#14 Here we go again

[sandi2]

In this post below, everything she said sounded so............. protocol.

She claims she doesn't know what happened. That they played the game. He was flirty. That he had a similar sense of humor to hers. At some point she told him she didn't even know what he looked like. His profile had no picture. He asked her to give him her email address. She said no, I am not giving you my email address. The next time they played after chatting back and forth, she gave it him. This was about 3 weeks ago (according to her). She says that she doesn't know why, that she had several guys over the last year and a half as her for contact info and told them no. She would tell them all she was married, many said "so am I".

I'm sorry, but the first sentence where she claims she doesn't know what happened..........is not true. She has been down this road in the past, so she knows exactly how the game is played, and I'm not talking about the cyber game. All of this is so familiar, it brought back memories of when I was involved in the same activity.

It starts with saying humorous things while playing the game, then it turns into what some might refer to as "innocent or harmless flirting". They start asking questions, as a way to get to know who they are playing with, and the first couple of questions are, "Do you live in the US", and then, "Are you married". Then they gradually give a short description of their situation, and this guy's story is pretty much the run of the mill. They ask for the woman's email, so they can just talk.

So, she admitted she has continued playing this game for the past year and a half, although that was the source of the last EA? She actually plays dumb and says she doesn't know why b/c she's had several guys to ask for her contact information. I want you to notice something here, Steve, she wants you to know how she turned all these other guys down and told them she was married. She is selling something, and you are buying it. She is painting a picture of this innocent girl who just got swept up one time, and she doesn't know why she did, and she said "no" to all those other married guys who wanted her contact info, yada, yada, yada. It's a pitch! Some of what she says is true, but she's painting herself almost like a victim who was bewitched by this one guy.

She didn't know why this guy was different. That he came from a troubled youth (her youth was troubled too). That he is married to a woman with lots of health problems. That he was a sex-starved husband. She said she identified him with me, because she felt she was similar to his W, minus the health problems. I think some of this was rewriting of current history. Certainly 2 years ago we had a SSM, but our sex life has been pretty good, much more frequent, and the quality of each instance was way up. But this seemed to be a point she related with him on, even if it was more with his W than him. His W didn't like him playing the game, so he would wait until she went to bed.

See what I mean? She didn't know why this one guy was different from all those others who pursued her. She wants you to think she's not so bad, b/c after all, she turned down all those other men. Then she says something that kind of hits below the belt when she brings up how they have had a SSM, and it triggers you and reminds you that this is YOUR fault. If you had been a better H, then this would not have happened again. You know that hasn't been the case since you've excelled in DBing, but it's still enough that you can't put the responsibility where it belongs.

Many times they would just play the game. Sometimes they would message while playing. Sometimes it swerved into the flirty and inappropriate. It wasn't every night since some nights he couldn't get on. Obviously some of her answers are typical WAS stuff: she wasn't going anywhere, neither of them were interested in leaving their marriage, it wasn't as often as I think it was, most of the time it was joking and/or telling each other about their lives. She still played the game against strangers, and other friends. It hadn't consumed her life in anyway.

This entire paragraph is her pitch. She is selling you her story that it wasn't all that bad. Her answers are typical wayward W stuff.

I still am not sure why. I made it clear this one was on her. She claimed that her personality gets in the way and it takes over and she gets overly flirty and sometimes the other person reads too much into it. She usually shuts it down but not this time. For some reason. I tried to explain I doubt it was as innocent from his perspective. She tried to poo-poo that notion, but I think most of us men know how easy it is to get caught up by infatuation for an attractive woman. I know he lives in another country, but she admitted he has an up-to-date passport. I have no doubt that a "visit" was firmly in the back of his mind. Supposedly the passport discussion was "innocent" but this is where I remember to believe nothing she says.

