Speaker 1: This podcast should not be used as a substitute for
Speaker 1: medical or mental health advice. Individuals are advised to seek
Speaker 1: independent medical advice, counseling, and or therapy from a healthcare
Speaker 1: professional with respect to any medical condition, mental health issue,
Speaker 1: or health inquiry, including matters discussed on this podcast. This
Speaker 1: episode discusses abuse, which may be triggering to some people.
Speaker 1: The views and opinions expressed are solely those of the
Speaker 1: podcast author or individuals participating in the podcast, and do
Speaker 1: not represent the opinions of Red Table Talk productions, I
Speaker 1: Heart Media, or their employees. I'm almost glad it happened
Speaker 1: the way it did or it was such a big scale,
Speaker 1: because it helped me to realize it wasn't me. It
Speaker 1: would have happened regardless. It was happening before he and
Speaker 1: I were to get I think if he had had
Speaker 1: an intimate relationship with one person, it would have been
Speaker 1: even more devastating than it was. We have been hearing
Speaker 1: from Jennifer Faceon and Andrea Gunning from the podcast Betrayal,
Speaker 1: a story of betrayal that isn't just shocking for its
Speaker 1: size and scope, but with how unexpected it was. Jen
Speaker 1: didn't see any red flags, so when her world came
Speaker 1: crashing down, she was left with the pain and trauma
Speaker 1: of making sense of it all. While betrayal is present
Speaker 1: in almost all narcissistic relationships, their podcast was not about narcissism.
Speaker 1: Jen and Andrea were more focused on telling the story
Speaker 1: of the survivors and not focusing on the behavior and
Speaker 1: character of the betrayer. The recognition that whether it is
Speaker 1: one betrayal or many, is that there are some predictable
Speaker 1: patterns in manipulative and deceptive relationships, grooming and indoctrination, lack
Speaker 1: of empathy, entitlement, and a bottomless supply of denial and rationalization.
Speaker 1: Let's keep exploring how narcissism showed up in Gen's story,
Speaker 1: So Andrea, upon listening to the story, one of the
Speaker 1: most powerful parts of the show to me as a
Speaker 1: listener was when the women involved in these accusations spoke
Speaker 1: with Jen. Right, that, in many ways is the moment
Speaker 1: that many people who have experienced any form of relational
Speaker 1: betrayal or infidelity. Would I ever speak to this person,
Speaker 1: Would I ever want to speak to this person who
Speaker 1: was involved in my betrayal? Right? Can you shed some
Speaker 1: light on some of the decisions that were made to
Speaker 1: bring these women to your podcast to actually have these
Speaker 1: conversations with them, because it was incredibly powerful. I think
Speaker 1: when Jen and I sat down for the very first time,
Speaker 1: she was dealing with a lot of anger and a
Speaker 1: lot of anger, a lot of misplaced anger. And this
Speaker 1: is not the first time I've set this in front
Speaker 1: of Jen. Right, there was a lot of not understanding
Speaker 1: these women, and I felt like, I want us to
Speaker 1: get to the bottom of that anger, and the best
Speaker 1: way to do that is to confront it and talk
Speaker 1: to these women and really hear their point of view,
Speaker 1: because I felt like who she was truly angry with
Speaker 1: was her husband, Spencer. I had just met Jen in
Speaker 1: and listening to her story, I felt like, it's a
Speaker 1: horrible experience. I truly believe she didn't see anything, but
Speaker 1: I know that these women had their own individual experience,
Speaker 1: as I just knew in my gut. So I felt
Speaker 1: like it was helpful for her to understand the man
Speaker 1: that they had a relationship with because she owed it
Speaker 1: to herself in the time she had invested to really
Speaker 1: know who this person was. So that was really the
Speaker 1: decision to sit down with these other women and Jen
Speaker 1: was game and the women were too, So I have
Speaker 1: a lot of admiration at her bravery and their bravery.
Speaker 1: So interesting, Andrea, how you framed as misplaced anger, because
Speaker 1: I think that anytime somebody experiences any form of relational
Speaker 1: infidelity or betrayal, they do have anger at the other party.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's I think it's just it's built in,
Speaker 1: and I think it's part of the overwhelm of the process.
Speaker 1: How did that shift for you over time? Jen, Because
Speaker 1: I have to say, I have yet to meet the
Speaker 1: person who out the gate when they learn about a
Speaker 1: betrayal or an infidelity, say like I'm only mad at
Speaker 1: my partner. Oh, that other person is blamed free right.
Speaker 1: We will never get away from that sense of co complicity,
Speaker 1: especially if there's awareness that they knew you existed. I
Speaker 1: think there's sometimes a little more empathy if that other
Speaker 1: person was sold such a story that you know, with
Speaker 1: a different identity, and so there was no even way
Speaker 1: to no look at social media or any of that,
Speaker 1: no wedding ring, all those things that we might say, Okay,
Speaker 1: this person was completely completely scammed. But it's sounds like
Speaker 1: some of these women actually definitely knew you existed. So
Speaker 1: how did you move from that anger towards the women
Speaker 1: who were having these relationships with him to shifting your
Speaker 1: anger solely towards Spence, Because that's actually a really difficult shift.
Speaker 1: It was in the beginning I learned a couple of
Speaker 1: these women I knew had made a choice to have
Speaker 1: an affair with my husband, and I was mad because
Speaker 1: they were old enough to know better and they made
Speaker 1: that decision. So I did have a lot of anger.
Speaker 1: I think it was after really diving in and exploring
Speaker 1: Spence's role in those affairs and how he manipulated them.
