In episode 76 Brad and Morgan discuss a new way to look at negative cycles.
If you haven’t yet listened to episode 3 called “Why Do We Fight and Avoid Difficult Topics” that episode will help you understand negative cycles.
You can check that out HERE: https://healingbrokentrust.com/podcast-blog/ep-3-why-do-we-fight-or-avoid-talking-about-the-affair
Episode Transcript:
Morgan (00:00):
Welcome to the Healing Broken Trust podcast. I'm Morgan Robinson. And
Brad (00:03):
I'm Brad Robinson.
Morgan (00:05):
And today we have a topic that everyone needs to hear. If you've listened to the episode called Why Do We Fight or Avoid Difficult Topics, you are introduced to the concept of negative cycles, and this episode will take that to the next level. I'm excited that you're here. Sit back, get your popcorn. Let's talk about this. We want to start by telling you about some research conducted in 1990, but first we want to mention that we have workshops and intensives and other ways to get help from someone and trust that's us. So visit our website@healingbrokentrust.com. That's healing broken trust.com. Okay, so let's jump into the research. Brad, would you like me to go ahead and talk about it first? Yes, go ahead. So in 1990, researchers asked individuals to share personal stories from their lives in which they still had an ongoing personal relationship with someone to this day that they had angered. And then they were also asked about a time. So the same person was also asked about a time that they made someone else very angry, deeply angry at them. So the researchers were brilliant and that they used the same person. This is important, the same person to furnish both victim and perpetrator narratives for their findings. Because important thing and why it's important is because it rules out explanations that treat victims and perpetrators as different kinds of people.
(01:42):
Instead of how we often feel in a perpetrator victim situation, it's based on a role we play in the interaction. So there would be no ability really to label a person as psychopath or narcissistic because it's the same person giving both accounts, both the victim account and the perpetrator account. So victims and perpetrators are not different kinds of people, rather, we're the same people who see things differently depending on whether we are the victim or in the perpetrator role. So in the victim role or the perpetrator role, and we talk about it as betrayed betrayer very often, and we also were talking about how in the negative cycle, that's how we talk about the problems. But in the victim perpetrator, it's kind of how we see each other in that negative cycle. Right, Brad?
Brad (02:33):
Yeah, that's a good way to put it.
Morgan (02:36):
And here's what they did. Some of the stories that people told included situations around topics of broken promises and commitments, violated rules, broken obligations, broken expectations, betrayal of secrets, unfair treatment lies, conflicts over money, and kind of other similar incidences. And so as I read that, it makes sense why this applies to infidelity or broken trust or really any relationship that you're in, right, Brad?
Brad (03:06):
Yeah, I would say so. The couples that I see are really dealing with hurts and wounds in the relationship, and that's what creates a negative cycle. And so this research that we're getting into today is really important because it's research really on how we can fall into the role of a perpetrator or a victim. Like Morgan mentioned. This is research from the same individual who's giving both accounts as you can see based on how the role that we fall in on a particular scenario. If I'm a victim in a scenario, I'm going to probably have some of these characteristics. If I'm a perpetrator in a different scenario, I'm probably going to have some of these characteristics. And we've talked about pursuers and ERs, and then withdraws, avoiders, what they're really avoiding or pursuing around or blaming around are typically hurts or injuries. It's things that they don't have resolution on. And what we're going to get into after this is how to get out of this victim perpetrator negative cycle. And so let's get into how victims and perpetrators see each other based on their roles or see the situation based on their roles.
Morgan (04:23):
So in the study, the victims saw the provocations or actions of the perpetrator as random, arbitrary or gratuitous deserving of the victims' justified anger. Sometimes they reserve that anger until there's a pattern and then they blow up. We'll talk a little bit about that. So they're like, oh my goodness, how could they do this? It's so random. How could they do this to me? I need to protect myself. So when a person was in the perpetrator role, they looked at the events differently than when they were in the victim role. So let's see if we can relate to this. So the following is how the two roles viewed the stories or events that people recounted. So it's how they viewed themselves in those stories that they were telling the researchers
Brad (05:17):
And how they not only viewed themselves, but also the situation.
