The Aftermath
After five years of legal intimidation, litigation abuses and a situation of extreme emotional abuse and psychological harm. I want to revisit the betrayal, the emotional impact and look at a hypothetical scenario of Flipping the Script on Infidelity and the Aftermath.
Just three days after his return from the UK and joining me in Spain, he did what I now refer to as his four-sentence discard speech. The words which reverberated in my mind for months. Before I realised that it was not a normal relationship break-up.
QUOTE
I’ve got something to tell you
I’m in love with another woman
We can remain friends if you want to remain friends.
We just can’t have sex anymore.
Discard Speech
This is not how to end a relationship in a respectable way at all. Let’s flip the switch. What if a woman were to come out with a discard speech?
For example.
I’ve got something to tell you.
I want to be with another man
We have been in a sexual relationship for the past nine years.
We can still be friends if you want to remain friends.
We just can’t have sex anymore.
I wonder what reaction a man would have if his wife or long-term partner said these words at the end of a night where they have been entertaining friends and showing affection, like sitting on his knee and kissing him and talking about future retirement plans.
Would he be calm, cool and collected?
Would he be angry and confrontational?
Would he be enraged at his wife’s lack of empathy, infidelity, cheating and lying for nine years?
Here are two scenarios to think about.
Scenario 1: The Disbelief and Collapsing Foundation.
This reaction focuses on shock, disbelief, and a profound sense of humiliation and betrayal that immediately overrides any chance of a “calm” response.
Initial shock, Stunned Silence and Repetition.
He stares at her, a blank expression on his face. “Nine years?” he asks, his voice barely a whisper, as if the words are nonsense. He might laugh—a short, involuntary, humourless sound—because the idea is so absurd it must be a joke.
Sinking In (Rage) The Realisation of Betrayal.
The rage is not immediately confrontational but internal and visceral. He feels physically sick. He stands up suddenly, knocking his chair back. He doesn’t yell at her but yells at the air, a raw, desperate cry of “Nine years! Nine years you’ve been lying to me! What about the friends tonight? What about what we just planned? That was all a lie?”
Focus on Self, Humiliation and Loss,
He stops looking at her and starts pacing, hands running through his hair. His immediate thought is not about the relationship, but about his own image and his wasted life. “Everyone knew, didn’t they? The way you were sitting on my knee tonight—was that for him? To make sure I bought the lie one last time? You’ve made me a fool for a decade.”
Ending State, Cold, Controlled Dismissal.
He turns back, his face white, the emotion gone, replaced by a chilling, absolute distance. “Get out. Get your things and get out. Don’t talk to me about remaining friends. You don’t know the meaning of the word.” He walks into another room and locks the door, leaving her to process the finality alone
Scenario 2: The Evasive and Logistical Calm
This reaction focuses on avoidance, emotional shutdown, and an immediate pivot to practicalities as a defence mechanism against the overwhelming emotional pain.
Initial Shock, Calculated Calm
He remains seated, rigid. He doesn’t raise his voice or even change his expression much. His eyes are wide, intensely focused on her, but unseeing. He needs to appear calm, cool, and collected to avoid breaking down.
Sinking In (Avoidance) The Logistical Questions.
He completely ignores the “want to be with another man” and “nine-year affair” parts. He immediately pivots to logistics. “Okay. So what does this mean for the house? Are you filing for divorce? Where are you going to live? What about the joint account?” He speaks in short, clipped, managerial sentences.
Focus on Her, Cutting Judgement.
As the shock begins to wear off, a razor-sharp, quiet anger emerges, aimed solely at her character. He doesn’t argue the point of the affair but judges the timing. “You had to wait until an hour after our friends left? After we were talking about next summer’s trip? That takes a special kind of cruelty. You’re a coward for not saying anything before now.”
Ending State, Emotional Shutdown.
He gets up, not angrily, but with a weary finality. He pulls out his phone and starts sending an email to a lawyer, pointedly ignoring her presence entirely. The reaction is not rage, but an immediate, total psychological and emotional divorce. He has instantly rendered her irrelevant, using his calm, managerial approach to convey his ultimate anger and devastation.