Speaker 1: He lied to them. He would tell women that he
Speaker 1: loved them, shower them with compliments. I started to realize
Speaker 1: is that, yes, they had a choice on whether or
Speaker 1: not to participate, but they were also manipulated to believing
Speaker 1: that they were special to this person. And I felt
Speaker 1: for that. It felt for them to be lied to
Speaker 1: and just deceived so horribly. Reading the things that he
Speaker 1: would write to them and say, it was just awful.
Speaker 1: So I started feeling some empathy toward them because I
Speaker 1: started really realizing how he operated. And I think it
Speaker 1: was important that you can hold two thoughts at once,
Speaker 1: right like, you can still be angry but also understand
Speaker 1: the mechanics of how the relationship came to be. And
Speaker 1: in some cases there were women that were racked with shame.
Speaker 1: It was just we're just wearing that shame every day,
Speaker 1: you know. The one woman Hope wasn't even excited to
Speaker 1: get married because of the shame that she carried. And
Speaker 1: so I never wanted Jen to say I'm not angry anymore,
Speaker 1: because you can hold those two thoughts. You can be
Speaker 1: angry but understanding. You can have those two feelings. And
Speaker 1: I think that's what's so challenging when you have these
Speaker 1: kinds of antagonistic, manipulative relationships, is that multiple things can
Speaker 1: be true at the same time, and I think we
Speaker 1: often have trouble holding multiple truths simultaneously, especially when they
Speaker 1: seem sort of at odds with each other. When I
Speaker 1: was listening to the story, I was very struck by
Speaker 1: how different the tenor of the conversation was when you
Speaker 1: were talking with the person who was a student at
Speaker 1: the time of the relationship versus the person who was
Speaker 1: an adult woman internally for you, emotionally for you. How
Speaker 1: would those experiences different, Because I can't see how they
Speaker 1: wouldn't be different. They must have felt so different to
Speaker 1: talk to a person who was still a minor when
Speaker 1: all this has happened, versus a person like you said,
Speaker 1: who knew you, who was making a different kind of
Speaker 1: a choice. What was happening inside of you when you
Speaker 1: had those two different conversations and speaking with the student,
Speaker 1: I just did not hold her responsible in any way.
Speaker 1: I don't care. Maybe if she had a crush on
Speaker 1: him at the time, whatever, none of that was her
Speaker 1: responsibility in this. He was a teacher, and what he
Speaker 1: did to someone so young was just it's devastating. It's sickening,
Speaker 1: you know, to think about he was with the sixteen
Speaker 1: year old. I remember how I was in high school,
Speaker 1: and so I kind of thought, what if that had
Speaker 1: happened to me. The most important thing for me was
Speaker 1: for her to know that I did not hold her
Speaker 1: responsible for it. I did not put any blame on
Speaker 1: her for it. She was completely a victim. And then
Speaker 1: in speaking with some of the adult women, they did
Speaker 1: have some responsibility in saying, yes, they knew he was married.
Speaker 1: I wasn't. I was empathetic, but I couldn't solely put
Speaker 1: the blame on spence because they did participate. If that
Speaker 1: makes sense, it absolutely makes sense. Not only does it
Speaker 1: make sense, I think a lot of people would have
Speaker 1: found those conversations difficult, if not impossible, to have. Those
Speaker 1: were such human conversations. Your sense of restraint was remarkable.
Speaker 1: Your empathy came through. But I will tell you this,
Speaker 1: I could hear the edge in your voice when you
Speaker 1: were talking to the adult women, which humanized you to me,
Speaker 1: because if you were just like I get it, I'd
Speaker 1: be like, oh come on now. But I heard the
Speaker 1: edge and I thought, Okay, this is actually remarkable restraint.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't have been able to do that. We heard
Speaker 1: the humanity of it. But it sounds upon listening to
Speaker 1: your podcast, he uses a similar ground game with every
Speaker 1: person he was trying to draw into one of these relationships.
Speaker 1: Can you say more about that? Yeah, it was absolutely
Speaker 1: the same thing. He would tell them, Oh, you're so beautiful.
Speaker 1: It was that same flirting. It was like I just
Speaker 1: picture him casting that line out and seeing who would bite,
Speaker 1: and so many women did bite. And the way he
Speaker 1: would talk to them on text and string them along
Speaker 1: and just make them feel like they were the only one.
Speaker 1: And that was another thing in talking with them, they
Speaker 1: didn't know that they were one of fifty sixty. So
Speaker 1: when I found out the whole spectrum of how many people,
Speaker 1: that was one of the reasons I think I was
Speaker 1: so angry. And then talking to them individually, I got
Speaker 1: to see that humanity and what they had gone through
Speaker 1: and what they were feeling because of it. And I
Speaker 1: think that one thing that he was very good at doing,
Speaker 1: which groomers and narcissists are very good at doing, is
Speaker 1: identifying vulnerabilities in other people and using it to their advantage.
Speaker 1: So with the high school student that was sexually assaulted
Speaker 1: and we say sexual thought because it was adjudicated and
Speaker 1: the state of Georgia, and that's what he was convicted of,
Speaker 1: he used her faith against her. This is God wanted
Speaker 1: this to happen. He knew that in and he worked
Speaker 1: that angle with Jen's friends. She had just come off
Speaker 1: of being pregnant and was feeling like she was trapped
Speaker 1: in her house and like this mother's solitude and didn't
Speaker 1: feel pretty and he knew that. So he was very
Speaker 1: masterful and really identifying vulnerabilities that are very different, individualistic
Speaker 1: to each woman, but working that relationship identifying those vulnerabilities
Speaker 1: and capitalizing on them, right, and that, right, there's a
Speaker 1: definition of manipulation. And he was such a personable person that,
Speaker 1: if you want to use the word flirt, he flirted
Speaker 1: with everybody, or he was just kind to everybody and
Speaker 1: engaging and all of that. And I think that's another
Speaker 1: thing he used, was his personality, because who would think that,
Speaker 1: I know, I had another friend and that he had
Speaker 1: reached out to and she just kind of stopped it
Speaker 1: and thought and never send anything to me, because she
Speaker 1: just thought, oh, that's just spense. He's just so nice.