Morgan (05:21):
Yes,
Brad (05:21):
Or the complaints or the perspective of their partner.
Morgan (05:24):
So Brad, do you want to tell us about some of the perpetrators, some of their thought process that the researchers recounted?
Brad (05:32):
Yeah. So perpetrators looked at their actions as isolated, like events closed in time. It's a one and done. And sometimes people who have an affair may have had an affair recently, and that's why you're listening to our podcast, but they may have had one five years ago, two years ago, 10 years ago. And they look at that also as isolated events closed in time versus victims of these, they place the incident in a longer timeframe. They see it possibly as a pattern of a perpetrator's behavior. They see it as a pattern of behavior. Well, you're flirty. You have poor boundaries. This affair is just an extension of that. Your infidelity is an extension of that versus perpetrators who are like, no, this is an isolated closed event. My affair doesn't matter. It's not related to my poor boundaries. It's not related to my
Morgan (06:22):
Personality or who I am, my
Brad (06:24):
Personality or how I act or behave. And there's this other thought that perpetrators can have is I'm in control. I can stop when I want to stop. Nobody will get hurt, nobody will find out. So they tend to have this theme of minimization of damage. They minimize their intentions. They're judging themselves based on their intentions
Morgan (06:42):
That minimize lasting negative consequences or minimizing the damage to interpersonal
Brad (06:48):
Relationships.
Morgan (06:49):
Yeah.
Brad (06:49):
And so perpetrators will minimize lasting negative consequences or damage to interpersonal relationships. Sometimes they even outright deny that there is any such consequences. Perpetrators were more likely to deny that there were any lasting negative consequences by stating that the conflict has been forgiven and forgotten and the individuals involved in it were now on good terms. So people who were the offenders who did the hurtful action, they thought it was over just because they apologized, they said they were sorry. And so I'm now on good terms with you because I apologized
(07:26):
Versus victims who would say, no, there are lasting negative consequences and there are implications and still damage to our relationship, such as a loss of trust or even continued hostility, maybe even a loss of friendship. Perpetrators would say, you know what? This incident ended with a happy ending and that they helped close that up and help make it a happy ending by making an apology or amends for what they did. They'd say that they apologized for what they did. However, most victims in this research felt like they never received an apology. Victims would say that a happy ending is rarer for them. They still felt angry or otherwise victimized. They still felt an ongoing sense of loss and grievance. So the perpetrator's going on, I'm happy. It's okay. I've apologized, so you're okay with me. But the person who's hurt by the incident is still like, you know what?
(08:26):
My trust is still broken. You didn't keep your promise. You still did something that was outrageous or offensive, and it's not over for me yet. I'm still struggling to trust you. I'm still struggling to get back to where we were at now. Perpetrators will see the victim as having an overreaction to a single incident, and this is really important. So perpetrators will see the victim as overreacting. That's how they would often categorize it, and they would see the victim's anger as an overreaction as well. They see the victim as inappropriately or excessively angry. Even when they acknowledged some fault of their own, they still regarded the angry response as excessive. So even when they could say, yeah, I did make a mistake. I did screw up, they would still see the victim as overreacting with their anger. Victims rarely seem to regard their own responses as excessive. They saw their anger as justified. And so here's why victim's accounts were more likely to refer to multiple provocations multiple times where they felt like, okay, there's bad behavior here, or You've done something deeply hurtful or wounding to me,
Morgan (09:40):
And that's what I was talking about earlier. It's built up, up over time. It's almost like they're watching and seeing and waiting before they finally lose their cool and then lose their anger, get angry, but it just sort of adds up and adds up instead of dealing with it right away.
Brad (09:57):
Yeah, exactly. Victims were more likely to make a statement like, you know what? My anger towards them built up slowly over the course of the summer. It built up slowly. Victims may initially stifle their anger and then later express strong anger in response to a series of provocations, kind of series of bad behavior or offenses where they cross the line.
