I have been dating the same lady for 5 years and before proposing to her but one little thing still exists in the back of my mind.
A few years ago I had a colleague/friend who was a real womanizer and seemed to sleep with so many peoples wives. He had his own wife but openly cheated. He always managed to get everyone''s girlfriends/wives phone number and he was a total nightmare in terms of boundaries especially around women. I don't know much about narcissism/psychopathy etc but he was definitely the most difficult person I've ever encountered and he was definitely messed up, especially regarding women. This man has since died in a car accident (RIP).
Two years, I had to go to the far east for work. I was gone for 12 months. My gut tells me he slept with my girlfriend while I was gone. I have no proof. Just my gut instinct which Ive always trusted and used to make decisions in life. I have said nothing to my partner. How can I know if my gut feeling is right or wrong? If she did cheat I don't want to continue the relationship.
I don't know how old you are, so the length of your relationship and its meaning kind of depends on that.
If you were 19 when you started your five-year relationship, I can see why you'd wait.
If you were 25 or 30, as a woman, I'd be wondering, what the heck are you waiting for?
As an outsider looking at what you've written here, the thought that pops into my head is, if this happened *two years ago,* why didn't you pursue the question then? The timing of your doubt seems odd.
If she's NOT THE ONE, well, okay she's not, but let's not waste any more of her time, okay? Five years is kind of long to wait for a commitment. Keep your feelings about your colleague to yourself, tell her you're sorry, but it's time for you both to move on.
No one should marry someone he /she considers untrustworthy. You're basing your fear on your colleague's character. What about your girlfriend's character? And if you ask her, and she says nothing happened, will you believe her? You could have gotten engaged before you left to work overseas, yet you didn't. Did you have doubts then?
Sorry I have no answers, only questions.
"I don't know much about narcissism/psychopathy etc"
I do. And - YUP. OHHH, YUP, YUP, YUPPETY-YUP! A link has just recently been proven between all forms of malignant narcissm (NPD, NPD-AsPD: Sociopathy or Psychopathy) and cheating, both sexual and "emotional" (well, for the victim, maybe!), especially serially. Plus we also have a Pervasive Pattern of Disdain towards his (supposedly) best buds. Plus you said, "boundaries, ESPECIALLY with women", which mmeans, but also with men...us...his friends, towards whom he's supposed to be a friend...(the way he treats you all is NOT...WHATSOEVER...what anyone would consider FRIENDLY - think about it). And also there's the fact that this grown woman seems incapable of doing what a woman who knows she's being cheated-on multiply/regularly - or even just the once, given he shoves it in her face! - would be incapable of NOT doing - dumping the dud! IOW, he's managed to hobble her so that she can't go ANYWHERE, can't ESCAPE even if she wants to! (In the physical world (of murderers), that's called Lollypop-ing. Probably best you DON'T google it.)
I could go on, already, but...
You still there before I start prattling?
I guess I'm a little puzzled that his girlfriend's character isn't worthy of consideration? Even if his acquaintance was a skunk, doesn't mean his girlfriend was unfaithful, or even easily swayed by a skunk. She must have been aware of his activities, right? Sounds like it was no secret. Let's not write her off as an idiot, or just as bad, a naive woman-child with no mind of her own, zero sense of self, zero life experience, and no moral code.
Pretty damning, and an archaic way of thinking about any modern woman, especially one you've been with for five years, if you ask me.
And if you went overseas for a year without discussing what this separation meant - or didn't mean - that's kind of on YOU, OP. Beyonce's song about 'putting a ring on it' had been out about 10 years when you went away for twelve months.
Since the bad actor is dead, analysis would be interesting, but kind of an exercise in futility.
You love your woman-friend? Do you trust *HER*? If you don't, move on. If you don't trust her you've already wasted at least two years of her time.
Be with you asap tomorrow - bear with!
(Ignore that, it was a mis-post)
"I guess I'm a little puzzled that his girlfriend's character isn't worthy of consideration?"
"Even if his acquaintance was a skunk, doesn't mean his girlfriend was unfaithful, or even easily swayed by a skunk. She must have been aware of his activities, right? Sounds like it was no secret. Let's not write her off as an idiot, or just as bad, a naive woman-child with no mind of her own, zero sense of self, zero life experience, and no moral code.
Pretty damning, and an archaic way of thinking about any modern woman, especially one you've been with for five years, if you ask me."