The Psychologist’s View of the Woman’s Disclosure
A psychologist would view this method of terminating a relationship (a sudden, shocking “discard speech” that includes the revelation of a nine-year secret affair) as highly problematic, often indicating a deep-seated issue in the discloser’s coping and communication skills, regardless of gender.
Key Psychological Concepts
The Shock Value and Cruelty: The method—waiting until after a night of public affection and planning—maximises the shock and cruelty. The psychologist would note the woman’s apparent lack of empathy (or profound emotional disconnection) by choosing a time and method that ensures maximum emotional devastation. It shows no respect for the partner or the shared history.
The Role of the Nine-Year Revelation: Revealing the affair’s nine-year duration is not a communication choice; it’s a psychological weapon.
It Erases the Past: The revelation doesn’t just end the relationship; it retroactively poisons every memory of the last decade, turning them into a lie. This makes the partner question his reality, stability, and judgment, often leading to a traumatic response.
It is Self-Serving: The psychologist would consider why she revealed the duration. It is often a way to absolve guilt by creating a clean break or to emphasise the finality of the decision, leaving no room for discussion. The woman chooses an explosive, painful path to ensure the man can’t fight for the relationship.
Passive-Aggressive Avoidance: Choosing the format of a rehearsed “speech” that prohibits discussion or questions (similar to the initial example) is an act of passive-aggressive avoidance. The woman avoids the difficult, complex, and mature conversations that should accompany the end of a long-term relationship. She seeks to control the narrative and the emotional fallout by dropping a bombshell and running, rather than engaging in a respectful dialogue.
The “Discard” Frame: Using a speech like this aligns with the concept of a “discard” often seen in high-conflict breakups. The woman is treating the partner as an object to be dispensed with, rather than a person with whom she shared a life. This transactional, unemotional ending suggests a profound inability to manage conflict or intimacy in a healthy way.
In summary, a psychologist would see the woman’s choice of words and timing as highly dysfunctional, emotionally manipulative, and potentially traumatic for the recipient, prioritising her need for a clean, non-negotiable exit over the emotional well-being and respect of her long-term partner.
*****
I would imagine that there could be more tragic consequences in a scenario like this. For example, not just a verbal altercation but a physical assault. Obviousley, men are stronger than women, but I know that in the past, domestic abuse and homicides have been labelled “crimes of passion”. I would think it would take a massive amount of emotional maturity and constraint to walk away calmly after hearing the person you love has cheated for nine years. If the man’s reaction is immediate anger and a physical attack because of the way the woman spoke to him, she has put herself in direct danger that could result in homicide.
Possibility of Escalation to Violence
Think about it. A sudden, absolute betrayal following a public display of affection and future planning is a recipe for a massive, instantaneous emotional breach that can lead to violence, independent of the man’s typical demeanour.
The Emotional Trigger
The disclosure is not simply about infidelity; it’s the revelation that the man’s reality for nine years has been a calculated, intimate lie. This triggers a profound sense of betrayal, humiliation, and loss of control. In psychology, extreme humiliation is a known catalyst for violence.
The “Discard” as Provocation
The clinical, rehearsed nature of the speech is perceived as an act of cold, ultimate disrespect. It suggests the man is not being treated as a partner, but as an obstacle to be removed. This can fuel a rage driven by the feeling of being used and discarded.
The Immediate Danger: When this level of intense rage and cognitive dissonance is combined with the shock of the moment, the man may experience a state of emotional overwhelm where rational constraint is entirely lost. The result can be a flash of violence targeting the source of the pain: the person who delivered the news.
The historical label of “crimes of passion”
Legal and Psychological Context.
Historically, the term “crime of passion” was sometimes used to mitigate sentencing for crimes like homicide by suggesting the perpetrator acted out of intense, uncontrollable emotion, often related to jealousy or betrayal, implying a lack of premeditation.
Modern legal systems, particularly in the West, do not typically recognise “crimes of passion” as a valid legal defence for murder or assault. The focus is on criminal intent. While sudden passion or provocation might be argued to reduce a charge from First-Degree Murder (premeditated) to Manslaughter (a killing committed without malice aforethought, often in the heat of the moment), it never justifies the violence.