Speaker 1: He didn't he wasn't really meaning anything by and so
Speaker 1: she was able to set a boundary because she was
Speaker 1: able to set a boundary. And you're right, we don't
Speaker 1: understand how seductive niceness is. We often think of the
Speaker 1: big ticket seduction, the sort of the the swagger and
Speaker 1: the arrogance. But it's nice. I mean, you know, and
Speaker 1: there is somebody with this kind of manipulative personality who
Speaker 1: is nice. I cannot think of a more dangerous combination.
Speaker 1: Because we want our villains to look like villains, right,
Speaker 1: we want him to look like jerks and me and
Speaker 1: almost have a villain. Look, and I'm not hearing that
Speaker 1: any of that was here. And then again, manipulation is
Speaker 1: a way for a person to get what they want
Speaker 1: while making the other person feel like it's good for them.
Speaker 1: That it's the core of manipulation. And that's what you
Speaker 1: were saying was happening over and over again. This is
Speaker 1: meant to be, this is what God would want. You're
Speaker 1: so pretty, you deserve more attention, and to figure that
Speaker 1: out in a way it had to have felt like,
Speaker 1: I'd imagine I'm speculating like a game for him. It's
Speaker 1: almost like closing a sale. Sales is manipulation, and so
Speaker 1: too was this. So it's really the scale of this
Speaker 1: was so stunning to me. I mean, I've heard betrayal
Speaker 1: stories before, but this, the scale of this one was.
Speaker 1: This wasn't just as as though it was behaving inappropriately
Speaker 1: as a teacher and he had an affair, or the
Speaker 1: more classical story of a person has in a relationship
Speaker 1: and their partner has an affair with one person. The
Speaker 1: scale of this, the number of people being communicated with
Speaker 1: having sexual contact with you know, the the breath and
Speaker 1: the depth of it. Again, you're gonna have to speculate
Speaker 1: because you haven't had the other scenario. Do you ever
Speaker 1: think about, well, how this would feel different than if
Speaker 1: it was sort of your standard. I have a husband
Speaker 1: and he cheated on me. That is such a good question,
Speaker 1: because I've thought about it a lot. This sound crazy,
Speaker 1: but I'm almost glad it happened the way it did,
Speaker 1: or it was such a big scale, because it helped
Speaker 1: me to realize it wasn't me. It would have happened
Speaker 1: regardless it was happening before he and I were together.
Speaker 1: I think if he had had an intimate relationship with
Speaker 1: one person, it would have been even more devastating than
Speaker 1: it was, because we talked about what marriage meant to
Speaker 1: us so often and what that love looked like and
Speaker 1: that soulmate feeling, and so I think if it had
Speaker 1: just been a one off, it would have been really hurtful,
Speaker 1: um in a way that was more personal. To find
Speaker 1: out that it's you know, fifty different women or you know,
Speaker 1: that's that's something that's just I can't comprehend, and it
Speaker 1: says that it's it's a bigger issue than just him
Speaker 1: wanting to have an affair. Again, thank you for answering it,
Speaker 1: and you know and for your your honesty on this one,
Speaker 1: because I listened to it, I said, I don't get
Speaker 1: to know what would have been worse for Jen, but
Speaker 1: I have to say you're absolutely right. When a person
Speaker 1: is in a relationship and there's an affair with one person,
Speaker 1: the immediate sense is what didn't I have? What was
Speaker 1: I lacking? Why was I not enough? What is this
Speaker 1: person have that's better? This was clearly something so massive
Speaker 1: it was all him, and in a way, as you
Speaker 1: dealt with devastation, betrayal, trauma, all of that at the
Speaker 1: court of it, though you also were saying this, this
Speaker 1: was not me. This was something much, much bigger. So
Speaker 1: it was again a very unique situation, and I think
Speaker 1: when survivors listened to it, I'm sure more than a
Speaker 1: few of them thought. Not that I'd ever wish this
Speaker 1: on anyone that said what this might have actually been
Speaker 1: a more I don't know again, a less self blaming,
Speaker 1: you know, less self harming situation of what they're doing
Speaker 1: to themselves versus something and at this big level, yeah,
Speaker 1: I think I would have felt worse about myself had so, yeah,
Speaker 1: we will be right back with this conversation with Jen
Speaker 1: and Andrea, So I know for me, again, so many
Speaker 1: compelling things. So the conversations you had with the other
Speaker 1: women who had been in relationships with or assaulted, and
Speaker 1: to everyone listening to me talking, You've got to go
Speaker 1: listen to their podcast Betrayal because these conversations are unbelievable.
Speaker 1: But the other part that was incredibly compelling to me
Speaker 1: was you speaking to him in the jailhouse phone conversations. Okay,
Speaker 1: I was waiting, like, what do you have to say
Speaker 1: for yourself? And how did this feel for Jen to
Speaker 1: be having these conversations? So you asked him why he
Speaker 1: did what he did? Was he aware that he hurt
Speaker 1: other people? Was he aware of what he did to you?
Speaker 1: What he did to them? And I felt, I mean,
Speaker 1: I had my feeling I'd like to hear from you first.
