SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I know there are lots of posts here regarding the 180 method. But is there a short summary of it somewhere or more on a straight forward explanation?

What is the difference between soft 180 and hard 180?

I did read the simplified 180 but my apologies because my mind is so clouded right now and I couldnt think straight. Its like nothing is processing at the moment and it is overwhelming.

As I mentioned to my previous post, A season is coming up and I dont even know how to handle this (4 months post dday).

I did try to do the 180 from what I understood from the posts here before but I was not consistent (I know, its on me) plus I think because I don't fully understand the whole concept of it? Maybe?

Here's the thing for me as of now, I do care for him and I love him but the love I used to have for him is long gone. TBH, I dont even know what kind of love I have for him right now. I dont know if this is the pain or resentment talking.

Although, we are both trying our best to work things out for our relationship. I just think and feel his effort/s is/are not enough sad to say.

Ugh! Im so lost! 😔 I'm sorry....

KiboGaAru, 180 is a separation (physical and/or emotional) that has two purposes:

-Allow the BS to work on itself without interference.

-Show the WS the rejection of his actions.

The greater or lesser harshness depends on how BS feels, what type of A it is, the duration, the degree of sincerity, emotional openness, empathy, regret, etc... of the WS.

It is not linear or fixed, but if it must be genuine, it comes from within. It is the power that BS can recover, power over himself and over the M that was expropriated from him.

In my case, for example - EA/inappropriate relationship -, I applied it after Dday2, before the confrontation, I had to wait for my daughters to finish their exams from last school year.

I applied it again after checking that the doors were opened to break the NC, the AP contact on the phone had not been blocked.

I don't know if it was soft or hard.

I stopped talking and interacting with my wife, except for children's matters, household things, etc...

Sometimes the only thing you can do is break off relationships. You can't or don't want to leave or force WS to leave, you can't force WS to do A or B against his will but you can show that you don't agree with his behavior and that -"That's nothing, it's a game, etc...","He's just a friend" is not for you.

[This message edited by Littlepuppet at 3:30 PM, Friday, November 17th]

If you put your hand on a hot stove you learn a valuable lesson. To protect yourself you don’t do that again. Consider how you interact with your husband. Are you often walking on egg shells? Do you keep a knot in your stomach. Those are the signals to your brain to not get into conversations where this happens. We have a hard time learning about these "hot stoves". We keep putting our hopes on the idea that it is not hot enough to burn us. The 180 is you not participating in these conversations/interactions that harm you emotionally. To quote someone "insanity is doing something over and over again expecting a different result". That is why you opt out of conversations any time you begin to feel uncomfortable, and that includes anger, sadness, confusion, etc. The idea is that anything that looks or feels toxic you will not participate in.

The 180 is often viewed as a tactic that might make an unremorseful WS change their mind from D to R. It cuts communication and acts of service, assuming that the WS will feel isolated, realize what they're about to lose, and 'come to their senses.'

IIRC, it was documented and named by Michele Weiner-Davis in one of her early books. She reports that a client of hers started cutting her WS off from her support, and the WS 'came back' to her. MWD cautions that it should be used as a last resort and wasn't guaranteed to result in R.

IMO, the 180 is useful for BSes with unremorseful WSes who can't bring themselves to D. IOW, it's a tool for detaching from the WS when detaching is the healthiest thing the BS can do.

It's manipulation, and IMO, if you want a good R, R has to be entered with eyes (and all other senses) wide open. If a WS needs to be manipulated into R, I just don't want to be around when the WS realizes it. Sure, some WSes might say, 'You were right, and I'm glad you manipulated me into R.' Personally, I think I'd rebel; of course, I'm not a WS.

For R to work well, both partners need to increase their authenticity and decrease manipulation. R requires honesty above all.

Also, R requires lots of communication about wants and commitments to action. The 180 limits communication. The 180 is, IMO, antithetical to R.

At the same time, it's probably a good thing if the 180 causes the BS to question what they're willing to do in the relationship. Many of the tactics aim at building up the BS's sense of self-worth and self-reliance; the tactics help the BS, and that empowers the BS. realize they don't need their WS - but that's way different from cutting communications to the minimum.

