Well, I too experienced "situational" infidelity when military/deployed. I still don't think it is a category, only a variable. By making it a category it is as if it excuses it. Well, I was deployed so you can see why I might have been betrayed. Nope, not an excuse, not a category just a variable among many that you might use to rationalize an A and might help you R or possibly hurt your chances, depending.
But it is the nature of categories that some may appeal or be useful to one person and not to others. Still, I think simplicity is often best. Something like this:
One time event?
Longer term affair?
Then combine that with one of these:
Pure EA
Pure PA
EA/PA
Then add in a layer of reaction by WS at D day:
Confessed proactively
Admitted all when confronted
Denial and or gaslighting
Amount of trickle truth and subsequent d days
Time to a remorseful state
Time to taking of accountability for actions/not blaming BS
Amount of effort to heal themselves and their BS
Then variables matter hugely, such as:
Double betrayal?
Bashing of BS to AP or friends and family?
Denial of BS? (Sex or activities done with AP)
Hostility toward BS during A?
Comparisons of BS to AP?
Sexual acts offered AP and not BS?
Sex in home and/or bedroom?
Introducing AP to BS or children?
Saying I love you to AP?
Spending money on AP?
And the list goes on and on.
Edit: so it is kind of 1) affair length 2) EA, PA or both 3)D day reaction by WS and ensuing behavior. Those are the A elements that drive D or R potential, all dependent on the perspective of the BS. On top of those key elements then you add all the many variables that will potentially be a killer of R, a few listed above.
This is kind of the way I see categories plus killer variables. You add up key elements and the answer shows us how hard to R it may be EXCEPT that every BS is different, as stated by others. The last straw for me will be acceptable to someone else and vice versa.
What do you think?
[This message edited by Trdd at 11:44 PM, Friday, February 27th]