Speaker 1: Do you feel like he answered your question? No, not
Speaker 1: at all. I had been waiting to have this conversation
Speaker 1: with him. He had been promising that he would let
Speaker 1: me speak with him. He just shut it down. And
Speaker 1: then talking to him and asking him these questions and
Speaker 1: hearing his response, I just knew he's not capable of
Speaker 1: understanding the devastation he caused. Somehow, I think in his
Speaker 1: mind he somehow made it okay, whether it's with the
Speaker 1: students saying it was consensual, things like that. He just
Speaker 1: he can't take responsibility or have empathy like we spoke
Speaker 1: about before, And I just I got frustrated, to be honest,
Speaker 1: and eventually just ended the call because what else could
Speaker 1: I ask him? He's not aware enough. I don't think
Speaker 1: you feel like he's not aware of his behavior, how
Speaker 1: his behavior affects other people, which must have been so
Speaker 1: shocking for you to recognize, because I'd imagine for the
Speaker 1: seven years, because there were no red flags, you did
Speaker 1: believe he was self aware. Yes, absolutely, absolutely. That revelation
Speaker 1: in and of itself is actually quite massive. But as
Speaker 1: though you think somebody knows how to read, and then
Speaker 1: you find out for seven years he was lying about
Speaker 1: being able to read. Right, They were able to put
Speaker 1: together the clues enough to it seems like he could
Speaker 1: read the book. But oh, he listened to something, and
Speaker 1: so that's how he knew what the book was about.
Speaker 1: This is somebody who was a great father, and so
Speaker 1: he would think that he would just have this outpouring
Speaker 1: of sorrow for what he's done. And I just haven't
Speaker 1: heard it from him. There's another piece though, that really
Speaker 1: jumped out at me. If you disagree, please tell me.
Speaker 1: In that call with him, I felt like he never
Speaker 1: expressed remorse. What he was doing was he was remained
Speaker 1: on how he did it, and he even talks a
Speaker 1: little bit about the why. I do remember him saying
Speaker 1: I liked the attention. He did make that comment that
Speaker 1: he actually liked getting the attention. I was like, okay,
Speaker 1: that's a it's not a satisfying answer, and it certainly
Speaker 1: put one more brick in the wall of me thinking
Speaker 1: that this was a narcissistic personality. He talks a little
Speaker 1: bit okay, I did it for attention, but he still
Speaker 1: retains entitled anger at the system that that he if
Speaker 1: I remember correctly, that he was angry that there was
Speaker 1: supposed to be maybe an earlier release date, but an
Speaker 1: additional sort of victims impact statement led to increased time,
Speaker 1: and he literally had entitled anger. So there was zero shifts,
Speaker 1: zero remorse, no recognition of oh, okay, this is a
Speaker 1: person's real pain. He talked about how terrible prison is
Speaker 1: and was complaining about the conditions he was under, how
Speaker 1: you couldn't get good therapy in prison, so it was
Speaker 1: very much about him. He was the frame of reference.
Speaker 1: There was, though, no remorse, no ownership. I think after
Speaker 1: you saw not just the not knowing his why, but
Speaker 1: the next level up, which was not having remorse, how
Speaker 1: did that leave you feeling about him? How did you
Speaker 1: view him? It's so sad to me because I loved
Speaker 1: this person. I had this beautiful marriage with this person,
Speaker 1: and then, you know, to discover this whole other side,
Speaker 1: and then to hear him say something like I hope
Speaker 1: everybody has moved on. I just want everybody to move on.
Speaker 1: One of the most challenging aspects of surviving a betrayal
Speaker 1: by someone who seemingly lacks empathy or awareness of how
Speaker 1: others are affected is their desire to just move on.
Speaker 1: As Jen said, he said I hope everybody's moved on
Speaker 1: when she talked with him. It's as though the pain
Speaker 1: caused by his actions is an inconvenience to still have
Speaker 1: to deal with and that people can just put it
Speaker 1: behind them. This idea of just moving on is reflective
Speaker 1: of the lack of empathy that we observe in narcissistic
Speaker 1: personalities and can leave survivors feeling as though they are
Speaker 1: the ones that aren't healing fast enough or not letting go.
Speaker 1: You know, it's just him not understanding what he did
Speaker 1: to the student first and foremost, and what she's had
Speaker 1: to go through and how this is going to impact
Speaker 1: her for the rest of her life. And I believe
Speaker 1: that she's strong and resilient and she will use this
Speaker 1: for something good. It's just it's really sad to me,
Speaker 1: to be honest, because it's just not the person that
Speaker 1: I knew for you. To me, this went beyond betrayal trauma.
Speaker 1: It was a death. It was the death of a
Speaker 1: person and replaced by a person that on any day
Speaker 1: of your life you would not have given the time
Speaker 1: of day. And so there was not just that experience
Speaker 1: of the trauma around betrayal, but also the grief because
Speaker 1: it was a grief of your marriage, a grief of
Speaker 1: the life you thought you would have, a grief of
Speaker 1: a future. And in any time somebody has one of
Speaker 1: these toxic relationships, however it unfold, the grief is often
Speaker 1: overwhelming and unrecognized. People don't see his grief because the
Speaker 1: person is still walking around alive in the world. Andrea,
Speaker 1: how did you feel after listening to the jailhouse phone
Speaker 1: calls that ended up in the podcast and probably more
Speaker 1: than what we even heard, and then lack of remorse
Speaker 1: and the lack of ownership. How did you feel about this?
Speaker 1: So how did you process this? I felt sad for Jen.
