An old pro at adultery, he doesn't rush, but saunters back in with a pretend concern of "What is it, honey?"
She retorts in righteous anger, "Don't 'honey' me, I saw the email from Juanita at work! Working late, huh? Why is she thanking you for yesterday evening? You were 'wonderful', huh?!"
Now the old pro has a couple of options. He could do the "blame the victim" thing, and speak of her not being up for as much marital relations as they had 20 years ago. Or that her figure never re-bounded after the third child. But that's pretty darn risky, for obvious reasons.
He may drag that in later, as a supplement, but really, better if she can be made to think of those on her own, without him laying himself open to a charge of rudeness and ingratitude by saying them himself.
And as an old pro, he knows that "blaming the victim" not only depends on the person actually feeling guilty for something they did in the past, but it would also be a tacit confession that he did do it, just with reasons. And why would he admit that right out of the gate, when he may yet win?
Is there a way he can not have to make the admission? And not have to rely on her feeling guilt for something that is normal and natural?
Sure!
It's called the Flip Around!
That's where you shift the conversation immediately from your action, to their reaction. Done right, their reaction becomes the "action" under discussion, and your own tawdry action is left behind, perhaps even, if done right, never to be addressed again!
Watch!
Wifey: "...you were 'wonderful', huh?!"
Old Pro: "I'm at an utter loss here, as to how you could do this to me." *shakes head sadly*
Wifey: "What?! What are you talking about!?"
Old Pro: "How many years have we been married? But this is the level of trust we have - or don't have - that my emails, my personal emails are fair game to you?"
Wifey: "You're the one who left it open, so why don't you tell me about this 'wonderful' time you had with her?"
Old Pro: *pretending to squeeze back a tear with his finger* "I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time hearing that your snooping is my fault. It's like you're blaming the victim for your actions, like it's my fault you read my personal emails! This makes me question things between us now. It makes me question things a lot."
Wifey: "What? How does that even matter!? How long have you been seeing her?"
Old Pro: *pauses to build anticipation at a supposedly honest answer* "Listen. We've been married a long time, and I love you very much, so I'm not just going to rush to judgment on what you've just done here or what it's cost our relationship. Even though I notice you seem fast enough to jump to conclusions with me. I'm going to grab some alone time, maybe watch the game, try and cool off, as this bothers me more than I think you know. There'll be time enough to talk everything out later, including your silly suspicions."
Okay, let's review that.
First, he didn't make the mistake of denying out right and at once, because after all, he doesn't know how many of those emails she saw, or if she found the pics. As it happens, she only found the one left open, and that was not too explicit, so he knows now that she knows very little for sure.
Second, in his initial non-denial, he did immediately go on the attack. Remember in Proverbs, "the guilty flee when no man pursue, but the righteous are as bold as lions". Thus the lesson - the dark and horrible lesson - that the Flip Around scammer learns is, "Do not flee from the accusation, or you'll look guilty, rather boldly attack as a lion so you'll look righteous!"
Thirdly, the wifey falls into the trap by doing a bit of understandable "victim blaming". Technically speaking, she was not to look in his email, but instead of giving a perfect response, her emotional state caused her react to his accusation defensively, thus making her look guilty - and feel guilty. If his own accusation planted a bit of guilty feeling in her, her very act of defending against that spurious allegation re-enforced in herself a guilty feeling she never really should have.
Fourthly, since the Old Pro tricked her into a poor defense, and one that made herself feel "defensive", he then ably followed it up with a pretense of a sad emotional state, which she notes and will wonder of later, and also named her sad - and actually justified attempt at - victim blaming, so to further re-enforce a sense in her that maybe she really is as guilty as she is increasingly starting to feel.
Fifthly, her "What? How does that even matter?" is weak, as on some level, she is actually asking him to explain that to her as if she needs real correction and instruction on this matter from him. Only after that, does she - secondarily - ask the real question of how long he's been seeing her. Which sadly confesses that she knows not.
Sixthly, the long pause as if in emotional shock over another's wrong doing not only helps emphasize how wrong the wifey was, but it gives the flip arounder time to come up with a great non-answer. That non-answer is nothing more than a threat. He is literally - if only subtly - implying that the marriage itself may be over, or at least gravely damaged, by HER actions in violating his privacy.
He still also persists in not denying or defending, making her start to doubt there is anything for him to deny or defend. He's also offering her an "out". That possibly, after he cools off, there may be hope in a future conversation in which she could convince him that she meant no harm in looking at that email.
See? Now she's almost eager to brush off the suspected affair, just if it will get him off her back about her violating his privacy. Why? Because she values the peace and stability of the marriage and her place in it, above all. It's her love and reliance upon that stable and comfortable relationship that is the very thing that makes the flip around work so well.
What she had read made her feel that the marriage was in doubt, due to HIS actions. But he has done the "flip around", so now she feels her marriage is in doubt due to HER actions in violating his privacy, but she is hoping now that he'll just cool off and not bring this up again. Because while she really doesn't know "for sure, for sure" about his cheating, she knows she's stone cold busted on the privacy violation.
Now her only goal is not to prove his guilt and speak of punishment of him, but to avoid speaking of any of this at all, so that her own guilt will not be used as a reason for he to end or modify the marriage.
Flip around complete. The guilty will now be sought out by the innocent, with the innocent hoping that the guilty can forgive and forget about this, and just move on! And if you think that's all very stupid, and cannot happen, well, you've limited experience with jerk men, or for that matter jerk women, as they can pull equivalents.