Morgan (10:19):
So it looks like an explosion to the person in the role of the perpetrator, when truly it was just the victim role was just building up and building up
Brad (10:28):
For the victim. Minor offenses produce anger that has not expressed overtly until a series of accumulated grievances provokes an explosion from the victim's perspective, an angry outbursts may represent a response to a series of provocations, and the victim may feel that they had exercised great self-control and restraint and not showing anger. Until this point. In contrast, the perpetrator may see only the immediate provocation may only look at their immediate bad behavior, which may seem quite similar to previous actions that elicited no such anger outbursts. And they may regard the victim's anger as an inappropriate overreaction like you're saying.
Morgan (11:09):
Yeah, and it's funny, I think we all do this. We don't think about all of our past bad behavior. We just see what we've done. Maybe at that moment when somebody's confronting us, but we don't often think about, oh, well, I did this and I did that, and I did this in the way that our partner might.
Brad (11:28):
Yeah. So victims who feel like they've suffered lasting harm will feel entitled to sympathy and support versus perpetrators who say, you know what? I apologize. I acknowledged it. I said I was sorry. Let, let's put it behind us. Yeah, let's put it behind us. Why talk about the past? Why dress up negative feelings? Victims want to keep the incident open compared to the perpetrator who wants to see it as closed. Victims don't feel they receive the necessary closure from the perpetrator, which is very important. And that's actually a predictor of ongoing relationship trouble, and we're going to talk about that in a couple minutes. Victims will ruminate about the past sufferings even for years afterward, in contrast to perpetrators who don't ruminate about the event, and they feel like there's no lasting consequences. Said, I'm sorry, what else do you want me to do? I can't go back in time and change things. They'll express sentiments like that which don't really help close the event for the victim.
Morgan (12:27):
And so why, when we talk about the why victims see the perpetrator's action as incomprehensible, leaving them wondering why they acted the way that way towards them. And victims don't see an apparent reason for acting that way. Only if few perpetrators. Sometimes when you're in the perpetrator role, maybe you'll see the actions is making sense, maybe even unavoidable or legitimate. I guess it depends on the situation or the scenario. But what's most interesting about this is we're both the victim and the perpetrator. I think it's easy to accidentally forget that, oh, they did the wrong, I did do the wrong, but they're not separate people. So this is our mindset about different events in our own lives. This is helpful to understand negative cycles also, because we sometimes play multiple parts in different relationships or in different settings or events. And so I think keeping that in mind helps. It helps. I mean, obviously we still say, okay, if your partner had the affair, you do have a role of being a victim. You didn't have the affair. So we're not saying that you're the perpetrator in any way, but in different situations, even if it's a small thing, I've offended someone. Well, in that sense, we all offend people from time to time. We can't help it. Bull and China shop happens.
Brad (13:55):
One of the things, Morgan, going back to the why somebody was unfaithful, why were you unfaithful? Why did you do this? Why did you have an affair? That is a universal question that everybody has after they've been betrayed. One of the outstanding pieces of information this study presented is how difficult the why is to grasp for somebody who's a victim or who's been betrayed. It's a universal question that everybody has that I've had,
Morgan (14:27):
Whether it's infidelity or not.