Speaker 1: I felt sad for Rachel, the sexual sult victim, that
Speaker 1: he did feel a sense of injustice, that he had
Speaker 1: a serviceful term, which was like just mind blowing that
Speaker 1: for some reason, because he was a Teacher of the
Speaker 1: Year and served on the Air National Guard and he
Speaker 1: had all of these like trophies on his shelf, that
Speaker 1: he should be entitled to something different and not held
Speaker 1: accountable for actions made me sad for the victim there
Speaker 1: made me sad for Jen. I also was not necessarily
Speaker 1: surprised because this is something that I can't remember if
Speaker 1: we use this in the show, but I remember after
Speaker 1: he was sentenced, he wanted to have a conversation with
Speaker 1: the students parents and apologize for that. But it felt
Speaker 1: very much, oh like I'm being sentenced, but I'm just
Speaker 1: just felt like a It just felt performative and for
Speaker 1: him and not for the parents, and the parents are like,
Speaker 1: I don't want to talk to you. You assaulted my child,
Speaker 1: So just like learning about him over a very long time,
Speaker 1: I just I'm not surprised, but it's still sad. I'm
Speaker 1: disappointed because he is out and I feel like Jenn
Speaker 1: and I are empathetic people. We still feel for other
Speaker 1: human beings, and it's just disappointing that one can't take
Speaker 1: a hard look at their behavior and are incapable of
Speaker 1: feeling remorse or incapable of seeing how really truly owning
Speaker 1: the collateral damage some people are. But I didn't feel
Speaker 1: true ownership of the collateral damage. It's like he could
Speaker 1: have thought, what if this had happened to my daughter,
Speaker 1: how would I have reacted? And just I don't think
Speaker 1: that's ever been a thought in his head. I think
Speaker 1: somehow he is justifying what he did. Also, was a
Speaker 1: little fascinated with people's coping mechanisms. It just was like
Speaker 1: an interesting, fascinating look into coping mechanisms. And I don't
Speaker 1: know if he's doing what he's doing for to cope
Speaker 1: and get through, but I certainly don't feel like it's
Speaker 1: necessarily helpful in the long run. What do you mean
Speaker 1: by that? What his coping mechanisms were meaning when in
Speaker 1: in the jail house call, you know, gent spoke to
Speaker 1: two is, I just want every want to move forward
Speaker 1: and generally pressim is like maybe the student did write
Speaker 1: a letter and we knew that she did write a
Speaker 1: letter to keep him in the prol board, and he
Speaker 1: was like, that's irrelevant. It was in his inability to
Speaker 1: really sit with the fact that she was a victim
Speaker 1: as opposed to like, on paper she was under age,
Speaker 1: he was an adult like that. It's a formality. It's
Speaker 1: like a systematic justice formality, as opposed to know she's
Speaker 1: truly a victim here she was actually assaulted, she was manipulated,
Speaker 1: and so to me, I don't think there's much gravity
Speaker 1: in what it really is, and I think that there
Speaker 1: may be some coping there. And it was just I
Speaker 1: don't know, I don't know if that makes sense, but
Speaker 1: but it's almost if he really thought about what he
Speaker 1: had done, and like I said, he would say, oh,
Speaker 1: that person didn't mean anything to me, yet he's writing
Speaker 1: to her, I love you. If he really thought about
Speaker 1: what he did to people, then maybe he wouldn't be
Speaker 1: able to cope as well as he is. So he's
Speaker 1: putting on this shiny hat and just gonna be positive
Speaker 1: and move forward, or its pathological levels of denial, rationalization, justification,
Speaker 1: and compartmentalization. You know, those are the four pillars that
Speaker 1: are keeping this whole structure up in like a scaffold.
Speaker 1: You're absolutely right. If those things were taken away and
Speaker 1: there had to be true accountability in some ways, the
Speaker 1: person would psychologically collapse, which isn't necessarily a bad thing,
Speaker 1: but it's very rare for somebody with this kind of
Speaker 1: approach to the world and to other people to have
Speaker 1: that turnaround, especially when something as intense as a prison
Speaker 1: sentence happens and a life has changed permanently and there's
Speaker 1: not the change, then I'm not banking on that happening.
Speaker 1: So he was in prison for four years and still
Speaker 1: just came out not feeling any remorse or not showing it.
Speaker 1: My session with Jen and Andrea will continue after this break.
Speaker 1: When a betrayal experience happens like yours, obviously you Gen
Speaker 1: and the women he heard, Rachel, the assault survivor, all
Speaker 1: of these people experienced the most primary betrayals, but there
Speaker 1: were a lot of people around you. You yourself said
Speaker 1: you were surrounded by supportive community, and this community knew him.
Speaker 1: How are you setting a boundary for yourself? Because you know,
Speaker 1: all I was for you to keep healing and feel
Speaker 1: good and safe in the world. How are you setting
Speaker 1: those boundaries because now that he's out in the world,
Speaker 1: he's out in the world, and so what are you doing?
Speaker 1: Because I know a lot of people wonder, Okay, something
Speaker 1: like this happened in your case, it was four years
Speaker 1: of prison in and out. For other people, it's just
Speaker 1: a betrayal. Relationship ends and they're still walking around the
Speaker 1: world with this person. What what do you intend to
Speaker 1: do to keep yourself safe psychologically, psychologically? I think staying
Speaker 1: away from him. Had those moments lately. Now that he's
Speaker 1: out where, I thought maybe I should reach out to him.
Speaker 1: And I'm sure they're going to people say why would
Speaker 1: you ever want to talk to him again? But it's
Speaker 1: still hard to wrap my head around these two different people,
Speaker 1: and so part of me some empathy. But then I
Speaker 1: come back to my senses and I realize, you're never
Speaker 1: going to get the answers you want. This is not
Speaker 1: somebody who is safe to be around. He is going
Speaker 1: to manipulate and lie as best he can. I think
Speaker 1: that's another reason for putting this podcast out there, and
Speaker 1: the truth it's so that other people in his world
Speaker 1: and his orbit that he's talking to know the full
Speaker 1: story and not just what he's sharing with them. So
Speaker 1: I'm just I take it day by day and just
Speaker 1: remember who he is and just try to move forward.
Speaker 1: One theme that was raised, and you had an expert
Speaker 1: even talking about this quite a bit on your podcast,
Speaker 1: was the idea of betrayal trauma. Did that framework help
Speaker 1: you understanding it from the framework of betrayal trauma? Absolutely?
