OP, thanks for coming back, but we still have questions!

Is it the DW who values the relationship with OW, or is the DW trying to accommodate the DH's sorrow at losing OW?

Was the emotional affair like the PP above, with sexting etc.?

In any event, unless your definition of emotional affair is extremely mild or possibly one-sided, it's just not a good idea. And honestly, unless one of them was locked in prison, chances are good it was actually some kind of PA anyway. Want to know how I know? Because my husband confessed to an EA, and I'm no dummy, but the OW lives 7,000 miles away so I thought that would be an impediment. Nope! Where there's a will, there's a way.

In the two weeks when I didn't know about the PA, he tried to maintain the friendship. He "couldn't figure out" how to unfriend someone on FB. He whined to me that it was hard to lose someone he'd grown close to. I said, oh, you need emotional support? Let me loop in your (male) best friend because you will NOT be unloading this on me. And guess what, his best friend was not impressed and suddenly he didn't need to vent about it to anyone. He expected me to listen and accommodate because he was still both minimizing and justifying the affair.

When lines are crossed, there's collateral damage. If OW didn't want to lose her friendship with either party, or the cheating spouse didn't want to lose their friendship with OW, then the answer was not to cross the lines. They can't be uncrossed. You can't unring a bell. And it sucks, because if the OW was a friend of the DW, then that's just one more crappy thing the DW needs to swallow. But you can't rewind time.

Somehow I doubt this is the case, but if you are the DW and you are wishing you could still have a relationship with OW, then that relationship should be separate from your marriage. The DH and the OW cannot be friends anymore. But if the DW/OW relationship has unusually deep ties, maybe familial, then sure, you can find some way to maintain contact. Just without your spouse.

You are seriously referring to the OW as a “valued third party”? I’m assuming you had the EA and are trying to justify maintaining contact. GMAFB.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks for the comments - all appreciated.
To answer key questions:
It was DH, not DW, who had the emotional affair. The "third party" was the "other woman" - the woman the DH had the emotional affair with. I'm not sure what acronym people here use for that person.

You’re the husband here, then?

More likely the DW trying to accommodate DH’s wish to stay in contact with OW.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks for the comments - all appreciated.
To answer key questions:
It was DH, not DW, who had the emotional affair. The "third party" was the "other woman" - the woman the DH had the emotional affair with. I'm not sure what acronym people here use for that person.

You’re the husband here, then?

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone suggest or has anyone had experience with putting a reasonable limit on communications between spouse and his/her former “emotional affair” partner?
Is it a case of the only good limit is NO communications?
Or is there a way to transition the relationship from “emotional affair” back to a friendship that would work?
If it is possible, there is some strong desire here not to totally lose contact with 3rd party who is a good person and valued friend.

Is the concern that your spouse could potentially leave you for this "emotional" AP? If you both know this person well then you have a good understanding of what kind of person you are dealing with. Can you see this person as a good, caring friend to your spouse? If so, how would their relationship have to change? Can he get coffee with her and text jokes, or would he always have to invite/cc you?

When I had an emotional affair, it was definitely not about friendship. We talked about our jobs and kids, sure, and he was sharp witted with a great sense of humor.

But we talked about sex a lot. How little of it we were getting, how desperate we felt in our marriages. Then we started talking about all the sexual things we missed, and then about all the sexual things we would do to each other if only we could, and how much we wanted to do those things to each other. Then of course we started sending each other pictures, first innocent, then rapidly not so innocent.

It was hot and I blocked him and it’s over now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emotional affair sounds made up and is amorphous and abstract enough to be totally different in the eye of the beholder. Unless there is planning to break up the existing marriage, sexting, or plans to meet up for sex, no rubicons have been crossed. If you react like it was a real affair, you risk pushing the partner into a real affair.

Not OP, but: Clearly you have never had any experience of an emotional affair even as an observer, much less a participant. They're real things and can be almost as damaging as sexual affairs. You're right about one thing, though: After an EA is uncovered or admitted, the cheater and their spouse has to proceed with caution to avoid pushing the two cheaters back together again.

You seem focused solely on sex as a "real affair." But emotional affairs violate the intimacy of the marriage, and intimacy is not merely about sex. Intense intimacy without sex can be as big a betrayal, or bigger, than a sexual betrayal, for some people. You might want to learn more so you aren't so dismissive:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/nov/01/emotional-infidelity-the-devastating-destructive-love-affairs-that-involve-no-sex-at-all
There is no paywall so anyone should be able to access this article.

Thanks for posting. The article convinced me that emotional affairs are BS. An emotional affair between two straight women! It sounds like there are two offenders in every emotional affair: the oversharer and the jealous partner.

The world is going to hell based on the view that there are multiple conflicting truths/facts and multiple realities that exist at the same time. There is no objective truth, facts are based on feelings and beliefs. So if a spouse thinks there’s an emotional affair, it must be true!

Believe whatever works for you, then. Therapists and couples counselors will say that yes, there is such a thing as an emotional affair. Your approval or disapproval of the concept is meaningless to those who have experienced this--and meaningless to the professionals who deal with couples going through it. But you're living in the real world, with zero "conflicting truths," so enjoy your self-righteousness all you like!

Perhaps if everyone stopped labeling this as something that is equivalent or *worse* than an actual affair, people embroiled in a situation wouldn’t feel so much pressure to “heal”. At the core, which is backed by the guardian article, is that a person confides in someone other than their partner. Perpetuating this as inappropriate only creates more problems. Calling it an “affair” radically mischaracterizes it and is extremely alarmist. It also artificially induces jealousy by cooking up controversy that may not otherwise exist.

