In their most simplistic terms, boundaries are to keep people out, not to keep people in.
MWD does not promote exposure. Although some swear that exposure is the only way to force an A to stop. Of course, that assumes that the A couple had not exposed themselves, already.
If the WAS is running away, the LBS telling them that if they keep running, the LBS will leave... well... that's about as crazy as the WAS thinking their happiness is found in someone or something else, rather than inside them.
To take what I interpret Starsky to be saying in a DB context. LRT worked for him. And LRT worked most recently for Denver_2010.
That said, LRT is truly... the Last Resort Technique.
ie. Look WAS... I'm done here. Either you brain up and figure out what you want, which I hope is me, then I'm done and outta here... c'ya...
And then LBS leaves the building...
That's a choice the LBS may face, one day.
I have no idea what the DB success stats would be if each and everyone of us went straight to LRT. Maybe better, maybe worse.
MWD promotes other methods first, because sometimes things don't have to be so dramatic or black and white.
It is statistically accurate to indicate that any R, including an A, has it's initial moment of bliss, which then settles into mundane. There is no separating the WAS from the A without the WAS being motivated to leave the A.
If the LBS can figure out the motivation for the WAS and provide an even more seductive "pot of gold", then that might help.
Other than that, LRT might or might not work. At least, the LBS draws their line and the M is over.
What we do see is, even after LRT which does not save the M... both the LBS and the WAS will have regrets sometime down the road...
For me, what is blatantly obvious in this sitch and a few others, is that the WAS is in a strong stance of believing what they are doing is in fact, right and appropriate.
I don't actually think an addict doesn't see the problem. I am more of the mind that an addict just denies the problem, pushes it down, buries it... often, with more of the same behaviour. It's their pattern, which is why they are addicted in the first place.
KD,
I'm failing to see the distinction you're trying to make here. Both of these types of people are in major DENIAL. Yes, I would advocate TRYING to get them to see what they're doing is harming both them and the ones they love, but whether or not I was successful at that, I would still do everything within my power to try to separate them from the source of their addiction, as soon as possible.
The coaches that advised both Brit and Zig to "seduce" their Hs is right on, IMHO.
Unless I'm missing something (and I really haven't followed Brit's situation, at all) I couldn't DISAGREE more. If the cheating spouse has ENDED all contact with their affair partner, but still not taken any steps back towards the marriage, then yes -- by all means try to seduce them. Especially if the betrayed spouse's lower sexual drive has been a complaint in the past, and/or sex has been a problem in the marriage in general.
But if they're still actively carrying on an affair? Try to get them to have sex with you? That only enables their bad behavior (basic common sense), and I at least HOPE TO GOD that one would use protection in that situation.
Humans -- men, especially -- are path-of-least-resistance creatures. If we get to have our cake and eat it, too, and there's no "fear of loss" to motivate us, we're simply going to keep on our current path, in my experience.
In their most simplistic terms, boundaries are to keep people out, not to keep people in.
MWD does not promote exposure. Although some swear that exposure is the only way to force an A to stop. Of course, that assumes that the A couple had not exposed themselves, already.
If the WAS is running away, the LBS telling them that if they keep running, the LBS will leave... well... that's about as crazy as the WAS thinking their happiness is found in someone or something else, rather than inside them.
To take what I interpret Starsky to be saying in a DB context. LRT worked for him. And LRT worked most recently for Denver_2010.
That said, LRT is truly... the Last Resort Technique.
ie. Look WAS... I'm done here. Either you brain up and figure out what you want, which I hope is me, then I'm done and outta here... c'ya...
And then LBS leaves the building...
That's a choice the LBS may face, one day.
I have no idea what the DB success stats would be if each and everyone of us went straight to LRT. Maybe better, maybe worse.
MWD promotes other methods first, because sometimes things don't have to be so dramatic or black and white.
It is statistically accurate to indicate that any R, including an A, has it's initial moment of bliss, which then settles into mundane. There is no separating the WAS from the A without the WAS being motivated to leave the A.
If the LBS can figure out the motivation for the WAS and provide an even more seductive "pot of gold", then that might help.
Other than that, LRT might or might not work. At least, the LBS draws their line and the M is over.