Brad (14:28):
Oh yeah. Whether it's infidelity or some other role where we're a victim. I had a stepfather that was abusive towards me and my older brother, and he was physically abusive. My parents were not that way at all, and he was that way. And for years, I'm like, I could never understand human behavior. I could never probably, that relationship my mom had with him, my parents divorced, and that subsequent marriage to that guy and his abusive behavior probably led me down a road where I was interested in psychology because I wanted to predict and be able to control human behavior. So it led me to where I'm at today. So in that sense, I'm thankful, but I never really understood this person's behavior. That's me falling classically in the role of a victim. I'm 6, 7, 8, 10 years old, and this guy in my mind is a complete monster, and his behavior is incomprehensible. And that is exactly how people feel whenever they're a victim is it's incomprehensible. This behavior is incomprehensible. This behavior is not easily understood. It's unintelligible. This makes no sense at all,
(15:42):
And that's how victims say. So this is what some of the research shows about it is. Victims would describe what happened to them as incomprehensible. This makes no sense. Only 10% of perpetrators would say that their behavior is incomprehensible or doesn't make any sense. Perpetrators usually know why they acted the way they did. They know why they acted the way they did to them, their behavior makes more sense. But when you're hurt, wounded, traumatized by somebody, it's incomprehensible, and those wounds are going to be deeper the closer the person is to us, the misunderstanding is going to be much deeper the closer that person is to us. And so they see it as arbitrary. They see it as not following a consistent rule. This is who you are and what you did is not following a consistent rule of who you are. It didn't fit your personality.
Morgan (16:38):
Yes. And it's very interesting that also the researchers found that there were external or mitigating circumstances in the view of the perpetrator. When you're in that perpetrator role, that perpetrator role sees it, oh, there's all of these circumstances that led me to this. There were external forces that were putting me in this position. If I hadn't done this, or if this hadn't happened to me, then this wouldn't have happened, and I wouldn't have been in this position to do this or that. And so that's another way for them to say, I understand how I could have done this. Maybe in your role, that person in your life would've said, well, he was just being a disobedient child and that caused me to do X, Y, or Z. That was why you made me get upset, or I got upset, or I was trying to help you to see that you were wrong, or so they can kind of justify the behavior or the actions or the problem that happened that arose. The research is saying 68% of perpetrators can see the external or mitigating circumstances, but only 20% of the victim, victim role, the people in that role can see, can understand those external circumstances and make sense of them.
Brad (18:00):
Yeah. Perpetrators would see their actions as maybe they would. They're more likely to give themselves the benefit of the doubt by pointing to external or mitigating circumstances. Victims though are likely to see what happened as contradictory
(18:16):
Or
(18:16):
Senseless, incoherent. It's not understandable. Makes no sense. It's outside of the realm of how you consistently act. You're not following the consistent rule.
(18:28):
So an example of how one person can fit the role of a victim and a perpetrator is this. This is a couple I had several years ago where the person who was betrayed was asking of her husband, please, I need X, Y, Z from you. Was very upset, very hurt, needing certain specific things from her husband. In that situation, she was falling into the category of a victim. 30 seconds later, she was describing a scenario where she was a perpetrator to one of her kids where she would've fit the description of a perpetrator where she had done something to hurt one of her adult children. And she was complaining about one of her adult children who was literally saying similar type of statements that she 30 seconds before was making towards her husband, I need you to show support, sympathy. I need you to show concern for me. I need you to do X, Y, Z. You did this thing that hurt me. And she was kind of minimizing it, downplaying it. She was one situation in her life where her trust was broken with her husband. She was clearly falling the textbook definition of a victim the way that we described it. And then in the other, she is falling into the role of the perpetrator the way we described it. Same person, exactly. Different circumstances. And she was not able to see any of the irony in our situation.
(19:58):
And
(19:58):
So we often see these things, the researchers say through self-serving biases. When we're a victim, we tend to see these things from our perspective. And when we're a perpetrator, we see it from our perspective. And part of what makes it hard for somebody who's a victim, and this is using again, the language of the researcher, perpetrator and victim. But when we're a victim, part of what makes it hard is it's hard to see it from the outsider's perspective. And so it does keep us stuck and kind of self-serving bias. Your behavior is incomprehensible. It's so crazy. You so hurtful, so devastating. It's hard to fathom how anybody can do this. And so we get stuck in that negative cycle of communication because I don't see your point at all. I don't see your perspective at all. And that's where the research says people can see them as a moral, see them as not. It's just crazy. This is just weird, unfathomable behavior.
Morgan (21:01):
How much easier it would be for us if we could just put ourselves in the shoes of the other person for even just a moment.