People are either committed and trusting in their relationship or they aren’t. And trust is a two way street. Marriage is about monogamous romantic and sexual relationship - not forbidding close friendships. What a toxic idea.

+10000

+20000

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emotional affair sounds made up and is amorphous and abstract enough to be totally different in the eye of the beholder. Unless there is planning to break up the existing marriage, sexting, or plans to meet up for sex, no rubicons have been crossed. If you react like it was a real affair, you risk pushing the partner into a real affair.

Not OP, but: Clearly you have never had any experience of an emotional affair even as an observer, much less a participant. They're real things and can be almost as damaging as sexual affairs. You're right about one thing, though: After an EA is uncovered or admitted, the cheater and their spouse has to proceed with caution to avoid pushing the two cheaters back together again.

You seem focused solely on sex as a "real affair." But emotional affairs violate the intimacy of the marriage, and intimacy is not merely about sex. Intense intimacy without sex can be as big a betrayal, or bigger, than a sexual betrayal, for some people. You might want to learn more so you aren't so dismissive:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/nov/01/emotional-infidelity-the-devastating-destructive-love-affairs-that-involve-no-sex-at-all
There is no paywall so anyone should be able to access this article.

Thanks for posting. The article convinced me that emotional affairs are BS. An emotional affair between two straight women! It sounds like there are two offenders in every emotional affair: the oversharer and the jealous partner.

The world is going to hell based on the view that there are multiple conflicting truths/facts and multiple realities that exist at the same time. There is no objective truth, facts are based on feelings and beliefs. So if a spouse thinks there’s an emotional affair, it must be true!

Believe whatever works for you, then. Therapists and couples counselors will say that yes, there is such a thing as an emotional affair. Your approval or disapproval of the concept is meaningless to those who have experienced this--and meaningless to the professionals who deal with couples going through it. But you're living in the real world, with zero "conflicting truths," so enjoy your self-righteousness all you like!

Perhaps if everyone stopped labeling this as something that is equivalent or *worse* than an actual affair, people embroiled in a situation wouldn’t feel so much pressure to “heal”. At the core, which is backed by the guardian article, is that a person confides in someone other than their partner. Perpetuating this as inappropriate only creates more problems. Calling it an “affair” radically mischaracterizes it and is extremely alarmist. It also artificially induces jealousy by cooking up controversy that may not otherwise exist.

People are either committed and trusting in their relationship or they aren’t. And trust is a two way street. Marriage is about monogamous romantic and sexual relationship - not forbidding close friendships. What a toxic idea.

+10000

Anonymous wrote:Emotional affair sounds made up and is amorphous and abstract enough to be totally different in the eye of the beholder. Unless there is planning to break up the existing marriage, sexting, or plans to meet up for sex, no rubicons have been crossed. If you react like it was a real affair, you risk pushing the partner into a real affair.

I’ve never understood it either.

Anonymous wrote:Once a cheater always a cheater.

Oh stop it.

OP here. Thanks for the comments - all appreciated.
To answer key questions:
It was DH, not DW, who had the emotional affair. The "third party" was the "other woman" - the woman the DH had the emotional affair with. I'm not sure what acronym people here use for that person.

Anonymous wrote:I don't get the language on what the betrayed spouse should "allow". It's the cheater who should making the decision of how to behave, and the betrayed spouse should decide whether to divorce or separate from a cheater who won't stop cheating.

You don't control your spouse. You accept their decisions or you leave.

Yeah, the "allow" language makes me wonder if the cheater is telling the betrayed spouse, "I'll limit contact to whatever makes you comfortable, so tell me what you'll allow." When the cheater should be sitting next to the spouse as cheater blocks and deletes on every single form of contact and vows no contact.

But the whole "third party" with whom someone, I guess the OP??, wants to maintain contact, that's the weird thing in OP's post. Wish OP would return and explain that because the post is pretty confusing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a woman and I see nothing wrong with a so called emotional plantonic deep friendship

Why does a partner have to be the only one providing emotional support?

As long as spouse knows, its not crossing any boundaries or into anything physical, I don't see a problem OP.

DP. All of you here equating emotional affairs with deep friendships have never experienced an EA or witnessed one in action. If you had, you'd understand and wouldn't assume that EAs are merely hyperbolic terms for wonderful friendships. An emotional affair means the people involved, both of them, are more emotionally intimate and involved with each other than with their significant others/spouses. It means the two participants crave each others' presence, advice, support in ways that spouses should. It is romantic--and I doubt any of you insisting "this is just emotional deep platonic friendship" would also agree that romantic feelings fit that category, would you? It is romantic without sex taking place, but that does not mean the two people are simply superclosefriends. And as for "not crossing any boundaries," it's crossing a boundary to be involved with someone as intimately as a spouse, in every way except sex. But you've never seen this so you can't ever get it. Those on here who DO understand what an EA is know better than to classify it simply as "deep friendship," or to claim that the betrayed spouse is merely trying to control a friendship.

Anonymous wrote:No, there is no healthy limit. It’s zero contact. Otherwise it’s an excuse to continue the affair.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, there is no healthy limit. It’s zero contact. Otherwise it’s an excuse to continue the affair.

This is the only answer. But you knew that already, OP.

Yup 👍🏽