No, because this isn't Normal World, this is La-La aka Opposites Land. Different rules...everything skewed 180 degrees...down is up, up is down...what goes up doesn't come down...the sky is Green...and the Non-Do-able aka Impossible gets dared to be done.
If I may?
1. The OP on a deep-down level DOES KNOW (albeit daren't Q...UITE yet say for-sure) what that bloke was, and that, as such, his adulterising was just the more 'trivial and playful' tip of what actually was a far scarier, potentially highly dangerous monster of an iceberg. I mean, think about the inhuman level of arrogance, sense (delusional or not) of power over others, and invincibility, that one would need in order to subtly (but deliberately not subtly enough) rub all the other men's noses in what he was constantly up to "in front of them all"? An inhuman level.
A normal person (say, having an Off Year) either wouldn't dare or would keep all knowledge of it away from said friend-victims. Spaths/Lower-Functioning Psychos can't resist bragging, even in acted-out/under-the-table format, to taunt their victims. Plus they're well-known for (technically!) placing themselves in danger while busy in the process of risking the other person's safety or welfare (e.g. what if - on seeing him go through the women like a box of ruddy Kleenex tissues - one of the men had snapped and injured/killed him?). So this guy EITHER wasn't worried about potentially one day having to take on possibly a whole mob single-handedly OR his over-arrogance was so sky-high (God delusion) that being at-risk didn't even CROSS HIS MIND! Neither would be good.
He wasn't normal, KNEW IT, and hence acted like he KNEW that wherever he goes, whomever he's with, he is guaranteed to be the hardest, scariest bstd "in the village" BY FAR and get to smash-grab-take, unimpeded, with unspoken impunity.
And yet all these in-turn conquests within the group, obviously weren't on impulsive whim, but rather, moves in a whole campaign (which is why with this one, I'd suspect Malignant Narcissistic Psychopath, rather than Sociopath).
Accordingly, any female target at the time would have been subjected to the Sociopathic/Psychopathic effect (hypnotism, aka "Spell") they put their victims (either gender) under. (And possibly add to that, having some blackmail-able hold over any of these individuals.) This and all other mental machinations and manipulations considered - as mentioned on Ria's thread (no Co-Creativity when there's partner inequality)- means that the (this case, sexual) target-victim of a Spath or Psycho, married/taken or not, is never compus-mentis enough to quality for adult, full-cylindered, thus bona fide, CONSENT.
The assertion now is that it's basically rape (using mind/body control). It's the mental version of Rohipnol in her drink (etcetera). And this is WHY victims like Ria have such a really, intensely hard time getting emotionally and psychologically over it. Because no matter how the victim themselves might prefer to paint it (usually by attempting to take however-much blame in order to convince themselves they'd NOT been stripped of all agency) they, for the first time in their life - to a degree that shouldn't be part of the healthy human life experience - were utterly, UTTERLY, by which I mean, in application, COMPLETELY....POWERLESS....to resist, to escape...any of it.
That is why an encounter with one ends up so disturbing and/or traumatic.
You'd be surprised how many women that have had an affair (and men, come to that!), didn't even bloody want one, certainly didn't go looking for one - and nor with 'him'.
2. As for the delay in confronting the issue, finally: If you're an intelligent person with a particularly strong survival instinct as well as the insight to ID a monster, you know it's just sensible to wait until said monster is dead (or at least permanently paralysed) before you (1) admit what they must have been and (2) dare start to investigate them, including tracing their steps. A dead body isn't going to come after you with a very big stick (or worse), is it.
Normally, subtly-publicly-humiliated blokes in that situation would at some point crack, band together and see the cuckolder off and out of the village, waving their pitchforks in the air. These guys didn't dare....basically just sat and took it...Not only for sensing a violent predator not to be messed with, but because the predator would by then have succeeded in priming them all (with paralysing honey or veiled "jokey" threats...a special, over-long, highly intimidating look...whatever...they find a way).
(Reckon the monster had abusive Father issues - inappropriate competitiveness off-the-charts.)
She might have just in a sad, weak moment, needed a cuddle - he offered, seemingly benignly....and before she new it - aaaand the rest (almost vertical, slippery slope). And then he could have threatened to tell the OP, to get her to repeat the incident...
So, with their type - "he slept with", i.e. Did To (my girlfriend), is usually right.