What we do see is, even after LRT which does not save the M... both the LBS and the WAS will have regrets sometime down the road...
KD, that's a really good and thorough description of the differing philosophies, and the dilemmas associated with them. In my experience, when there is active infidelity going on -- especially long-term, remorseless physical affairs (where the betrayed spouse knows, and the cheating spouse KNOWS that they know, yet continues anyway) it's best to go immediately to the LRT or even the after-the-LRT.
In all my years on here, and studying literally hundreds of affairs, there are really only two things I've seen work: the "let them go" thing or the "actively-affair-bust-with-everything-you-got" thing. (And one can do the latter, first, and then let them go; you realy can't do it the other way around). But it's not until you really move on that you draw them back, sadly (google that scene in the movie "Swingers" sometime -- it's exactly like that).
yep Starsky Zig and I have separate DB coaches and they both encouraged us to seduce our spouses. I didn't really go along with the idea of getting him into bed. But she did suggest that I always dress nice, flirt, have a bit of phsyical touch here and there, give him clear signals that I was not drawing a line, closing a door etc. Her reasoning was that men were very simple creatures they go where they feel good. I needed to make our house where he felt good, make all our interactions feel good ones. Then he would find that he enjoyed his time at mine more than he did at his place (with his GF)
he didn't have an affair BTW, I left him, we both dated other people, then I had change of heart and wanted to work on the marriage. But he is now living with someone else.
yep Starsky Zig and I have separate DB coaches and they both encouraged us to seduce our spouses. I didn't really go along with the idea of getting him into bed. But she did suggest that I always dress nice, flirt, have a bit of phsyical touch here and there, give him clear signals that I was not drawing a line, closing a door etc. Her reasoning was that men were very simple creatures they go where they feel good. I needed to make our house where he felt good, make all our interactions feel good ones. Then he would find that he enjoyed his time at mine more than he did at his place (with his GF)
he didn't have an affair BTW, I left him, we both dated other people, then I had change of heart and wanted to work on the marriage. But he is now living with someone else.
If he's not in a current affair, I have no problem with this approach.
yep Starsky Zig and I have separate DB coaches and they both encouraged us to seduce our spouses. I didn't really go along with the idea of getting him into bed. But she did suggest that I always dress nice, flirt, have a bit of phsyical touch here and there, give him clear signals that I was not drawing a line, closing a door etc. Her reasoning was that men were very simple creatures they go where they feel good. I needed to make our house where he felt good, make all our interactions feel good ones. Then he would find that he enjoyed his time at mine more than he did at his place (with his GF)
he didn't have an affair BTW, I left him, we both dated other people, then I had change of heart and wanted to work on the marriage. But he is now living with someone else.
Wow!
Simple creatures.
Flowers always make people better, happier, and more helpful; they are sunshine, food and medicine for the soul. unconditional love is awesome!
I think it's important for an LBS in an infidelity situation to truly grok the "I'm already dead" principle.
I think that in Zig and Brit's sitches, they have that understanding.
So there's no M to save. Now... it's just a matter of doing what ever works for them.
To put it in vulgar terms, their H's are just another piece of meat.
I don't see either as being desperate and setting themselves up to be abused. I also see them both struggling with the idea of seducing an attached man. And I see that as positives, in them.
Yet, if they do what they do... really embrace their feminine side... and their Hs are simple creatures... it MAY draw their Hs back to them. That would then be an appropriate time for them to set boundaries with their H's. "IF you want some of dis... then u gotta ditch bimbo..."
"IF you want some of dis... then u gotta ditch bimbo..."
HAHAHAHAHAHA
In my sitch my H is very very very against ever having an affair. He is very much a one woman guy. However I'm seeing him acting towards me in a way that he wouldn't act towards a woman if he's in a relationship and I think he struggles with that. However it is still a dangerous game to play, because as the H's get closer you have to manage expectations and you are of course opening yourself up to being rejected, to being an Ow yourself, etc.
I'm not advocating this approach. For me, I'm happy that H and I have a better friendship that we didn't have previously. And I think I'm ready for my own R that doesn't involve me having to seduce, lure, or be an Ow.
