Can I just point something out about the Scarlet Letter reference? Not a really good one to use here, if you remember the whole story.
Yes, the man kept quiet and was not judged by society, while Hester went around with the "big red A" and a child to boot. HOWEVER, the man was consumed and driven mad with the guilt of knowing what he did and that he didn't tell or support the woman (Hester) who was injured by his action. Remember how they found him with the "A" he had carved into his own chest, bleeding and raw?
The moral of the story wasn't, "If you screw up, don't tell about it and society doesn't have the right to judge you anyway." It was that when you commit an act that YOU KNOW is wrong, and you don't make amends for having done it, the guilt of that action will be worse than anything society could throw at you for admitting to it and dealing with it.
Quite different from people running around sewing big red A's on people.
And for what it's worth, yes, I've been cheated on, and I'd rather know ASAP instead of hearing about it later, when I "thought" the person I loved had been faithful to me all this time. Kind of like I'd rather know if I have cancer at an early state than to just ignore any signs and deal with it later when it's terminal. But clearly, mileage varies here.
if and when (doubtful this will come to pass) the spouse finds the said person cheated; will it cause more pain then? or would it be less painful to find out now?
...
what do you think?
It depends a lot of the state of the relationship when the discovery is made and the mental state and outlook of the spouse who was cheated on when he or she discovers the truth. It also depends on the type of relationship they have. If the cheater's spouse is the type who is utterly devoted and feels a strong emotional and psychological bond to his or her spouse, it'll hurt more no matter when it happens. If their relationship is less connected, it'll hurt less.
These types of questions are hard to answer well because it's so easy for each of us to project our feelings into the situation. We don't talk about how the other person might feel but rather how we'd feel because we can't put ourselves so thoroughly in another person's shoes.
Generally speaking, I think that the cheater's spouse would feel more cuckolded if told later because the period of time between the cheating the the revelation of the truth would lengthen the time one felt betrayed and as if the relationship carried on under false pretenses. On the other hand, being told now might end the relationship right away. Cheaters who slip up and cheat once don't tell to protect their spouses, and there is something to it. Sometimes living with the lie makes them more devoted spouses as jeopardizing the relationship with their actions makes them treasure it more.
Personally, I can't relate to this very well as my husband and I are exceptionally close and he would never cheat. Yes, I know, every woman thinks that. The truth is that my husband couldn't hide anything from me because I'd know the second he tried. I can tell by the way he takes in a breath that he wants a cup of coffee, has gas or is "in the mood". He is utterly transparent to me emotionally. Beyond that, he's utterly devoted and comes home every night without delay. If I happened to learn he had found a few spare seconds somewhere to cheat, I'd forgive him and get on with life, though it'd probably be a stab to the soul. I don't think that anything can be gained from judging someone belatedly for the person they were.
I haven't read the entire thread but here are my thoughts...
From a practical point of view, by not sharing this info, she is effectively denying him the opportunity to be tested for STI's. I've handed too many Kleenexes to people who "had a feeling" and came in to be tested, and had their feelings confirmed with a positive STD test. Condoms help but they don't provide 100% protection. He does not have control over his own body at this point because of omission of information.
Second, by keeping control of the decision for him to know or not know or when to know, he doesn't have the opportunity to make decisions about his life, relationship, family and future. He might be very hurt. He might be surprised. He might already know (people are pretty smart). He might want counseling. He might want to make a different choice about his future. He might forgive and work through this...but shoudn't he be allowed the choices about his own life?
I think that self-empowerment is really important.
Anyway, just my 2 cents.
ETA: Just reviewed the OP. I think it would be more painful to find out later due to the above. Realizing that one has been denied the opportunity to make informed decisions about one's body and one's future for a significant length of time would be a very painful thing for me.
Can I just point something out about the Scarlet Letter reference? Not a really good one to use here, if you remember the whole story.
Yes, the man kept quiet and was not judged by society, while Hester went around with the "big red A" and a child to boot. HOWEVER, the man was consumed and driven mad with the guilt of knowing what he did and that he didn't tell or support the woman (Hester) who was injured by his action. Remember how they found him with the "A" he had carved into his own chest, bleeding and raw?
The moral of the story wasn't, "If you screw up, don't tell about it and society doesn't have the right to judge you anyway." It was that when you commit an act that YOU KNOW is wrong, and you don't make amends for having done it, the guilt of that action will be worse than anything society could throw at you for admitting to it and dealing with it.
Quite different from people running around sewing big red A's on people.
IMHO- I'd rather not know if my dh cheated on me. It's only helping them purge their guilty conscience and it would only make me feel bad and not want to trust him anymore. If it's a one time thing and it won't happen again I'd say keep the mouth shut.
people may or may not say if they've cheated/been cheated on, this is a public forum.
a relationship is an extremely complex dynamic. there can be a million reasons why one of the partners goes outside of the relationship -- from simple temptation to serious emotional need.
