A Critique of Esther Perel’s Position on Transparency in Infidelity

Friday, February 14, 2025. This is for M&B who worked on Esther’s couch, and continue to work on mine. I celebrate you both choosing transparency the 2.0 version of your life-partner commitment, even though it’s occasionally been a pain in the ass.

In her book, The State of Affairs, Esther Perel writes:

'It was a momentary lapse in judgment – I was drunk and I deeply regret it,' says Lina, who’d been engaged only a few months when a night of partying after her college reunion ended in an ex’s bed.

'If I tell my fiancé, I know it will destroy him. His first wife left with his best friend, and he always said if I cheated on him, it was over.'

Perel muses:

“Yes, she should have thought of that before. But should her slip-up derail their whole life?”

Perel’s framing of infidelity and secrecy as complex moral terrain deserves careful examination.

Because from an American perspective, it’s not so complex.

While Esther presents a compassionate exploration of human frailty, I believe that her approach to transparency undermines core ethical principles in relationships.

Let’s unpack where Esther’s argument falls short.

Framing Deceit as Compassion is a Moral Error or“What he doesn’t know won’t hurt him.”

Perel implies that Lina withholding the truth can be an act of kindness, but this reframes betrayal as protection.

Concealment does not shield Lina’s partner from pain—it only defers it, transforming what could be a painful conversation into a devastating revelation if the truth emerges later. True compassion honors autonomy; it does not deprive Lina’s partner of his right to decide his future.

Trust Erodes Slowly, But Breaks Suddenly

Secrecy is a slow poison.

Relationships built on deception often suffer from intimacy decay, as Lina’s guilt and fear create emotional distance. Should the truth surface years later, her now twice-traumatized husband not only faces the infidelity but also the collapse of trust from Lina’s prolonged deceit.

Transparency as Accountability and Repair

Accountability without transparency is an illusion.

Perel’s advice risks allowing Lina to avoid the consequences of their actions under the pretense of protecting her partner. But genuine accountability means Lina fessing up, facing the consequences and allowing her partner to respond with full knowledge of the truth.

Deception Undermines Consent and Dignity

Consent requires informed choice.

By hiding her infidelity, Lina thwarts her partner’s ability to engage in the relationship with full awareness. This is not protection—it is exploitation, turning what should be a partnership into a unilateral control of truth.

Esther never explores the elephant in the room; The depth of the betrayal, only a few months into the commitment, given what Lina knows about the deepest heart-felt wounds of the man she loves.

Lina’s current unworthiness as a reliable life partner for a man who made his deal-breaking relationship boundaries concrete as f*ck from the get-go is readily apparent.

Very often we don’t go elsewhere because we are looking for another person. We go elsewhere because we are looking for another self. It isn’t so much that we want to leave the person we are with as we want to leave the person we have become. Esther Perel

The Long-Term Costs of Silence

Perel profoundly underestimates how secrecy compounds harm.

The longer Lina’s deception continues, the more it entangles family, future children, and shared commitments. The inevitable fallout, should the truth emerge, leaves devastation not only for the betrayed partner but for the entire family unit.

The False Mercy of Concealment

Perel’s suggestion that confession can be self-serving misinterprets the meaning of disclosure.

Truth is not merely a confessional purge for Lina’s guilt; it is a recognition of Lina’s partner’s essential dignity and right to make informed choices about his life.

Perel’s inability to tolerate transparency as a moral absolute presents a shocking contrast to American moral sensibilities.

The Role of Context and Consequences:

Perel emphasizes that not all truths are equally necessary or constructive.

She believes that the decision to disclose should depend on what the clueless partner stands to gain or lose from knowing.

In Lina’s situation, her one-time lapse does not define her commitment to the relationship. I disagree.

It may not define it, but it sure as sh*t informs it.

The notion that Lina is fundamentally unworthy of her fiancee is never explored.

Also, why is this not being seen by Perel as a potential impulse control issue that warrants a medical assessment? I’d want to rule out bi-polar disorder, AUD, and many other conditions.

Perel asks readers to consider whether withholding the truth could sometimes be an act of care, especially when the revelation might cause lasting damage without offering a path to healing.

Ok, but why are we conveniently assuming no path to healing? As a fellow Marriage and Family Therapist, I’m confused by Perel’s certainty.

Guilt, Remorse, and Repair

Rather than focusing solely on confession, Perel encourages Lina to channel her guilt into meaningful change.

She believes that true atonement can come through renewed dedication and care within the relationship, rather than through a confession that serves primarily to unburden the unfaithful partner.

For Perel, the most important question is not “Should I confess?” but “How can I become the partner I want to be moving forward?”

But if Lina was anywhere near the partner she aspires to be, she would not be in this absurd predicament.

How will Lina change? Esther knows that the best predictor of future behavior, is past behavior. Why are we pretending otherwise?

The self-absorbed sentiment here is as thick as a handshake at a sales convention—warm, firm, and utterly devoid of meaning.

Integrity Through Truth

Perel’s thoughts on relational complexity are sometimes insightful, but in this case, her tolerance for secrecy conveniently shoplifts compassion for Lina’s naked self-interest.

Transparency, while painful, is the only path to integrity and genuine repair.

Relationships are built on trust, and trust cannot survive without integrity.

Real care requires courage—the courage to face consequences, honor boundaries, and prioritize dignity over comfort.

But Esther suggests you gauge the level of painful difficulty your disclosure might entail, and, if it’s assessed as too overwhelming, take the easy way out, instead.

That is profoundly unwise.

Be Well, Stay Kind, and Godspeed.