Speaker 1: When I got the definition when Kim said, you're going
Speaker 1: through betrayal trauma, and I could read books about betrayal trauma,
Speaker 1: it helps so much because then I realized that other
Speaker 1: people have gone through this. It affects you psychologically, emotionally, physically,
Speaker 1: all sorts of things, and the way I would react
Speaker 1: sometimes after it happened, I could go back to, this
Speaker 1: is a symptom of betrayal trauma. So to put a
Speaker 1: definition on it, it just it helped it make sense
Speaker 1: what this story has revealed. A person who lacks empathy,
Speaker 1: who is entitled, who is grandiose, who engages in denial,
Speaker 1: who is admiration, attention and validation seeking, who doesn't think
Speaker 1: about the consequences of their actions. Backing up into that
Speaker 1: neighborhood called narcissism. When you throw lack of remorse on
Speaker 1: top of that, now in the neighborhood called potentially sociopathy
Speaker 1: or even psychopathy, the lack of remorse is a real
Speaker 1: ringer of what differentiates the two. Narcissistic people actually feel
Speaker 1: tremendous sense of shame when they hurt other people. They'll
Speaker 1: still do it, but the shame comes up and the
Speaker 1: shame for them comes out as rage. But it is
Speaker 1: an activation of shame for a person who's more in
Speaker 1: the realm of sociopathy psychopathy. Even when they're caught in
Speaker 1: the big bad thing they've done, the violation of others rights,
Speaker 1: they're very quick. They just go to the defend, justify, rationalized.
Speaker 1: I am curious, though, would having had that framework in
Speaker 1: addition to betrayal trauma but understanding narcissism, psychopathy that kind
Speaker 1: of thing, would that have been helpful or actually not?
Speaker 1: I always thought that if I just had the answer
Speaker 1: to what is he and Andrea and I discussed this
Speaker 1: over the years. Can somebody speak to what he is
Speaker 1: and put a name on it. I really thought that
Speaker 1: would help, but I think it's just so many different
Speaker 1: things that I just I can't. I just have to
Speaker 1: let that go until somebody can diagnose him. But it's
Speaker 1: so interesting to hear what you have to say. And
Speaker 1: the empathy part, because I never thought about it like that. Yeah, No,
Speaker 1: it's a complete lack of empathy because I often say,
Speaker 1: you know, infidelity always reflects a lack of empathy, because
Speaker 1: even if it feels good in the moment, it means
Speaker 1: you were able to cut off any sense of feeling
Speaker 1: for how this could affect another person. To me, that
Speaker 1: is a lapse of empathy, and that, to me is
Speaker 1: actually one of the most harmful psychological spaces a person
Speaker 1: can occupy. As you went through this and you were
Speaker 1: talking to people, did anyone ever throw you a hypothesis
Speaker 1: of something like sex addiction? Did that ever come up
Speaker 1: as part of the conversation? Definitely? I think in the
Speaker 1: beginning that's what I leaned towards. I wanted to define it,
Speaker 1: to give it a name so that I could understand
Speaker 1: it and read about it. And I even asked him,
Speaker 1: actually I asked him right before his arrest. Are you
Speaker 1: a sex addict? Just flew out of my mouth, and
Speaker 1: he said no, and he's denied it for sense, But
Speaker 1: that's got to be part of it. To have that
Speaker 1: much sex that often and that deviant, I feel, again,
Speaker 1: I can't diagnose him, but I think there's sex addiction
Speaker 1: in there. It's such a complicated issue. I don't know
Speaker 1: that I've ever really seen this case of sex addiction
Speaker 1: without the narcissism stuff sitting right next to it, right,
Speaker 1: because there's a complete dehumanization and disregard for someone else.
Speaker 1: There's different schools of thoughts, So I can't say what
Speaker 1: I'm saying is right. I'm just saying that I've always
Speaker 1: seen those things happen together. I was just curious if
Speaker 1: it came up. This is a big piece I want
Speaker 1: to bring up. I was listening to one of the
Speaker 1: last few episodes of the podcast where people were actually
Speaker 1: raising their questions there how much they enjoy the podcast,
Speaker 1: but you also got some critiques, And the one that
Speaker 1: jumped out at me and that actually I sat with
Speaker 1: for a long time was that there was some pushback
Speaker 1: on the use of the term grooming and applying that
Speaker 1: to anything but a relationship with somebody who would be
Speaker 1: designated as vulnerable almost under the law, like a minor,
Speaker 1: And for that term to be used in an adult
Speaker 1: relationship was an issue. What are your thoughts on that?
Speaker 1: Because I know I sat and thought. I sat with
Speaker 1: that one for a long time. So this term grooming,
Speaker 1: like gent said, I want people to understand this, and
Speaker 1: then the use of the term seemed to raise controversy.
Speaker 1: So could you unpack that a little bit? Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think it was the reason why we sought out an
Speaker 1: expert in this field to educate ourselves and our audience.
Speaker 1: And the biggest thing that we learned was it knows
Speaker 1: no age or gender like it's a specific action. And
Speaker 1: I spoke to it earlier, where you are seeking vulnerabilities
Speaker 1: and individuals building a relationship, building a rapport, creating this
Speaker 1: identity for yourself in relation to somebody else so they
Speaker 1: feel safe in order to understand their vulnerabilities, understand their entryway,
Speaker 1: and work into that to expose whatever you need to
Speaker 1: get whatever you need from them. And that was a
Speaker 1: really hard email to get when we got an email
Speaker 1: about grooming. Language is important, and absolutely it is, but
Speaker 1: The biggest thing that we learned is you could be
Speaker 1: sixty and still be groomed. You could have a lifetime
Speaker 1: of experience and still deal with this. And it's also
Speaker 1: important to note that we were not comparing one person's
Speaker 1: experience or the other or putting them on a teer.