The Flip Around Scam works on far more than just betrayed wives. It's a scam for any time you do not wish to be held accountable for a wrong doing you've committed, or if you do not wish to have to go to the trouble of punishing someone who did wrong.
 |
| "I'm more concerned with your failure to be quiet in the library then this spurious allegation of me kissing Juanita in the stacks!" |
One day at a routine office meeting, someone asks why the TPS reports weren't done right, and some regular employee speaks up, "It's because he *points to the owner's son* didn't do it! He never does them! When can we finally get someone who will do them so the rest of us won't fall behind any more?"
Clearly the employee is justifiably angry and has named something that justifies anger. He's also making it that you - the boss - must now do something, or you're the baddie. You can't do anything to the owner's kid, but you sure don't want to look like the baddie!
So you Flip Around!
Boss: "You're entirely out of order! If there were any legitimate concerns - and that's a big IF - you should have talked to the employee in question first, or if that didn't work, come to me! After all, we're here today to get things accomplished, not this surprise ambush of a co-worker! This is completely unprofessional!"
Complainer: "I'm sorry."
Boss: "Fine. Next time you know."
Okay, so let's review that.
First, the flat out of the gate shut down, as bosses have more authority than husbands! And by making sure the employee knows the boss is angry - through tone and labels - the employee now fears for his own position. Which drives out of mind the previous concern about what - if anything - would be done about the slacker.
Secondly, it's as if he's the guilty one, as you've named at least three supposed offenses of his. That he failed in procedure twice and that he violated some previously unknown sanctity of a meeting! That the emotionally charged words like "ambush" and "unprofessional" really gives him a good "back off blast"!
Thirdly, after the instant apology, you as the boss just gave an unresponsive dismissive statement. Not that you'd review it, not that you'd do anything. If he had enough temerity, you could afford to say "You may trust we'll look into everything", with the emphasis on "everything" letting the employee know you meant him.
Issue now dead. The owner's son need not be talked to, and no employee will risk being targeted by you next! Therefore they will instead solve your problem by picking up the slack - on their own - of the owner's son!
Now that's managerial brilliance in responsibility avoidance - Flip Around Scam style!
Of course, it's actually for crap. The Flip Around NEVER rewards goodness and decency, always and ever it only rewards the guilty. That's the only thing the Flip Around is for, so that's no surprise. It's the tool of guilty husbands and bosses who don't want to do their job.
Or are afraid to.
How about in the legal arena? You bet! There's been prosecutors who not wishing to prosecute the son of a rich man who burgled a citizen's home will instead threaten to charge the home owner for the injuries the home owner gave that kid!
This changes the dialogue from "Hey, Mr. DA, how come you aren't prosecuting the guy who I shot when he crept through my daughter's window?" to "Ok, Mr. DA, I appreciate you not prosecuting me for shooting at the guy who crept through my daughter's window."
How about in the religious world? You bet!
I've lately seen the fanstastical display of a good woman weepingly reading from the Bible and seeking solace and aid from her pastor and peers, and the pastor trying to shut her down by accusing her - and those who were in support of her - as being like a "lynch mob" and for me in asking about it the next day being "inciting".
She didn't ask in the right time and place - but when pressed, he admitted he did not know himself any ideal or proper time and place. I "incited" by asking two Elders and a Pastor what to do. Who besides they I should have asked - well, he could not name any other better course.
See, as was mentioned in another blog - Theological Musings - ministers are frightened that by a "commission of discipline" they might lose a member, even a bad one. So they prefer to risk losing several good members by their "omission of discipline", which they feel somehow makes them less at fault.
They also hope - like the Flip Around boss - that if they throw it back on the good members, the good members will pick up the slack to mitigate the bad actions of the bad member. Then the pastor gets the benefit of doing nothing, and everything still lurches forward. True, the baddie will inevitably drive yet more away, and even some of the good will drop out, or while staying, lose heart, but hey, controversy will be avoided, and real decisions will be put off, so a win, yes?
Uh huh. A win for the Flip Around Scammer. And the baddies involved.
Never for the good. Not for the good wife. Not for the good employees. Not for the good home owner. And not for the good church members.
It is a scam, and like all scams listed in this blog, needs to be fought with education and awareness. You are now educated and aware. Next and last is the firm naming of it. That is ALL one ever has to do to deflate this scam.
Name it. The Flip Around scam is a like a cockroach - it cannot stand light. It thrives only when some good person doesn't know about it, and trusting the other, gets their trust brutally used against them.
When ever you see it tried on another, or you, name it at once.
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt, from the one who hurt to the one who was hurt. It is not a 'lynching' to be hurt by another and then seek out help and aid from your church family and church leadership."
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt, from the one who hurt to the one who was hurt. It is not 'inciting' to seek counsel from Elders and a Pastor."
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt. Maybe you have legitimate sins of mine and my friends to speak of later. But we are only here and now speaking of the sin of the man who hurt us. Address that. There will be time later to address how we could have better reacted in pain and anguish."
Those I just field tested recently, so I know they work.
But that also works for every situation because the Flip Around Scam is the same - and just as bad - no matter whether it's done by Pastor or cheating husband, District Attorney or work boss.
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt, from you who may be having an affair to me who at worst looked at an open screen. Address my concern first, and I promise will do my best to atone for any wrong in looking at that screen."
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt. From the owner's son who is never disciplined to the rest of us who must then do more work. Are we getting raises? Or are we dusting off resumes?"
"No. This is a flipping around of the guilt. From the man who terrified my wife and daughter in the wee hours of the morning under cover of darkness, to I who apparently winged him in the shoulder when I attempted to drive the unknown threat away from my loved ones. When is he being prosecuted?"
The commonality is that in each case you recognize that the Flip Around Scammer is very concerned with trying to deal "justly", ha, ha, with your supposed bad reaction. But very reticent about in any way dealing meaningfully - or at all - with the action that prompted your reaction.