3. "Even if his acquaintance was a skunk, doesn't mean his girlfriend was unfaithful, or even easily swayed by a skunk. She must have been aware of his activities, right? Sounds like it was no secret. Let's not write her off as an idiot, or just as bad, a naive woman-child with no mind of her own, zero sense of self, zero life experience, and no moral code.
Pretty damning, and an archaic way of thinking about any modern woman, especially one you've been with for five years, if you ask me."
Again - normally, but in cases like this, only technically, yes.
Even if she'd known what he was like - as above, it still wouldn't have helped her any. In the example of needing a cuddle - the m.psycho could have acted in such a way that convinced her that he was "getting real", putting his normally lascivious act firmly to one side out of empathy, and so she was safe to accept. So no, not an idiot. Just drugged (and ego-manipulated against the other conquests)...just not herself.
"Since the bad actor is dead, analysis would be interesting, but kind of an exercise in futility."
Nay, not futile. Understanding what went on is vital for recovery to where one can move on from it.
"You love your woman-friend? Do you trust *HER*? If you don't, move on. If you don't trust her you've already wasted at least two years of her time."
Granted, it could be she's WEAKER than, say, you (or maybe just weakened at the time?). But that's down to what she got given...so it still isn't her control or fault if the charmingly-conning bully was twice her size. Trust me - if a Psycho wants to get you into bed and is boring his predator eyes into you - Honey or not, you do NOT reject his advances! You KNOW it's a demand in poor disguise. Most tend to 'think', at least if I give him what he wants, he'll then leave, which is preferable to what one can sense he might do to you (whether there-and-then or in the bided-time future) if you don't! So you can't criticise a weak/weakened woman whom to-boot is drugged-up at the time (and maybe didn't have brothers to rough-and-tumble with), for not lifting a certain weight (which exerting your moral fibre under pressure, is) which only a much stronger, taller, heavier woman could and would dare attempt.
3. He trusts what his gut suspects/knows because it's never failed him before. That'll do me!:-)
Saying all of that - you could be right. But we'd need more data, and unfortunately, as the OP has wandered off, it looks as if we won't ever know for-sure.
Here you go....knew I had something:
Psychopaths Use Trance and Hypnosis to Get and Keep Victims
By Adelyn Birch ((- she's been there!))
"When a psychopath targets a victim, he lures her in a highly hypnotic way (along with using many other tactics of covert emotional manipulation) to gain emotional control and then to keep it throughout the relationship. At the top of my list of red flags of a psychopath is what I describe as the “charm” of the psychopath:
He is incredibly charming. This charm causes his target to focus intensely on him as he focuses intensely on her. It is very pleasing to the mind and senses, and it disables your personal boundaries and your self-protective behavior (just when you need them most). It induces a trance — a pleasant, relaxed and focused state of mind where you are open to suggestion. You will find yourself wanting to be back in the focus of his potent charm again. A warm, engaging smile and intense eye contact are present…This superhuman charm is often one of the first and only red flags of a psychopath, and it is exactly what makes it hard to walk away. Read the post on “Charm” to learn the details of how this works.
The intense bond that forms between a victim and a psychopath at the beginning of pathological love relationship is due in part to the “hypno-powers” of the psychopath, according to Sandra L. Brown, M.A., author of “Women Who Love Psychopaths,” a book that examines the temperament traits of women who are victimized by psychopaths. In fact, she says hypnosis and trance are the “attraction heat, attachment magnet and bonding glue” of the relationship.
The technique of hypnosis — a focused and controlled trance — comes naturally to the psychopath, and he hypnotizes his victim repeatedly. When a victim hyper-focuses on the usually “entertaining and electrifying” psychopath, she is aroused, rewarded, and motivated to repeat it. The psychopath uses his natural intensity to easily gain and keep her rapt attention. Brown describes it as “a gentle lulling into a state of fascination where reality begins to fade out,” and says the luring and honeymoon phases are all about fascination.
During periods of hypnosis, the psychopath makes suggestions disguised as statements — “We have a very strong emotional bond” — and uses symbolic language — “I have you locked in my heart” — that are perceived in a different and more powerful way in the trance state. These messages become fixed in her psyche and remain there even after she figures out the truth and even after the relationship ends, because she learned them during states of euphoria, intense sexual connection, bonding and happiness.