I personally don't think the cheater should confess if the motivation is to assauge her/his own guilt. so I'd say the motivation for confession is key in my mind. I agree too that it also can be a situation where the partner being cheated on may very well be aware something is happening, consciously or unconsciously. I think the cheater has to figure out why he/she did it, does he/she want to continue in the relationship, and what he/she has to do to move forward to make that relationship (more) successful. all this is so individual, and I think even more individual to each relationship.
There also seems to be a link common in this thread that confessing somehow equals being truly sorry for their actions. I think we ALL know people who will confess to things and aren't truly sorry. If actions speak louder than words, then the actions of the transgressor will be the key, not the words. Even if the "action of confession" is done, the words really are meaningless UNLESS the contrition is followed up by normally years of impeccable behaviour. In the case of a multiple cheater who goes home after every transgression, there no DOUBT was the usual scene of "I did this. I'm sorry." and so on. However, the confession is meaningless because they just went out and did it again. Talk is cheap, in other words. Confessing is NOT in my humble opinion a true sign of contrition. The only one who know if they are sorry or not and have truly changed is the transgressor. This is why I feel that GIVEN the conditions detailed by the OP in the original post, the act of confession may be more harmful than positive to the relationship as the subsequent actions will be what matter. And if those actions include std testing (which they have), counselling (which they have), and personal contrition, there is nothing positive that a confession can add to this relationship.
Last edited by misskimothy; 10-30-2009 at 12:03 PM.
Can I just point something out about the Scarlet Letter reference? Not a really good one to use here, if you remember the whole story.
Yes, the man kept quiet and was not judged by society, while Hester went around with the "big red A" and a child to boot. HOWEVER, the man was consumed and driven mad with the guilt of knowing what he did and that he didn't tell or support the woman (Hester) who was injured by his action. Remember how they found him with the "A" he had carved into his own chest, bleeding and raw?
Sounds to me in the example above that the act of confession for the man was to assuage his own guilt about what he did and to assuage his own guilt about how Hester was treated, and not because he was truly sorry for the act itself.
I really hope everything works out for the OPs friend. Tough decisions and choices all around, and so avoidable.
Last edited by misskimothy; 10-30-2009 at 12:08 PM.
i do know the entire story about hester and the big ole A cut into his chest.
the point i was making is--------------the reverend went thru his (albeit tortured) life with only his OWN self judging him. (seems to support my theory that the cheater is probably suffering enough to make even the most angry of us feel satisfied)
hester TOLD and how was she treated?
she was judged and labeled and shunned.
by her peers.
my question was ---can anyone who is NOT perfect judge and not be JUST as guilty as the person THEY are judging.
and the hester fessed up and was treated in a horrible manner BUT she survived. the reverend didnt confess or repent or atone and he was driven mad by HIS failure to confess to HIS God.
point being?
confession is good for the soul.
but whose?
the confessor?
or the receiver of the confession?
that is the recurring comment made again and again in this thread.
if the CHEATER tells her husband? it should be because she feels it will be best for their marriage and her mental well being.
not to make herself feel better and to prevent US from judging her.
and the most curious and interesting point being made over and over is that if she DOES NOT confess to her husband; regardless of her own religious or moral beliefs--she really isnt sorry.
who the heck says so?
and who died and left you in charge?
your opinion is yours. everyone has one.
but you dont run the world or my life or anyone elses.
i think this thread is so enlightening. and it has led to a great discussion between me and my husband.
Atonement is said to be the process of forgiving or pardoning a transgression.
atonement refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin through the death of Jesus Christ by crucifixion which made possible the reconciliation between God and creation
Confession
The intent of this sacrament is to provide healing for the soul as well as to regain the grace of God, lost by sin.
Repentance
includes an admission of guilt, a promise or resolve not to repeat the offense; an attempt to make restitution for the wrong, or in some way to reverse the harmful effects of the wrong where possible.
includes an admission of guilt, a promise or resolve not to repeat the offense; an attempt to make restitution for the wrong, or in some way to reverse the harmful effects of the wrong where possible.
or in some way to reverse the harmful effects of the wrong where possible.
Seems to me if she told her husband that she would never do it again...that would enhance the NEVER DO IT AGAIN part...I'm thinkin' she doesn't tell...what's to change her from doing it again if the opportunity arises...after all she wasn't caught before...
You seemed to jump on people for their religious views then you keep coming back with religious information...christian.