Brad (21:09):
Well, that's something we do at the workshop that I have people do who are perpetrators to help them have compassion and empathy. We have a
(21:18):
Whole
Morgan (21:19):
Lesson.
Brad (21:19):
Oh, yeah. Well, we have a great exercise that really helps people. I've had several clients who really struggle on the why, and the people who get really strung up on the why and held up on it are like, I know who my spouse is, and this behavior is not them. They're not following that consistent behavior that they have, and it's hard to give that benefit out. They just don't understand the mindset. And I think that reflects how deeply hurt people can be when they're in the role of that victim. And so this research we're going over, just to emphasize what Morgan mentioned earlier, this isn't necessarily about infidelity. This is just more those relationships that we have with folks, people in our life where we have been hurt, maybe promises have been broken, could be like siblings, could be parent, could be an intimate relationship, but it could be with a friend, it could be with a coworker, could be with a boss or employee, where this is how people feel in situations where they're the one who hurt somebody or how they feel when they've been wronged by somebody. And people who are, like Morgan mentioned, people who are more in the role of the perpetrator are more likely to see their actions as being impulsive, done without thought, done, without really thinking. And they're also more likely to say, this is something that could not be helped victims. 0% of victims would say, this could not be helped.
(22:51):
Victims are like, no, you could have chose something different. You had a way out of this perpetrators. 29% of them were like, well, I really couldn't help it.
Morgan (22:59):
I have no choice. I had was no choice. It was impulsive for me. I couldn't have done anything different.
Brad (23:04):
Now, half of perpetrators felt like what they did was justified or even justifiable. Victims would say that the perpetrators actions were inconsistent. Now, this is a biggie immoral. A quarter of victims, 25% of victims would say that the perpetrator's actions and intentions were immoral. That's huge. Not every wound creates contempt like we talked about, I believe in our last podcast episode on why relationships really fail. But contempt, a feeling of moral superiority is what predicts divorce. It's the best predictor of divorce when somebody feels like they're morally superior to their spouse. And so if somebody's wounded and they see the actions of the other party as immoral, it's going to be very hard for them to want to stay in a relationship with that person very long just because they're going to be like, our values are completely different. We are opposites. You can't have a life with somebody that you don't feel like you're morally compatible with. You may be able to have a life with somebody that you disagree with politically or spiritually or in a lot of other key areas of life, but if you feel like you're somebody's immoral, you cut them out quickly. That's what people do,
(24:19):
And
(24:19):
That's the greatest predictor of divorce. Another word for that is contempt. We're repulsed. We find people like that disgusting. So it's very serious.
Morgan (24:28):
And 7% of the perpetrator, people in the perpetrator role would say that their actions were immoral. And 25% of the victims would say, what about the next one?
Brad (24:39):
Now, victims are more likely to say that the incident was hurtful or even malicious
(24:45):
Or on purpose or on purpose. You did this on purpose. It was hurtful. About 31% of them would say that perpetrators would say no, it wasn't. Only 7% would say it was actually on purpose that they did it. Now, this is important. Perpetrators would be more likely to say that they regret the incident. However, victims don't see perpetrators as regretting the incident. That's huge. If somebody wrongs us and we don't see them as regretting the incident, how can we continue with them? We're going to put up a boundary with them. If you wrong me and I don't see you regret it, I'm going to start probably labeling you as a narcissist. I'm going to start thinking that you're a psychopath. If you're not regretful of what happened, how can I continue in a relationship with you? And so again, this is not research necessarily about infidelity, but it's research on our relationships that we have in life where we fall into the role of victim and perpetrator. And these are the same folks like Morgan mentioned, they surveyed individuals, not couples or not two people. And when the person was a victim, they wrote about the incident and they didn't see the perpetrator as regretful. But when they wrote about themselves, they saw themselves as regretful. And that's very important.
