledger.

Others lean heavily on the "what they don't know won't hurt them" logic, genuinely believing that if the partner never finds out, no harm was actually done. Then you have those who argue it isn't wrong simply because "everyone does it," usually because they were raised in dysfunctional environments or surrounded by questionable peers.

I can concede that the majority of cheaters likely know what they're doing is wrong on some level, but certainly not all. Moral gymnastics is a powerful drug in its own right.

Attempting reconciliation, provided the WS demonstrates the remorseful behavior required of R, can be a form of self-respect

Agreed. But having to demand No Contact—or negotiate it in any way—demonstrates on arrival that they aren't showing the remorseful behavior required for reconciliation.

But that's also evaluating the WS right after DDay, when they're still psychologically a mess, and before they've had time to make any progress towards becoming a safe partner again

This is a deeply personal view of mine, but I firmly believe it is far better to judge someone at their worst than at their best. When the chips are down, what sort of person are you? It is dead easy to be a decent human being when life is smooth sailing, but who are you when you're in the trenches?

I know it’s an extreme analogy, but consider Jimmy Savile. He was celebrated as one of the UK’s greatest philanthropists, raising tens of millions of pounds and saving countless lives through his charity work. Yet post-mortem, it was revealed he was a rampant predator who abused hundreds of victims. I don't know a single soul who says, "Yes, but look at the hospital wings he built." Everyone rightly views him as a monster. You could theoretically try to weigh his heart on the ancient Egyptian scales of justice and ask if he did more tangible good than bad, but it changes nothing. He remains a monster. Character is defined by your absolute baseline, not your performative highlights. But I won't try to convince you of that.

My partner knows my worst most immoral actions and I hers. Luckily in both instances, I don't think they are character shaking choices.

The BS who has to demand NC isn't waiting for their WS to figure out that the cheating is wrong, they're waiting for them to figure out it isn't worth it

Even if I grant you that, let’s rephrase what that actually looks like:

Look at what the betrayed spouse is expected to swallow while waiting for this evolution. They are supposed to sit there, completely traumatised, taking deep breaths while their partner slowly detoxes off the affair and decides whether stabbing the person they vowed to love in the back is worth the cheap thrill the affair gives them.

Does that reframe make it sound any better? It feels markedly worse to me.

At the end of the day, this is entirely individual, and there is no universal right or wrong answer. Some people have no qualms whatsoever wallowing in the dirt if it maintains a comfortable life. Others don't view wallowing in the dirt as lacking dignity at all, so long as it’s their partner's dirt and not their own. Meanwhile, others would gladly torch a comfortable life to the ground just to be proud of the person looking back at them in the mirror.

Though, frankly, it never ceases to amaze me how many people seem to navigate their entire lives without ever bothering to look in the mirror at all.

Either way, I hope this discussion is useful to someone.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 12:17 PM, Friday, August 14th]