/7:53/ Then each of them went home, /8:1/ while Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. /8:2/ Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him and he sat down and began to teach them. /8:3/ The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery; and making her stand before all of them, /8:4/ they said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. /8:5/ Now in the law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" /8:6/ They said this to test him, so that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. /8:7/ When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." /8:8/ And once again he bent down and wrote on the ground. /8:9/ When they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the elders; and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. /8:10/ Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" /8:11/ She said, "No one, sir." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and from now on do not sin again."
Scarlet Letter is about Puritans after all... People screw up constantly. seems to me your better off trying to deal with things in the most adult way possible, leading to the most mature outcome for all involved. it's more of a challenge to be compassionate and empathetic than to be morally superior.
There's a big difference between judging a person and judging the action, or having an opinion on Right and Wrong (especially since we're talking about a situation apart from the individual - we don't know the individual, so we are all speaking in the abstract).
If were speaking TO the cheater, most of us would be less blunt - but regardless it doesn't change the morality of the choice (for most of us).
If my seven year old nephew lies to his mother, or takes something without permission (even a cookie from the cookie jar before dinner, because he knows it's against the rules). The right thing for him to do is to admit it, and try not to do it again. He may choose not to confess, and his behavior may never be discovered. Or - it may be discovered and he may be punished for it by his parents (or he may punish himself with the guilt he feels for breaking the rules).
No matter the result, even if his parents punish him, it does not mean that his parents are "judging" him. Punishment can be nonjudgemental.
Having an opinion on the RIGHT thing to do, does not mean we are judging the person. We may understand and even empathize (and may even have experienced ourselves either as the victim or the offended) and still feel a particular action is either wrong or right.
In fact, when it comes to morality (which is independent from religion, though often entwined), it's necessary for a society to have a group morality - an agreement on what is right, what is wrong, and what the "appropriate" response is to wrong behavior (both on the part of the person making the offense, and on the part of the offended, and on the part of society as a whole).
Otherwise, everything is ok - and we have no right to judge or punish anyone, so we shouldn't jail even the pedophile child rapists because "who are we to judge."
My religion and personal morality tells me that I should not judge even the child rapist - that doesn't mean that I shouldn't judge the behavior or have an opinion on the right and wrong of the situation.
As a probation officer, I found myself in the very weird position of feeling compassion for a pedophile. They aren't ugly men in dirty raincoats - they're men and women who have deep psychological issues, but are generally otherwise apparently normal people. It's hard to understand how people "so normal" can make those choices. Feeling compassion for them doesn't mean I didn't judge the behavior or hold them to consequences deemed appropriate by the legal system.
One particular man had such a horrific childhood and in some ways had tried very hard not to offend was such a risk to the community that I had to recommend that he be sentenced to life in prison, ideally a psychiatric prison, but that he never be released into the public again. I actually felt bad that this man might have to spend his life in prison, even though I knew it was what was probably best for both him and the entire community. When he was sentenced to life in prison, I was both sad and relieved.
Having an opinion on the RIGHT course of action, does not mean judgement.
It doesn't mean she's a horrible person if she makes a choice that any of us feel is morally wrong. I can empathise with any choice she makes, but that doesn't make them all equally good choices.
Having a moral code means that you don't just think - that you are certain that some choices are good, and some are bad. And everyone has one (a moral code) - whether or not they have any religious beliefs. Having a belief - even a conviction that certain choices are the right ones (and even a belief or conviction about the results of wrong choices) is not the same as judgement.
I can feel complete compassion for the cheater, and yet still believe her actions are wrong and will have severe consequences (regardless of her choice) and furthermore feel she has a responsibility to make a specific decision. That doesn't mean I condemn or judge her if she makes a different choice.
If judgement means we should never tell anyone what they SHOULD do, and have no right to impede on another's choice or even to punish behavior (because after all, we have no right to judge) - that means anyone can do anything any time without any expectation of consequences.
I do feel compassion for the cheater, but it doesn't change my opinion on what the "right thing to do," is. If she doesn't take the course of action I feel is right, I don't think she's a bad person or deserves to suffer because of it. I still would give her my honest opinion - if she asked - as to what she should do and why (personally I'd have to have a lot more information than I've received in this forum, but I also understand that some people's moral codes may be somewhat different - I'm not judging them either).
the below is not directed at any one person. it is meant to make you think and comment if you wish.
to have an opinion is just that-but to say (imply or whatever words you want to use) if she doesnt do * fill in blank* (according to MY moral code or religious beliefs or personal "i think she should" ; she isnt really sorry or there is no way for her to have a happy successful marriage and that she is IN THE WRONG. no gray area and no no extenuating circumstances.
THAT IS JUDGING.
and i am not condemning anyone for judging. read back thru my comments.
i just asked if you see yourself in the "judging" category?
when you meet your maker, your God, your higher power, your karma
what will they have to say to you about your actions?
and if you are comfortable with your possible consequences?