Morgan (26:01):
Yeah, absolutely. And so to summarize the research in the overwhelming majority of cases, perpetrators were able to make sense of their actions, at least in retrospect, looking back victims. However, were often unable to make sense of the perpetrator's actions even long afterwards. So that kind of echoes what you were saying earlier. They sort of ruminate on it. Typically, they'll ruminate over a long period of time over the actions. Whereas again, the perpetrator or the perpetrator role would look at it and be like, I just want to put it out of my view. I just want to forget about it, because we don't want to think of ourselves as bad or terrible people. We want to think of ourselves as good people. And so naturally, that's the first response. Well, I said, I'm sorry, forgive, forget, move on. And the perpetrator's like, well, I'm still over here bleeding, got this gaping wound.
Brad (26:57):
The victim. Yeah.
Morgan (26:58):
Oh, yes, the victim is still hurting. So it takes time. But it's interesting that it's one and the same. So when we are in both roles in any kind of relationship, we all feel this way. It's kind of a universal sentiment, which is very interesting.
Brad (27:16):
Yeah. There's some research that also talks about where both partners feel like the victim, and it usually happens where they both have a hurt sensitivity, where they have been hurt or rejected by each other in the past. And so they're not able to really support each other emotionally through those moments. And that's going to really impact conflict.
Morgan (27:39):
Yes. We've seen that a lot when both partners have had an affair. One person has an affair, maybe the other partner has a revenge affair or something like that. And both people are very hurt. And then it's like, it's up to you, Brad, to help them figure out, well, where do we start? Where's the beginning here? Whose hurt do we begin with? I think that's very interesting to be in that role. Yeah, I agree. Yeah. So there's conflict here. Relationship conflict can happen from discrepant perspectives, right? When we have two perspectives that don't really match. One person offends the other or harms another, but the victim fails to express anger overtly so quickly, maybe in the first, rather than letting it build up and build up before they kind of explode. And so the perpetrator may repeat the action, not realizing that it's harming and angering the victim.
(28:35):
So eventually, the victim responds to the series of provocations by expressing accumulated anger, which to the victim seems entirely appropriate to the multiple offenses, right? We talked about that. But then the perpetrator fails to recognize that there are lots of offenses building up to this moment and sees the anger as a response only to the single most recent and immediate action. From the perpetrator's perspective, their most recent action may be quite similar to past actions that elicited no objections. Perhaps because the victim concealed their anger, the perpetrator is inclined to see the response as an overreaction, and the perpetrator may even come to feel like a victim of unjust persecution. So the extent that the anger was perceived as disproportionate or unjustified, this research sheds light on how interpersonal conflict may be generated. The transgression is often an act that can be understood as a meaningful one, in many cases, reasonable and even legitimate. And in other cases, regrettable but understandable. The victim, however, fails to see the transgression in that light to the victim. The transgression tends to appear as a random and explicable provocation done for no apparent reason or out of sheer malice just being mean to me. So victims believe they're innocent and deserving of sympathy and restitution, and the perpetrator is guilty and deserves punishment, which leads to conflict. Perpetrators see their behavior as meaningful and comprehensible. Okay, so how do we get out of the spread?
Brad (30:16):
So yeah, how do we get out the victim perpetrator negative cycle? That's a great question. There is a researcher named Judith Finney, and she has some research that talks about predictors of ongoing relationship problems where we are still in a relationship, whether it's a romantic relationship or a sibling relationship, or parent child relationship or friendship or work setting relationship where we are still in a relationship with a perpetrator if we're the victim and vice versa. And so what are the things that predict an ongoing relationship problem? And this has huge, huge carryover for us dealing with broken trust. But Judith Finney said the basic thing is that when a victim perceives that the offender is failing to show concern for them, that is what predicts ongoing relationship problems. And so if you want to have a relationship problem that continues to follow, you fail to show concern for the hurt partner.
