Divorcebusting.com Forums Open Forums For Newcomers Her heart has already left

Amy,

What "logistical" details need to be discussed between these two?

"No contact" means NO CONTACT.

Puppy

It's a compromise. W has flatly refused actual no contact.

It is better than the agreement we have now.

I guess that begs the question. If she is unwilling to do full no-contact, what can I infer from that and what is my next step?

You infer -- and you say to her -- "I can only infer then that you are still in contact with her, or you want to be ABLE to continue contact, in which case I guess I have my answer. I'm not willing to live in an open marriage."

There's no room for compromise when it comes to separating the addict from the source of their addiction (and make no mistake, affairs are HIGHLY addictive. Just Google "phenylethlamine addiction brain" to learn more. It's what made an otherwise sane, intelligent female astronaut drive from TX to FL, wearing an adult diaper, so that she wouldn't have to stop at rest areas and she could get there sooner to avenge her man. It's what makes highly-successful businesspeople and professionals throw away their careers.

You can't allow the pyromaniac to just keep a FEW of the matches in the home, nor the newly-recovering alcoholic just a FEW bottles of booze, as a "compromise."

Sorry, I know that's not what you want to hear.

Puppy

This is the thing that feels impossible.
My head is saying: If she can't give our relationship a 6 month commitment to work on it and completely end the affair, then the marriage is already over and I need to focus on moving on. (and perhaps that will force the issue)
Puppy, I do want to hear your advice. (where can I read more on the Gandhi technique?)
My heart is saying: She still comes to me for hugs, we still work like a well oiled team, she turned and scooted toward me in her sleep, she kissed me goodbye this morning... She's remembering that our relationship is wonderful and good and she'll choose me if I keep reminding her that I'm a fantastic person and can be a better wife.
My fear is that if I force the issue then she'll choose the OW (inlove poisoning indeed) and that will be the end end end.
I want to go to the OW and read her the riot act, then go to her parents and enlist their pressure...
I'm a conflict averse person. This is like the ultimate test!

http://www.sciencebuzz.org/buzz_tags/phenylethylamine

Seems to say that if WE have sex it will release new chemicals that will suppress the "in love" chemicals. Specifically Vasopressin and oxytocin suppress dopamine and norepinephrine. Dopamine and norepinephrine are the passion chemicals. Vasopressin and oxytocin are the attachment chemicals.

What do you make of that? (there is no reason to believe she would agree to have sex, with me, of course. She's "in love" with the OW...)

Here is the Gandhi Approach thread.

Your head is right. Your heart is letting her have her cake and eat it too at your expense. If you don't force the issue you will live in this limbo for a long time because people usually don't change unless forced to do so. Why would W do anything differently if she has both of you to fulfill all her needs with no effort on her part?

Puppy's suggested statement is dead on. If you don't create and enforce boundaries now you will continue to be walked all over.

Sex with a cheating partner is debatable around here. Personally I don't support it because I would feel used. But others say it worked to maintain their connection. Think about how you would feel afterwards and let that guide your decision. But if she's in love with OW then I think it's moot because W probably won't want to have sex with you.

Thank you Pearl, you are dead on. (darnit!) and thanks for the Gandhi thread!

She has already chosen the OW -- she has already chosen to cheat on you.

Her movements toward you -- be they physical or emotional -- are cake-eating, pure and simple.

The best psychological frameworks I've seen for dealing with the sheer HELL that is infidelity, are the Stockdale Paradox (google it -- it's fantastic), and the Band of Brothers "I am already dead" paradigm. The sooner you can get to that place, intellectually and emotionally, the better you will be able to DB this thing.

You can find posts about "The Gandhi Approach" over on the Infidelity forum, I believe.

Puppy

Here, I'll save you the time of a search:

STOCKDALE PARADOX:

"You must retain faith that you can prevail to greatness in the end, while retaining the discipline to confront the brutal facts of your current reality."

Admiral James Stockdale was shot down in Viet Nam and imprisoned in the "Hanoi Hilton" for almost eight years. He was also its highest-ranking officer. He writes about his experience in his book, In Love and War. How did he survive while others did not? "Retain faith that you will prevail in the end, regardless of the difficulties." He adds, however, what distinguishes his position from simple "optimism" - and formulates what has become known as the Stockdale Paradox: "and confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be."

This is the critical difference which guards against the endless disappointment that optimism’s carrots' evasiveness create - until, maybe, the reward in the end. On the other hand, an ability to continue making realistic assessments of one's current life situation measures and apportions one’s energies and reserves to better face each challenge as it comes, thus positioning one with a stronger chance to prevail.

This old post of mine probably best summarizes my own approach, Amy -- call it "The Puppy Approach". Apply as you see fit:

My main concern with this (what I call the "Little Bo-Peep") approach is that I don't believe that most people can "hold out" for more than 6-12 months, and many can't hold out for more than 3-6. I am especially concerned about men, because it can be especially emasculating and humiliating for us, and many of them never recover fully.

For the record, my fast-track approach isn't "end it or else." That is an ultimatum, and it's controlling. I advocate that the betrayed spouse make it about THEM, and THEIR PERSONAL BOUNDARIES:

"I cannot live in an open marriage," (similar to Michelle's teachings about "I can no longer live in a sexless marriage") My approach with my wife was one of "I cannot control what you do; you are a grown adult woman, and you are free to make your own choices. All I can tell you is what I am willing to endure in my marriage, and this is a personal boundary with me. I love you, and I don't want a divorce, and I hope you'll end it very soon and come back and work on our marriage with me, at which point I think you will find me ready and willing to work on ANY AND ALL ISSUES. But please hurry, because my patience is not without its limits."

I do believe that DB teaches that a wayward spouse WILL be attracted back toward the marriage, when the betrayed spouse GALs and does some of the other techniques that MWD teaches. But MWD isn't anti-boundary, and she isn't pro-doormat or pro-cake-eating. And when a wayward spouse continues to get some of their emotional and physical needs met by their OM/OW, and some of their other physical, emotional and financial needs met by their spouse, with no boundaries and no consequences and no deadlines . . .

. . . then they have little, if any, reason to make a choice, in my experience.

Finally, I think there is an "added benefit" to this more aggressive approach, especially for men, in that it makes the betrayed husband more attractive to his wife. I believe that many of these women are WAITING for their husbands to fight for them, and for their marriages, and they lose respect for them every day that they don't (even as the wife pushes him away with her infidelity). Some formerly-wayward women have even come and posted as much on these very forums

Puppy