Trance can be induced in many ways,
and the psychopath layers them for the strongest effect. A trance state can happen during intense playing, and psychopaths are known for being very playful and fun to be with. Trance can also occur during flow states and peak experiences, such as during sex or dance, when intense concentration produces feelings of interconnectedness. Obviously these activities and feelings are also included in normal relationships, but when in the presence of a psychopath, they become dangerous means to gain emotional control and create the strong bond necessary for the inevitable abuse that will happen when the honeymoon phase is over."
(Thinking about it, I should post that for Ria...she's probably still wringing her hands in misguided guilt.)
ARTELIUS, if you're still there and want to understand what could have been done to your wife "the minute the cat (you) was away", under this Trance effect, then check out what nearly happened to poster Ria:
"It’s no surprise that several experts on the psychopathic bond, including Sandra Brown M.A., show that psychopaths rely upon hypnotic techniques to seduce and ultimately control their victims: repetition; a mesmerizing tone of voice; inducing a total focus on them and the relationship with them; focused eye contact; the power of suggestion. In fact, there are even books on the market advising men how to seduce women via hypnotic techniques. All of this didn’t strike a chord with me until this Thanksgiving, however, when my family and I attended a hypnotist show.
According to the Wikipedia, hypnosis is defined as “a trance state characterized by extreme suggestibility, relaxation and heightened imagination.” Contrary to popular belief, unlike sleep, the hypnotic trance is not an unconscious state. Those under hypnosis are usually led into an extremely relaxed and at the same time highly focused state of mind, whereby they become very suggestible and prone to follow instructions. The use of hypnosis for therapeutic purposes is referred to as “hypnotherapy,” while its use as entertainment, as in the case of the show my family and I watched, is known as “stage hypnosis“. Both processes, as well as psychopathic seduction, work in a similar manner despite their radically different purposes.
The hypnotist leads the subject or audience to a state of increasingly focused attention and a corresponding reduction of inhibition and of peripheral awareness. This intense focus, in turn, increases the subject’s response to the hypnotist’s instructions or suggestions. During the stage hypnosis show I attended, some of the volunteers were quickly eliminated because they were too self-conscious, or at least not sufficiently susceptible to the hypnotist’s suggestions. Others, however, including grown men, began to follow the hypnotist’s various instructions, which entailed (among other things) laughing at jokes that weren’t funny; phonetically imitating Japanese rap (even though they didn’t speak a word of Japanese), and (the most ridiculous) clucking like a chicken while eating from the floor imaginary grains. All this seemed very far-fetched.
There was a rational part of me that was very skeptical about whether or not these individuals were in a hypnotic trance or just putting on a show, since after all they had volunteered and were now on stage. Probably at least some of them were just being good sports. However, thinking back to my own experience with the psychopathic bond, I saw some similarities that rendered the notion of the hypnotic trance quite plausible.
Just as psychopaths are natural social predators–with an instinct for who will be susceptible to their advances, how and why–they are also natural hypnotists. Psychopaths inculcate in their victims a nearly total focus on them and on the relationship with them by isolating them from others, discouraging them from other activities, and monitoring and monopolizing their time. They use mesmerizing techniques, such as staring into their target’s eyes, speaking softly and repetitively, and using the power of suggestion to get them to do what they wish.
Everyone involved with a psychopath or any other personality disordered individual is ultimately abdicating control over their lives. Being predatory and power-driven, psychopaths gradually gain more and more control over their targets. Hypnotic techniques, such as the ones described in greater depth in the article below, can be used for constructive purposes or for destructive purposes. In the case of psychopathic seduction, the objective is clearly destructive: the psychopath aims to control, manipulate and harm the victim, often also leading her (or him) to harm others in turn. Take a look at the article below, from the website http://www.hypnotic-induction.com/, to
see for yourselves which techniques were used by the disordered person you were (or are) involved with to gain control of you, your will and your life. Perhaps these very techniques can be used by you to regain control and even improve aspects of your life.
Claudia Moscovici, psychopathyawareness"
Well, if all that's the case, I guess the woman is SOL, right? It's not her fault, but she cheated and he doesn't want to marry a cheater.
Well, I guess the OP, like the majority of betrayees, will be wanting to solve whether there indeed was a "crime" committed, BEFORE asking her outright, in order to see whether she immediately confesses and (by her subsequent run of sustained actions), is sorry and wants to make it up to him, or lies to his face.