You aren't sure why? What do you mean? You aren't sure why she would do this stuff again, after you have worked so hard to be AMOAFWL? That was your work, Steve. It wasn't her work. Look at what she's saying. She's still giving you her pitch. It's her personality that just takes over? Other people (men) read too much into it. Oh, but she has the ability to shut it down? That should be the ah-ha moment! She can turn it on, and she can shut it down. But you got focused on the man.

The conversation did turn to my "checking up on" her. She said that it upset her to know that I occasionally had done that, but she understood why. Still she said it upset her. She seems to insist no matter what I was doing or who I was doing it with, she would not snoop or spy on me. I FIRMLY do not believe this. I said "what if I was in an actual physical affair, you wouldn't want to get to the bottom of it?" She then backed down and said that a PA would be different. And while she is right, I think she deep down knows that EAs are no more justified than PAs. Though she denies that this incident and the one in Dec. 2017 were not EAs, but admits the one in 2005 was.

Of course it turned to you checking up on her! That's what WW's do when they are confronted. She tries to play the victim and make you out to be the bad guy.

I reiterated that checking up on her, and how I did it, simply doesn't matter, what matters was that there was something to find. She understood that and even agreed to it. She said the snooping upsets her but she knows it shouldn't.

A wife who is not guilty of inappropriate behavior/language should not feel upset that her H sees her messages. She should not be having secret messaging to a man.........period.

The conversation was very good. We even laughed and joked at a couple of points. Neither of us got upset.

Call me crazy, but I don't see that as a positive! I mean, I think it's good for you to remain calm, but she should have felt horrible. Laughing & joking after that type of conversation? Where is her remorse?

She insists that she wants to stay together, she is willing to do what it takes to do that, but understands if she lost that right.

Oh really? Then let's see how quick she gets into therapy. Let's see how long both of you stick to a transparency plan. You don't like it, b/c you are scared to death of what you will find. You want a wife you can trust and not have to check. Sorry, but you don't have one at the moment. She can become a wife you can trust, but she's got to do the hard work.

She has shared all of her passwords, she has disavowed all technology. She has put her tablet away, let the battery die. She only uses her phone text church friends, and family. Deleted all apps off of it. And she has moved to occupying her time with word searches and crossword puzzles on paper. I do not think this is sustainable long-term. We live in a digital world and I don't think she can completely unplug.

I think it's just a grand display. This is a woman who is bored out of her mind. She needs to find a job or volunteer at something. She can't sit and twiddle her thumbs all day and think she's not going to backslide.

So for now we have to try to rebuild trust. She still seems to be a little quieter than normal, but it is a little better than it was Wednesday. I think she saw what she stood to lose. I talked pretty firmly on Tuesday night. Made it clear I was uninterested in ever continuing to wonder what she was up to with who.

I think you are trying to see what you want to see. You don't want this to be as serious as it was the other times. Maybe it has not developed into an EA, IDK. The problem lies in her inappropriate behavior patterns. Can you forget about some OM being a threat, or not a threat b/c he lives on the other side of the world? It has nothing to do with him. At this point, it has nothing to do with you! It's her problem. You are so quick to say "we", but you try to carry the responsibility while she has zero consequences.

I think it was a mistake to tell her you were uninterested in wondering what she was up to and with whom. I know why you said it, but you should have left it out. How does that fit with a transparency plan? Like I said, you are the one who doesn't want to check her out.

So I am not going to give up on the idea of IC and eventually MC again. But I am done discussing anything about this, it is time to put it behind us.

I don't understand why she wasn't in therapy when you first reconciled. Why all this time, and no IC/MC? I think you took the blame and thought if you fixed yourself then everything else would fall into place. But what was her work, Steve? What did she do to repair the damage she caused?

You just want to put it all behind you. Well, that's exactly what a WW wants the H to do. They want to start from this day and act as if nothing ever happened. I'm not saying you have to hash it out with her again. I'm not saying to punish her. I'm saying there needs to be a plan of action ASAP. I would start with her agreeing to transparency (she is the offender, not you). Why won't you let her feel the consequences of her actions? I don't think you should have shared your passwords, etc. You certainly should have not told her your source of information.