(31:27):
So if you want to continue to struggle, just choose not to show concern today to your partner who's been hurt. Just choose not to show concern to your partner this week, and you will have a terrible week. But if you went out of this rut that you're in, show concern, show concern. So more specifically, here's the five things that Judith Finn, he said, number one, and again, this is all research from the victim's perspective. This is what victims say, why they get held up. The first thing is avoidance by the perpetrator. There is avoidance on the part of the person who hurt them. And what she means by that is the perpetrator is failing to show concern. They're not showing concern, like I just mentioned. They're not talking about the situation. There's a lack of discussion, a lack of warmth, defensiveness, minimization. They're avoiding it.
(32:23):
They're not discussing it, they're not talking about it. They're not addressing it. They're not acknowledging it. Two, the victim perceives a lack of remorse in the perpetrator. They don't really think the perpetrator is sorry. And this is real important what Judith Finney says. She says, there is a distinction between an apology and remorse. And she says, relationship repair happens when the victim believes the partner to be truly sorry, as opposed to just apologizing. We've all received apologies where people are saying it and they're not really meaning it, and we kind of just say, okay, whatever. I'll just forget about it. I'm not going to worry about it. But relationship repair happens when the victim believes the partner to be truly sorry, as opposed to apologizing. Apologies are sometimes seen as insincere or inadequate, not perceived as having sincere remorse and not taking responsibility to that a degree that is needed.
(33:26):
So the third thing that Judith th he says is a predictor of ongoing relationship problems is the victim believes the act was intentional. Like you did this on purpose. It was intentional and undeserved, like, I did not deserve this. This was way over the line, way over the top, and you did it on purpose. So that is going to predict ongoing relationship problems. If you're there, if you're stuck here, come to one of our workshops, let us help you. You're going to meet other people in your shoes who are going through the same thing, and you're going to be able to get help and really get through a lot of this in three days time that you wouldn't have been able to get through on your own.
Morgan (34:08):
Or even with therapy sometimes.
Brad (34:10):
Oh, yeah. Yeah. I would say most of the people who come to our workshop are there because they tried therapy and it failed them. So even if you're in therapy, please come. You can really accelerate your healing journey. There's so many mistakes that are made. Even if you're in this early, you just found out your trust had been broken, and you're like a month in, three months in come you don't week in. Yeah, a week in, come early because you're going to find a lot of help that will prevent a lot of future issues for you. So the fourth thing that Judith Finney said is a predictor of ongoing relationship problems where somebody has been a victim to perpetrator is destructive victim behavior where the victim can be aggressive or even ruminate, really struggle to just not think about it anymore, to let it go, really struggle to maybe forgive.
Morgan (35:03):
And that is what we were talking about earlier, where you let too many things happen before you address the concern where they've been flirting with people and you didn't like it, but you didn't say anything. Or you saw a concerning text and you didn't like it, but you didn't say anything. And then those build up, build up, build up, and then all of a sudden, bam, you're hit with the one thing. And that's kind of what I think they're saying by ruminating, sticking with it, but not saying anything.
Brad (35:35):
And then the fifth thing that Judith th he says, and this isn't a predictor, but it's something that you can do to not have ongoing relationship problems, is offenders can assist healing by engaging in sincere expressions of remorse and apology. So if you are the perpetrator, really engage in sincere expressions of remorse and apology. Be very sincere and engage in it. Express your, I'm sorry, you may have to say it every day early on, you may be seeing it more than once a day, but you need to be able to acknowledge that and say that. And if you can do that, you're going to have a much, much, much steadier path to healing without so many ups and downs if you can really own up that your end of the situation.
Morgan (36:24):
And that's a big thing that we cover in the workshop is how to not just make an apology, but how to really understand your partner
(36:32):
And
(36:32):
Where they're coming from and their position to really communicate that with them, and then to really feel remorse and to really turn and engage in that healing behavior that he's talking about here. And so that's also why the workshop is so very, very helpful. And then I know I've heard other people in our workshop talk about, well, what about if they haven't cut off the affair? Does this workshop help with cutting off that affair? And the answer is yes. We've had people cut off the affair during the workshop and make all of those important things happen with very helpful guidance from Brad and from the other leaders at the workshop. So if you're concerned that the fair hasn't ended, don't worry. We can help with that as well during the workshop. But definitely, if you're wanting to be able to express sincerely the apology, but go beyond the apology, that's where this workshop is also very, very important and useful. Anything else you'd like to say?
