Without the man in question here, we'll never know. All I can go on is men (& women) I have known who have come from a similar place. What I am saying is that doormat and "tough love" are not the only options, which is apparently what is being suggested here. If the objective is "Marriage Busting" (as opposed to "Divorce Busting") then "tough love" certainly fits the bill. I don’t see MWD advocate this tough love thing - but perhaps I am missing something (and would be happy to read anything she has written to that effect).
The tough love thing certainly feels better than being a victim, and if the thing that "works" is to end the marriage, it's pretty effective - certainly much quicker than the slow death of continuing to be a doormat. If these were the only two options, then I would certainly agree with tough love. Indeed, I do agree that there are times when it is the best approach for one spouse to take.
Perhaps my perspective is a bit different since I am familiar with quite a number of marriages that have healed from infidelity, albeit none that has successfully used this “tough love” thing. I do not know of a single one in which the betrayed spouse didn’t have a share of responsibility for the marriage problems, for example.
Accepting this can be a real stumbling stone for many betrayed spouses, and the initial reaction is typically that they are somehow being “blamed” for their spouse’s infidelity.
The doormat comes from a place of being a victim or a child. Whether a man or a woman, it is not an effective way to be in a relationship. The "tough love" attitude comes from a place of being parental towards the other. While this may be attractive to some women, it is not a solid basis for a marriage.
The man in the scenario described did not learn his lesson because he refused to accept his responsibility for the breakdown in the marriage.
