An Open Letter to Sidonie, and to Every Outside Voice Weighing In

This letter is addressed not only to you, but also to every bystander, friend, and self-appointed “truth-teller” who has inserted themselves into the private lives of those affected by betrayal and complex trauma. If you have ever labeled a betrayed and abused partner “materialistic,” “controlling,” “paranoid,” or a “red flag” for setting boundaries, insisting on safety, or surviving in ways outsiders do not understand - this message is for you.

You speak with confidence about situations you have never experienced firsthand: betrayal trauma, complex PTSD, patterns of integrity abuse, and the reality of living with secrecy or compartmentalized relationships. You offer opinions, judgments, and unsolicited advice without ever carrying the consequences, bearing the risk, or living with the real fallout.

This letter is not intended to attack, but to set the record straight and offer a voice to every betrayed partner whose experience has been denied, whose boundaries have been pathologized, or whose pain has been minimized by those who believe “knowing the story” means hearing only one version, one time.

To Sidonie, and to anyone who has ever felt entitled to judge a relationship from the outside and never lived,

You speak with certainty about a reality you’ve only ever seen through Cam’s view. Your commentary on my character and the relationship reveals a lack of experience with trauma, addiction, betrayal, and real accountability. What you call objectivity is, in practice, repeating Cam’s narrative without understanding the facts or the context.

You have not lived real life with Cam. You’ve spent less than 24 hours with him in person - never in the trenches, never on the receiving end of betrayal, or responsible for cleaning up the fallout. You have not witnessed the harm, the professional interventions, or the realities of supporting someone through repeated crises.

Passing judgment from the outside is easy; surviving betrayal and abuse is not. Your conversations with Cam don’t give you authority to speak for our relationship or its reality. For three years, I lived every day alongside him, managed the fallout of secrets, and made the hard choices to ensure safety - for both of us. The story you’ve heard is a fraction of the truth, filtered through Cam’s selective sharing.

Much of your judgment about me came before you had any knowledge of Cam’s disorders, compulsive lying, or the real extent of betrayal. Your certainty was misplaced; your assumptions were not based on full information. If you had the capacity for self-reflection, you might question how many of your conclusions hold up in light of the facts.

Everything I have, I worked for - often against odds you haven’t faced. My family relies on me. If valuing security or caring for those who depend on me strikes you as materialistic, that’s your lens, not mine. When you visited, I drove you around in the same car you now use to attack my character. If you understood what it means to build a life from the ground up, you’d recognize the projection.

Self-respect and self-assurance are not the same as superficiality. My choices - to care for myself, to set boundaries, to invest in community, are not shallow. They are necessary for survival after betrayal. What you label as vanity is actually hard-won self-worth. If this challenges you, perhaps it’s because it disrupts the narrative you find more comfortable.

The boundaries I set were not arbitrary. Every single one was put in place after specific, concrete betrayals. They were discussed and recommended by therapists and mutually agreed upon - these were not the actions of a controlling partner, but of someone trying to survive years of secrecy and gaslighting. In every clinical model of recovery, transparency and access are non-negotiable for safety.

What you call paranoia is the reality of betrayal trauma - an adaptive response, not pathology. If you experienced even a fraction of what I endured, you’d know that vigilance is not a flaw, but a survival tool.

You have judged me from a distance, never pausing to question how little you know or whether Cam’s version is the whole truth. That’s not empathy but it’s willful ignorance on your part. Cam didn’t share the full story with you or other enablers - he protected his narrative. The documentation exists: therapist notes, session records, and Cam’s own admissions confirm his “progress” came at a high cost to me.

When Cam claimed to be “himself” at last, it wasn’t a change in dynamic. It was the result of years of my emotional labor and refusal to collude with secrecy. He didn’t become honest overnight, he was confronted with the consequences of his choices because I stopped shielding him from them.

You met Cam in person twice, totaling less than 24 hours. You have no idea what daily life required, or what it took to get him to even approach honesty. If your standard for a healthy relationship is that a partner never sets boundaries or demands accountability, that says more about your expectations than mine.

I protected Cam’s privacy, even when it meant swallowing my own pain. But he made our private story public, forwarding my correspondence (with edits) to others. Once he chose to share his version, I had every right to correct the record. You don’t get to misrepresent someone and expect them to stay silent.

Instead of respecting the limits of your knowledge, you inserted yourself with confident diagnoses and judgments. That is not harmless. It is not neutral.

You know only the values Cam has shared after the fact, in narratives designed to justify his behavior. You never had to witness the reality or do the work.

Cam has repeated these same patterns - betrayal, avoidance, fantasy - in every relationship. Others left before seeing the full cycle. You’ve only heard the version that supports his comfort.

Cam’s reality is filled with ongoing sexual and romantic obsessions, often involving women he encounters in daily life or online. This is not harmless fantasy but a pattern of secrecy, boundary violations, and risk.

The boundaries about contact with exes or female friends were never a blanket rule, but a direct response to Cam’s betrayals and ongoing dishonesty. This was not about jealousy or control, but about safety after repeated deception.

My own friendships with men have always been open and platonic. What Cam called friendship with women was, in reality, secrecy, fantasy, and ongoing sexualization - even of those he described as “like family.”

Cam’s dishonesty extended to agreements about contact with Marie, a former sexual partner. We mutually agreed to pause contact to rebuild trust, but he chose secrecy and violation instead.

When I stopped offering emotional and physical comfort - after repeated harm - Cam shifted the narrative to frame me as controlling or “triggered by everything.” That is textbook DARVO victim reversal, not an honest appraisal of the situation.

If Cam or you claim values incompatibility, know that the real issue was a refusal to live with honesty and integrity. Those who run from accountability are not incompatible with my values, they are incompatible with facing hard truths.

My boundaries and decisions were made in consultation with licensed professionals, based on safety, not revenge. This was not dysfunction; it was the result of repeated, destabilizing abuse. I will not apologize for demanding accountability or refusing to minimize the truth.

You did not live this relationship. You did not bear the risk, the fallout, or the cost. I will not be redefined by those who saw only what they wanted to see.

If you seek facts, the documentation exists. I do not give consent for my experience to be used to justify someone else’s denial. What follows is not for debate, it is for the record.

P.S. To every woman who’s been redefined by outsiders: Your boundaries and your instincts are valid. You do not owe anyone your silence, your pain, or your explanation.