Speaker 1: We were just exploring the multi different relationships that this
Speaker 1: individual had with other women. And so I know that
Speaker 1: some people need to be able to say this one
Speaker 1: was worse and these weren't as worse. But it was
Speaker 1: more about exploring how grooming exists in different relationships with
Speaker 1: different people with different vulnerabilities. And you can be groomed
Speaker 1: when you're fifteen fifty. There really is no age or
Speaker 1: gender or boundaries there. So we're coming towards the end
Speaker 1: of our time. I want to ask you this, Jen,
Speaker 1: because you said something so poignant to me, which is
Speaker 1: marriage mattered to me. I loved the idea of marriage.
Speaker 1: I believed in marriage, And again, yours might be one
Speaker 1: of the more profound stories of relational betrayal that many
Speaker 1: people have heard. How do you feel about those things now?
Speaker 1: How do you feel about marriage and and love and
Speaker 1: commitment and all of that? How has that shaped your view.
Speaker 1: I'm not a pessimist. I don't want this to alter
Speaker 1: who I am, and I get excited about love and relationships.
Speaker 1: Do I think I'll get married again. I don't know.
Speaker 1: It's going to depend on that person, but I believe
Speaker 1: I can find somebody to trust. I don't think all
Speaker 1: of that was damaged. I'm excited about falling in love again.
Speaker 1: It's amazing. It's just who I am. I can't let
Speaker 1: this person who had such a huge issue affect the
Speaker 1: rest of my life. I'm so glad survivors are hearing
Speaker 1: this and people who people are listening to this podcast
Speaker 1: or hearing this, because I think a lot of people
Speaker 1: feel as though that's it. I'm out, and there's a
Speaker 1: sort of a want to shut a door in the
Speaker 1: name of safety. There's a tremendous courage to saying I
Speaker 1: am going to do this again. I believe in this
Speaker 1: thing called love. But one of the big pieces is
Speaker 1: this isn't me, this was another person. I don't blame
Speaker 1: myself for this, and I have always believed working in
Speaker 1: this space with individuals and with clients is I've got
Speaker 1: to break through that self blame space with them together
Speaker 1: We're going to get them through that, because on the
Speaker 1: other side, people after a variety of betrayal experiences can
Speaker 1: believe in love and fall in love profoundly, but with
Speaker 1: a different kind of I'm a wisdom about them, That's
Speaker 1: what I would call it. What about you, Andrea, though,
Speaker 1: while that obviously this didn't happen to you, you had
Speaker 1: a front row seed if you were living in this
Speaker 1: betrayal story day after day for a very long time,
Speaker 1: how has it affected how you think about relationships? My
Speaker 1: middle name is hope, and I believe in the Fleabag quote,
Speaker 1: to love someone feels like hope, and I would never
Speaker 1: want to get rid of that. I would never want
Speaker 1: to rid that experience from my life. And so I
Speaker 1: know that Jen is hopeful that she'll find someone, and
Speaker 1: so that's enough for me. If she can have that attitude,
Speaker 1: then so can I. That's it's amazing, I mean, it
Speaker 1: really is. And I think so many people would be
Speaker 1: afraid if I was betrayed, I'll never come back from it, right,
Speaker 1: That's always the fear. And I think that what people
Speaker 1: need to understand is that a lot of us are
Speaker 1: psyches are actually often made of tougher stuff, especially when
Speaker 1: you can see that is actually not you. Do you
Speaker 1: have any questions for me? Dispense fall into the category
Speaker 1: of a covert narcissist? Would you say so? Just to
Speaker 1: be clear. So there's such a tricky terminology. So vulnerable
Speaker 1: narcissis him. So there's grandiose narcissism, and that's our sort
Speaker 1: of textbook in the dictionary charming charismatic narcissist. The vulnerable
Speaker 1: narcissist is almost the flip of that is sullen, resentful.
Speaker 1: They feel aggrieved, They're angry at the world. They feel
Speaker 1: like victims. Now the covert overt part is about overt narcissism.
Speaker 1: Is aren't I great? Don't you feel lucky to be
Speaker 1: with me? They say things like that. The covert stuff
Speaker 1: is the stuff we don't see. It's the feelings they
Speaker 1: would have, the thoughts they'd have. They might be thinking,
Speaker 1: how come nobody thinks I'm great? How come no one
Speaker 1: can see how great I am? Obviously that might manifest
Speaker 1: his anger and things like that. I think in his case, again,
Speaker 1: if I was just a graduate student reviewing a case
Speaker 1: in the professor said, what do you think my first
Speaker 1: hypothesis is more in the sociopathy kind of narcissism psychopathy realm.
Speaker 1: The lack of remorse to me is really striking here.
Speaker 1: And I don't know history. Anyone really thinking about this
Speaker 1: would need to know all of that to be able
Speaker 1: to craft what who this person is. But if we
Speaker 1: focus solely on the behavior, solely on the behavior of
Speaker 1: long term deceit almost not quite aliases like the different
Speaker 1: faces he put out there, taking an advantage of people
Speaker 1: not following the rules, breaking rules with little remorse. That
Speaker 1: definitely that behavior conforms to more of what we consider
Speaker 1: to be psychopathy. And the reason it feels hidden is
Speaker 1: because somebody who's so skilled at lying is actually able
Speaker 1: to put forth these other faces. And if the whole
Speaker 1: machine is working well, that means everyone is actually seeing
Speaker 1: this really, if you will, charming version of this person
Speaker 1: all around, because the person's needs are being met so
Speaker 1: consistently and for a long time, many years, the entire
Speaker 1: machine actually sadly ran exactly the way he wanted it to.
Speaker 1: That's why everyone was seeing this best face. As long
Speaker 1: as like someone like him feel safe and validated, everybody's
Speaker 1: going to think that he hung the moon. That's the challenge.
