SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I do see this point made often though, as if to say: 'You may as well reconcile with a cheater. You have zero way of knowing your next partner won't do the same.

I see 'always D' voices paint pictures of people easily finding faithful partners if they leave their WSes. The General Social Survey indicates that 1 in 4 men have cheated and something like 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 women have cheated. So finding a new partner who will be faithful isn't a slam dunk. Hell, finding a new partner of any sort isn't a slam dunk.

That's very different from asserting that a BS should therefore R. That's jumping to a conclusion that simply isn't supported. I don't see that, though I don't spend much time on social media. The only other fora I've seen on healing from infidelity are pretty low quality, IMO, though every so often a post surprises me with its humanity.

I think a lot of people make bad assumptions about what certain sentences mean.

IMO, it's dumb to split because one thinks finding a new forever-faithful partner is easy. But that is not saying that one should R because finding a good partner is difficult.

As Bigger says, the only reason to R is that both people want to R. I add 'and will do the work.'

In fact, I think virtually all the SI voices that have R'ed would say that fearing being alone is usually a lousy reason to R.

Congratulations DRSOOLERS! I wish you and your wife a long and happy marriage, full of joyful moments and the chance to grow together.

I think some people are responding to the phrasing of "why you need to fix your picker." It sounds like you know better than they do how to run their lives and it can sound abrasive. If my husband were to read this post, he might respond with his story. His mother committed terrible infidelity when he was growing up which negatively impacted his life in huge ways. This background formed a core purpose in his life, to find a broken woman and prove that he can fix her. That sounds like a set up for a disaster, for a messed up life, but in fact, that is what happened for him, and he loves the entire story of his life, including the very jagged parts. He feels like a hero. It would be obviously wrong to prescribe this approach to others! But I think you'll find among betrayed spouses some for whom the most important part of their story is a sense of pride - more than pride, a fulfilled important purpose in their life - that they kept their family together, helped to heal their spouse, and made something beautiful out of something gross. There are people who are not disgusted or turned off by their spouse's debasement of their body with another debauched person, which I think is hard to understand and believe for people who are fundamentally disgusted by that. Imagine saying to my husband "you need to fix your picker." He's not the kind of guy who would get angry at that (you have seen people who get angry on this thread and other places), but he would set you aside as someone who doesn't understand him at all and discount your opinions as he would think you discount his. I think that is a fair representation of how he would respond to your post and I hope that you can adjust your posts to include that kind of person, so they do not perceive that they are being told by you how to run their lives when they are content with their choices.

Jane Austen is hilarious! Mr. Collins!

I think some people are responding to the phrasing of "why you need to fix your picker." It sounds like you know better than they do how to run their lives and it can sound abrasive.

OK, firstly, thank you for your time and for helping me understand why this post garnered a negative reaction in places.

Of course I'm not suggesting I know better; I'm merely sharing my experiences. For context, the post was particularly inspired by a movie in which I felt one of the core premises was how important honour is as a trait in a partner, and partially inspired by another post imploring us to review ourselves and the partners we are to live with. That post kind of hit me the wrong way. Perhaps it wasn't intended, but implicitly I read it as if we were somehow demonstrating the traits that led to us being cheated on.

My response to that was that, upon examining my own situation deeply, of course I had flaws, relationship skills to build, and traits to hone and improve. My glaring fault was my "picker". In consciously working to improve that, it has worked for me and led to much happiness.

If my husband were to read this post, he might respond with his story. His mother committed terrible infidelity when he was growing up which negatively impacted his life in huge ways. This background formed a core purpose in his life, to find a broken woman and prove that he can fix her.

This is a variation of a hero complex. It's not inherently wrong to have. If he is happy with how his life has turned out, who am I to suggest that needs fixing? What I can say, however, is that if he had worked on that in therapy and instead funnelled his efforts into finding a healthy partner, he would likely have had a lot less heartache along the way. Perhaps he's content with the heartache because he's so happy with the end result. That's not wrong, but I guess my post is aimed at people who want to mitigate that heartache.