The Distinction
The man’s actions would be classified as domestic violence or homicide, with the betrayal serving as the severe provocation, not a legal excuse.
Psychological Concept of Homicide by Provocation
Psychologists and forensic experts would analyse the incident through the lens of extreme emotional disturbance or loss of control.
Triggering Event
The woman’s speech acts as the final, devastating trigger in a relationship built on a lie. The intensity of the emotional reaction—enraged at his wife’s lack of empathy, infidelity, cheating, and lying—is immediate and overwhelming.
The Man’s Cognitive State
In that moment, the man’s prefrontal cortex (responsible for impulse control and rational thought) can be temporarily overridden by the amygdala (the brain’s emotional centre), leading to a state sometimes described as “tunnel vision” or an intense “fight” response.
Foreseeable Danger
A psychologist would argue that the woman’s deliberate choice to deliver this news in such a shocking, final, and humiliating manner—including the nine-year duration—was an act of psychological violence that made a violent reaction foreseeable, even if it was not justifiable. She consciously escalated the risk of harm by maximising the man’s emotional pain and removing any avenue for dialogue or de-escalation.
This level of shock and betrayal, delivered in such a callous manner, represents a severe threat to the woman’s safety, as it creates an environment where violence is a distinct and terrifying possibility.
Non-Confrontational Personality.
In my situation, I did not react in anger. I eventually, some years later, came to the realisation that I have a non-confrontational personality, I’m easy-going, shrug off criticism, and have a tendency to want to avoid conflict. I didn’t say anything at all at that point. I got up out of the chair, picked up my mobile phone and walked into the kitchen. I left him sitting on the porch. My intuition had warned me not to react with highly charged emotion; I had been in this scenario before.
December 2017, when he did his confession of having an affair with a woman he referred to as a Wednesday Girl. On that occasion, my reaction was still not anger; it was disbelief and shock. My immediate reaction was to get up from the sofa where he had asked me to sit next to him. I walked a few steps to the middle of the room and let out a loud and long scream until I had no breath left. A classic, authentic manifestation of profound shock and trauma, where the body takes over when words and rational thought fail. The scream, in that context, was a full-body expression of the betrayal, the pain, and the shattering of my reality.
The delivery of his news created inconsolable, overwhelming grief. That sudden disclosure was an event that caused severe emotional shock and trauma. I was not hysterical or wailing or crying with tears, just stunned and disappointed. I had no idea at that time that this would have lasting psychological effects or that he would repeat it two years after ending what I thought was an affair.
This time, though, it was final; it was an abrupt termination of our eleven years in a relationship. When I reached the kitchen, I threw my mobile phone down onto the glass table. It bounced and hit the floor. I stooped down and picked the phone from the floor while a thought went through my mind, No, don’t break that, you need it. I walked back through the lounge into the main bedroom, where I couldn’t hold the anger in any longer. I released the anger and the pain, not by screaming, but by hitting my fist into the door frame of the en-suite and saying three times, “You bastard, you fucking bastard”.
Years later, in a therapy session, I recounted this situation. My thoughts were that my intuition saved me from a possible escalation to physical violence, as I knew he had a short fuse, as I had seen his rages before. Releasing the anger in another room and not in front of him meant I was able to continue the dialogue that evening. A conversation that went on into the early hours of the next day. I think it was nearly 4 am before I went to the bedroom. Oddly, he wanted to sleep in the same room that night, because before he left for the UK in July, he had been sleeping in another room with the excuse that he was not feeling well.
How can my reaction be explained?
Emotional Intelligence and Self-Regulation.
De-Escalation
By remaining calm and silent, I denied him the emotional payoff (my tears, rage, begging) that often fuels the aggressor in a discard scenario. This means I effectively prevented the situation from escalating into an immediate, physical conflict. This was a rational, albeit agonising, choice to prioritise my safety over emotional expression.
Intuition as a Warning System
This was my inner voice, which served as a critical survival mechanism. Recognising his “short fuse” and prior “rages,” I had correctly identified him as a high-risk partner for confrontation.
The Power of the Exit
Walking away (“I got up out of the chair, picked up my mobile phone and walked into the kitchen”) was an act of non-engagement. It regained control over the physical space and the narrative, signalling that the conversation was suspended, not merely ended on his terms.