Speaker 1: But all of these personalities, they're all very close to
Speaker 1: each other. That why we use the word antagonistic, and
Speaker 1: that big word antagonistic can be really in your face,
Speaker 1: look how great I am. And it can also be
Speaker 1: quite hidden, which is what you experienced. And again your
Speaker 1: story is I've never seen one this striking in terms
Speaker 1: of all the people out there who are mad. I
Speaker 1: can't believe I missed the red flags. I just must
Speaker 1: be a fool. You are a living reminder that the
Speaker 1: red flags aren't always there. So that means though, that
Speaker 1: things can go wrong, and trust yourself when they are
Speaker 1: going wrong. Yours that was really in your face. But
Speaker 1: even for other folks saying this doesn't feel good anymore,
Speaker 1: But I didn't see red flags, so that must mean
Speaker 1: that this is okay. You've got to trust yourself all along.
Speaker 1: And just because there weren't red flags doesn't mean it
Speaker 1: wasn't a toxic relationship. The response to your podcast was extraordinary.
Speaker 1: I hope everybody listens to it because I think that
Speaker 1: it really is that reminder that many times what we
Speaker 1: think is in front of us is not And that's
Speaker 1: not a statement on us. It really is about the
Speaker 1: capacity of some people to go through the world very
Speaker 1: differently than the rest of us. So thank you, thank
Speaker 1: you again for the gift of your time. Jen, thank you,
Speaker 1: and thank you, thank you so much. It was such
Speaker 1: is very enlightening speaking with you. Thank you, thank you
Speaker 1: so much. I do it's amazing. Here are my takeaways
Speaker 1: from my conversation with Jen and Andrea. Betrayal trauma was
Speaker 1: a major theme in Jen's story and in the Betrayal podcast.
Speaker 1: It is a frequent theme in narcissistic relationships as well.
Speaker 1: It is a unique relationship trauma that comes from having
Speaker 1: trust violated, living with chronic deceit, and enduring consistent gas lighting.
Speaker 1: The fallout of betrayal trauma is quite consistent with what
Speaker 1: we observe in people living with narcissistic abuse, and is
Speaker 1: an important framework for survivors to have when they experience
Speaker 1: massive breaches of trust and don't know which way is up.
Speaker 1: In my next takeaway, there is no simple explanation for betrayal,
Speaker 1: and certainly not for one on this scale. It's too
Speaker 1: simplistic to say narcissistic people betray For survivors, hearing that
Speaker 1: is often not enough. Personality is certainly one factor, but
Speaker 1: other things may be at play, like disregulation other behavioral dynamics,
Speaker 1: but personality styles like narcissism, sociopathy, or psychopathy are often
Speaker 1: part of this picture above all else. It is so
Speaker 1: important for survivors to know that another person's betrayal is
Speaker 1: never your fault, even though you are the one managing
Speaker 1: the pain and the fallout. Jen resisted the temptation to
Speaker 1: make it just about why he was the way he
Speaker 1: was or why he did what he did, and instead
Speaker 1: she focused on what actually happened and how to not
Speaker 1: be defined by it. In my next takeaway, While the
Speaker 1: term may be controversial, the process is pretty clear. Whether
Speaker 1: it is termed grooming or indoctrination, or capitalizing on vulnerabilities,
Speaker 1: it is the process of a manipulative person praying upon
Speaker 1: a person's vulnerabilities or advantaging their own power to get
Speaker 1: what they want from them. It is, in fact a
Speaker 1: process and is the dark side of other dynamics and
Speaker 1: patterns such as love bombing. People can be vulnerable to
Speaker 1: this process, regardless of their age or life experience. The
Speaker 1: person doing the grooming or the indoctrination uses techniques such
Speaker 1: as praise, making someone feel special, telling them that they
Speaker 1: love them, or that this is a once in a
Speaker 1: lifetime experience, and then mixing that with being very attentive
Speaker 1: and then pulling back, leaving the other person feeling that
Speaker 1: they would do anything to get that manipulation her back.
Speaker 1: Awareness is key here because it's not as though our
Speaker 1: vulnerabilities or life circumstances will change, but looking for other
Speaker 1: problematic dynamics that can accompany grooming, like isolation, undertaking a
Speaker 1: relationship in secrecy, not being brought into all aspects of
Speaker 1: a person's life. These can be important to understand this
Speaker 1: dynamic and protect ourselves and others from it. In my
Speaker 1: next takeaway, Jen's story is a reminder that even when
Speaker 1: there is a massive betrayal that affected not only her
Speaker 1: but the other people he affected as well as friends
Speaker 1: and family. While it may feel that we can't come
Speaker 1: back from it, these experiences do not have to steal
Speaker 1: our empathy and compassion. While Jen had to go through
Speaker 1: her own process of working through her feelings about adult
Speaker 1: women who knowingly entered into a relationship up with her husband,
Speaker 1: she found that the process ultimately didn't steal her empathy
Speaker 1: and compassion or her belief in love. Interestingly, she did
Speaker 1: have empathy for the other woman as she learned more
Speaker 1: about how people like her ex husband work and manipulate,
Speaker 1: and ultimately she didn't lose her belief in love and relationships.
Speaker 1: These betrayal relationships do not have to steal our futures
Speaker 1: from us. They have already harmed us enough. A big
Speaker 1: thank you to our executive producers Jada Pinkett Smith, Valen Jethrow,
Speaker 1: Ellen Rakaton, and Dr Rominey de Vassila. And thank you
Speaker 1: to our producer Matthew Jones, associate producer Mara Dela Rosa,
Speaker 1: and consultant Kelly Ebling. And finally, thank you to our
Speaker 1: editors and sound engineers Devin Donnaghe and Calvin Bailiff