[quote=Starsky309]For the record, exposure -- properly taught (and there is a TON of both research and application of it out there, if one wants to look) is NOT about "shaming" whatsoever. The concept behind exposure is to remove the shroud of secrecy and intrigue that fuels affairs, and to enlist the support of those pro-marriage people whom are close to the cheater in an effort to apply loving pressure to end the affair. Period. We seem to do a lot of "point, counter point" on this topic & I guess some could be confused. Starsky, your description above^^, is well worded. But it's not really exposure you are discussing, imo, so much as "no more lying" for the WAS.
I've consistently and clearly supported that position. No LBS should feel compelled to cover for - or lie for their cheating spouse. (That's not exposure in my book, and it's not what MWD refers to or means when she uses the term.)
By exposure I mean telling others that your spouse is having an affair.
Most people who want to do that, imo, are doing so for the wrong reasons (i.e. to punish, to shame, to control, to "get the WAS to see/do/act" differently, etc). I gave an actual example of that, in my post, on this very thread.
But the LBSers who learn of an affair are usually in such a state of emotional pain, they are not able to objectively view their situation, or even their motivation. Your description above would be an option if they were objective AND if they were being asked to cover for their wayward spouse. Your comments would be totally appropriate.
RE true exposure as opposed to simply not enabling, let me say this.
As a world class rationalizer myself, I'd really PAUSE... if/when someone suggests that exposing would "benefit the situation." B/C I know I could come up with a reason for acting on my anger, with the idea of "getting justice", or "just being honest", when in fact most of my motivation would be to "wake" up (control/hurt/shame) the WAS even if I didn't admit it to myself. Let's face it, being betrayed is humiliating. And the first chance we get to do the same to them, in a smaller way (via telling), can be very appealing and darn easy to justify.
I suspect that's part of why MWD strongly urges us NOT to act on this ^^desire, b/c simply put, we're too mad to think straight.
Since this discussion is now really about semantics, hopefully we can move along.
-
M: 57 H: 60 M: 35 yrs S30,D28,D19 H off to Alaska 2006 Recon 7/07- 8/08 *2016* X = "ALASKA 2.0" GROUND HOG DAY I File D 10/16 OW DIV 2/26/2018 X marries OW 5/2016