By all means, Kibo, figure out what you're willing to do in your M. If you want your WS to cook their own meals and do their own laundry, let them know and stop doing those things. If you want your WS out of your bedroom, by all means tell them and do your best to keep them out. If you want something from your WS that they're not giving you, by all means ask for what you want.

Keep communicating your wants/don't wants to see how your WS will respond. Look at the ratio of yeses to noes. Too many noes means you can't R unless you stifle yourself, and that's not R.

[This message edited by SI Staff at 4:27 PM, Friday, November 17th]

The definition of 180 is to turn and head the other direction. It is a complete reversal how you have treated him. The 180 saved me, changed me forever, and ultimately pulled my WW out of the fog.

I cut all communication with her, didn’t tell her where I was going or what I was doing. I started exercising and taking care of myself and my appearance. I lost weight and hit my goal weight. My self esteem and confidence started coming back. I grew a beard. The self care proved to me and to her that I was the prize. I would not take anymore bullshit.

4 years later I still make my personal care and appearance a priority, I might look like hell in the morning, but I fix my hair and get dressed first thing. I will keep that part of 180 forever, I will only show my best self.

I did try to do the 180 from what I understood from the posts here before but I was not consistent (I know, its on me) plus I think because I don't fully understand the whole concept of it? Maybe?

The reason that the 180 didn't work for you isn't because you did it wrong; it's because the 180 itself is unsustainable. It's not feasible to pretend you're happy, disinterested, and emotionally disengaged from someone you still love, live with, and are deeply wounded by.

The 180 is little more more than playing hard-to-get with your spouse. You're pretending that you're cool, calm, and collected when you're really not. I'm sure the reason that the technique is often touted as successful is because many cheaters thrive on the thrill of the chase and hate the idea of losing their centrality, so they might start pursuing a BS who seems to be slipping away. But that dynamic isn't sustainable in the long term.

Generally speaking, my issue with Michele Weiner Davis, the author and relationship coach who devised the 180, is that all of her advice is based on the premise that a BS can (and should!) single-handedly be able to save their marriage and stop their spouse from cheating, with little to no effort on the part of the WS. While I'm sure her philosophy has made her fabulously wealthy through selling books and pricey seminars to desperate BSs, in practice, it's unfair and unrealistic.

In my opinion, although this is the opposite of Weiner Davis's intent, the 180 is a great strategy to help you emotionally detach, rebuild your confidence, and cultivate your independence in preparation for divorce. If you're going through the effort to enact all 30+ steps, do it for yourself and not for him.

Thank you so so much for all the input. I really appreciate it.
I have a better understanding now and it will help me to decide what to do going forward.

Sisson wrote:

"Also, R requires lots of communication about wants and commitments to action. The 180 limits communication. The 180 is, IMO, antithetical to R."

It's thrue but...

The 180 is also the opposite of the hysterical bond on the part of the scared BS, of the pick me dance.

Failed strategy after my Dday1.

BluerThanBlue wrote:

"I'm sure the reason that the technique is often touted as successful is because many cheaters thrive on the thrill of the chase and hate the idea of losing their centrality, so they might start pursuing a BS who seems to be slipping away. "

And 180 is the opposite of the hysterical/narcissistic bond of WS,or pretends to be.

[This message edited by Littlepuppet at 11:20 PM, Friday, November 17th]

I urge you to spend time by yourself going over all the ways you get sucked in. No matter how small you need to recognize patterns. The primary thing is that you take back your power. You will not put up with anything that feels degrading or harmful. Remember, you have already been harmed.
To me the 180 has nothing to do with anyone but yourself. You will NOT participate in anything except for your own benefit. Examples are doing his laundry, fixing him meals, picking up dry cleaning, putting gas in his car. In other words, if he benefits it you don’t do it. You don’t warn him because he did not warn you.
If he wants this marriage he has to do the work. You get to go about your own business, not his. He broke the marriage, he has to fix it.