Delayed Emotional Release (Anger Management)
Your physical and verbal release in the separate room highlights the healthy, necessary processing of the trauma, done safely.
The Displacement of Anger
The act of throwing the phone and then hitting the door frame is a classic example of displacement—transferring intense emotion away from the dangerous target (him) onto a safe, inanimate object (the door frame). The immediate thought, “No, don’t break that, you need it,” shows an underlying level of rationality still tethered to the survival instinct.
Validation of Anger and Betrayal
The verbal release (“You bastard, you fucking bastard”) was essential. It gave voice to the legitimate anger and betrayal you felt without exposing you to his violence. The fact that this release allowed you to re-enter the main room and continue a dialogue proves your strategy was successful. You processed the immediate, explosive emotion in private so you could approach the subsequent conversation with a measure of composure and strategic intent.
The Unexpected Dialogue and His Request
The fact that you were able to continue a dialogue until 4 a.m. and his desire to sleep in the same room are highly significant behaviours from him.
His Need for Control
He likely wanted to sleep in the same room to maintain a sense of control and normalcy, or possibly to alleviate his own immediate guilt or anxiety after delivering the speech. For a narcissistic or high-conflict personality, having the partner nearby—even after a discard—can be a way to ensure they still have a hold or can monitor the partner’s reaction.
The Incongruity
His request is highly incongruous with the nature of the discard, especially given his prior separation. Your non-emotional reaction may have confused him, making him attempt to re-establish proximity in a way that minimises the severity of his actions. Your ability to engage in a calm dialogue facilitated this bizarre period of transition.
Ego Injury, Narcissistic Rage.
It was not my fault that I caused an ego injury with my freedom of thought and expression of those thoughts. After his discard, he paid for Breakthrough Transformation Coaching, delivered by the same NLP Hypnotherapist Master Coach that he had visited the weekend before his return to Spain. I spent two full days meeting the coach over Zoom. I discussed my ideas based on starting a new business; despite how he had ended the relationship, he offered a settlement based on fifty per cent of the value of the property.
My idea was the creation of a B&B retreat-style business with women, with the focus on mindfulness, meditation, yoga, and art. I thought that I would be able to raise the funds to buy him out of the property by doing a crowdfunding campaign. I had even spoken to various property professionals for advice, and had obtained figures on the costs of a tourist licence application and the redemption figure of a property I had in the UK as my future pension asset. I put my thoughts into action by writing a GoFundMe appeal. I had not made it public, but I had shared it with a few friends and neighbours. One friend shared the page on her Facebook profile.
The Angry Monster
The angry monster was raging again, the same monster that I saw before on numerous occasions, but this time, he was the ex-partner.
Oh my god. I had no idea that she had shared the page publicly. Of course, he saw the page I had created and all of a sudden, I am receiving angry ranting text messages from him. Later, in a meeting to discuss the financial settlement (a meeting I had requested to be recorded, due to my knowledge of his uncontrollable anger), he would tell me that I was disrespectful, lacked empathy, was auctioning his house without his permission, and that I was calling him a cunt all over the bloody internet. Of course, I had done none of that. What I did was provide the raw truth.
Your Response
What reaction or response would you have in a situation of an abrupt termination of your relationship?
Which scenario do you resonate with? Have you got a similar story of a discard or a strange ending of a marriage or long-term relationship?
*****
If you enjoy my work here and want to see more, buy me a ☕ coffee on Ko-fi—every bit helps me keep writing!
Help lay the foundation for healing. Please donate $25 today to cover our essential startup costs so 100% of my book royalties can go directly into supporting women’s transformation.
Your gift doesn’t just fund a non-profit; it fuels a woman’s new beginning. Please stand with us in turning trauma into triumph. Sponsor a moment of transformation—visit DonorBox and Support LifechangePlans to donate now
Can’t donate right now? Your voice is just as powerful. Share this post with two friends who believe in the power of women’s resilience! Let’s get the word out that a sustainable path to healing is being built. Follow, Share, and Tag!”
Download a free Guide. Rights of Women.