That sounds like a set up for disaster, for a messed up life, but in fact, that is what happened for him, and he loves the entire story of his life, including the very jagged parts. He feels like a hero. It would be obviously wrong to prescribe this approach to others!

I'm glad he is happy, but yes, it would be wrong to prescribe that approach to others. It begs the question: if he enjoyed the challenge, why wasn't he looking for romantic partners in homeless shelters, finding heroin addicts and sex workers, and trying to turn their lives around? He might perhaps love that challenge, but if someone came to me suggesting that was their tactic, I'd likely advise them that they were in for a long and painful time of it. But have at it if that's what they want.

There are people who are not disgusted or turned off by their spouse's debasement of their body with another debauched person, which I think is hard to understand and believe for people who are fundamentally disgusted by that.

Yes, it's very difficult for me personally to relate to, and I think it's pretty atypical, but I'm aware these sorts of people exist. Hell, there are people who actively have a fetish for their wife being with others—enjoying hiding in the closet whilst other men go at it with their wives. Again, who am I to say that's wrong? I can't speak for those people; I can merely speak to the people who don't view things that way.

Imagine saying to my husband "you need to fix your picker." He's not the kind of guy who would get angry at that (you have seen people who get angry on this thread and other places), but he would set you aside as someone who doesn't understand him at all and discount your opinions as he would think you discount his.

I think that is a fair representation of how he would respond to your post and I hope that you can adjust your posts to include that kind of person, so they do not perceive that they are being told by you how to run their lives when they are content with their choices.

Yes, given what you've outlined, I don't think this post would be for him. But do you think that means it shouldn't exist? Have you ever heard of the Bean Soup Theory?

In summary (and I've got this from Google as a definition):

> Bean soup theory is a phenomenon describing the tendency of people to view internet content as if it were custom-made for them, leading them to leave self-centred or irrelevant complaints when it does not match their personal preferences.

In other words, I cannot write a post that caters to everyone. I can't really write a post that caters to people who have widely differing goals and preferences to my own.

For example if I write a post saying: These were the things I did to try and ensure my next partner was loyal, if someone responds: 'Well I like that my partner cheated because of x,y or z - all I can respond is: well, sorry, this isn't for you.

All I can do is write for myself in the hope that there are others out there who will relate to me. Presuming that's the case, this post may well be helpful to them.

I did not want to spend my life with a cheater. I wanted a loyal partner. Fixing my picker was a step I took towards achieving that goal. Maybe in the long run it would have proved to be ineffective or outright wrong, but for now, it's working great and I'm very happy. I want to share what worked for me. I remember how I felt when I was betrayed. I remember reading forums and posts and not relating to what they were saying. I think there is a place here for posts like mine so that if other like-minded people are navigating this, they can relate.

[This message edited by DRSOOLERS at 11:10 AM, Sunday, November 1st]

In response to the post discussing the mother"s infidelity and its impact on the child, my dad’s mom was a lifelong cheater. However my dad was the opposite and never cheated on my mom. He saw the behavior and did the opposite.

Generally, it comes down to observing outcomes and consequences.

​My dad was a serial cheater, and I saw how terribly his life ended up. Because of that, I developed a strong negative association with cheating from a young age. My ex’s father, on the other hand, cheated, moved to a beautiful part of the country, married his mistress, and built a great life post-infidelity.
According to her, he seemed happier in every single way.

​I don't think it's a coincidence that she never developed a strong moral stance against cheating.

I note that Pippin suggested "adjusting" posts for inclusivity rather than stating any posts should not exist.

perhaps adjusting the phrasing to "why I needed to fix my picker" instead of "why you need to fix your picker" (and for similar types of statements) would be received more inclusively. Then the phrasing would match the justification of sharing one's own experiences, and readers coming from all angles can learn from your experience without it potentially coming across as prescriptive.