Brad (37:35):
The main thing I want to leave you with is get help. Don't do this on your own. Get help. You can save yourself a lot of mistakes. Most people end up getting hurt in the quote healing process more than they did just from the discovery of the infidelity, the affair or affairs. And so get help. Let us help you. You want to have a community around you that can help you with this. It is embarrassing. It is not something that people want others to know about, but you need to get help because you deserve it. Your marriage deserves it.
Morgan (38:08):
All of your future relationships with your kids and anyone else will deserve it. It just makes all of your relationships so much more healthy and you can trust people around you in ways that you couldn't before. So that's really important. People forget about those relationships. But anyways, any last words before we head out for the day? Okay, I'm getting the head shake. Nope, I'm good. So we're grateful for you and we're glad that you're here. We think about you all the time, and we hope that you have a great rest of your day. We'll see you next time.
Miles (38:42):
Bye-Bye. The workshop for me, I was reluctant at first to come to the workshop. I was thinking, this is three years later. I've read a lot of books. I've been through other workshops, and I thought, if I go to this, is it going to make a difference? How is it going to change where we've been, what we've gone through? And that hopeless despair feeling. I was just reluctant and I wasn't sure that anything really was going to help at this point, because after three years of working at this and working at this, we were caught in such a negative cycle that the workshop reluctantly as I came, I realized, oh my God, this is really exactly what we need. And everything that we covered reflected where I was at, and I could identify with it, and I could see exactly where I fit in that I understood my spouse better.
(39:40):
I understood why her reaction to me and why we were caught in that negative cycle continued. We were unable to address the trauma. And the workshop really works smoothly, efficiently, and works right through and gets right to the point that above and beyond just your marriage and all that's happened is this issue of trauma in your life. And the workshop covers that, and it really went very smoothly. I came out of it feeling a hundred percent better that I understood my wife, I understood myself better why I did what I did. I really was able to let go of shame and a lot of remorse over not only my behavior, my thoughts, everything I had done in the past, but how my entire life and childhood contributed to what my actions would be later in life. What do you think?
Jenna (40:40):
I think the workshop was fantastic. I feel that it taught me how to be compassionate towards him, which I think is a huge healing. It's a stumbling block if you don't have it. And I learned that through the workshop shop. You seem to hit the nail right on the head with every emotion that I was going through. And it was the first time that I felt understood. And the way you conveyed the information to my husband made me feel that he understood. And if anybody knows about these types of situations, having him get it is so important to heal you. So I think you did a fantastic job with that. Yeah,
Morgan (41:30):
Thank you. Some of you are in therapy or coaching, and you're finding that your therapist is nice, but the issue of betrayal or trauma isn't being addressed. You run out of time in your sessions, and a lot happens in between sessions, which can feel like progress is stunted. It takes way too long to get somewhere in therapy or coaching. And in fact, if the average couple needs around 15 to 30 sessions, that works out to about four to eight months. If nothing big happens in between sessions. And then there are the individual needs that will often require more time. And so that's why we host monthly workshops. You can join us in person here in Tulsa, Oklahoma, or online via Zoom from anywhere in the world, and you'll even have access to a prerecorded version as well as the masterclasses and small group meetings. This workshop provides you with actionable steps that you can take immediately to see huge changes in your relationship and in how you feel.
(42:32):
It's the jumpstart you need. We take what would be months of therapy or coaching. We pull out the most useful and important parts and deliver it to you in a two and a half day workshop. These workshops allow you to get what you need without the frustration of lost time and resources. They're private and no one has to share anything with the group to see results if you don't want to. Although we do find that many couples love that they can make new and supportive friends if they want to. So check it out at Healing Brook and trust.com. That's Healing Broken trust.com.
