lovernotafighter Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Usually religious people are the ones that hold "the piece of paper" seriously. That's the problem I have with this. I am a Christian and I think this is 100% wrong... and if I was not religious, I would still not agree that a person deserves to be betrayed like this. Oh, for goodness sakes, get down off that crucifix. Someone needs the wood. Link to post Share on other sites
lovernotafighter Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 There is a big difference between "being available" and "being available to have sex, when its convenient". Love is an action. A married man's action towards his mistress is not love, unless he divorces his wife. He is just having sex with a mistress. If your wanting a purely sexual relationship than having sex with someone whose married would be a solution but if your wanting a love relationship, don't you think its wiser to start off by picking someone thats not married to someone else? funny do know how much work is involved in a relationship like a affair? trust me if the MM just wanted a piece of @ss he'd just go home which is far far easier Link to post Share on other sites
nittygritty Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 I agree they have the real life.. the bills, the house chores, the kids.. He's not willing to divorce because she's like an old slipper... comfortable.. he doesn't want to lose his kids.. he doesn't want to lose his financial security... Love has nothing to do with all the marriage crap... it has to do with the soul, the heart.. Scre*ing is not love, I agree... but if you think that when the W gets scr*wed as you say... and he closes his eyes and his mind is with the OW... humm.. I wonder who gets the 'love'... Lizzie, you are actually benefitting from the relationship and your not wanting anything more than it is. You don't want a man to divorce his wife for you. That is not what most of the OW's posts on this forum that I've read, want. The majority think or hope that he will someday divorce his wife to be with the OW, correct? Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 No.. I don't think I'm the only one who doesn't want the MM in their life... I know other women as well who date MMs but want to remain single... I don't see the difference... an OW is an OW no matter what her goal is... Link to post Share on other sites
nittygritty Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Don't worry, his availability is not dependent on sex...But you don't mean enough to me for me to explain anymore... I have a relationship with my partner that is based on friendship, love and mutual respect... I guess that's what really pisses you off... I'm not pissed off. Truly, I could care less what the nature of your relationship is. I was just pointing out that if your having sex with someone who is married to someone else... Link to post Share on other sites
nittygritty Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 No.. I don't think I'm the only one who doesn't want the MM in their life... I know other women as well who date MMs but want to remain single... I don't see the difference... an OW is an OW no matter what her goal is... My apologies, I did not realize that the OW on this forum did not want the MM in their life. Link to post Share on other sites
lovernotafighter Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Lizzie, you are actually benefitting from the relationship and your not wanting anything more than it is. You don't want a man to divorce his wife for you. That is not what most of the OW's posts on this forum that I've read, want. The majority think or hope that he will someday divorce his wife to be with the OW, correct? how weird. do you always stereo type everyone or something? Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Love is an action. A married man's action towards his mistress is not love, unless he divorces his wife. Right - love is an action. Yet the self-same action is deemed "love" or "not love" solely depending on a piece of paper? I think not. I'd argue the other way - that because of the piece of paper, in the one context (his W) it's obligation; in the other (the OW) it's choice. Hmm, obligation or choice, which is more likely to be "love"....? Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Right - love is an action. Yet the self-same action is deemed "love" or "not love" solely depending on a piece of paper? I think not. I'd argue the other way - that because of the piece of paper, in the one context (his W) it's obligation; in the other (the OW) it's choice. Hmm, obligation or choice, which is more likely to be "love"....? That is a good point... Just like suddenly you have divorce papers in hand-ok I don't love you now that I have these papers...please there's no love WAY before a divorce on someone's part...a piece of paper has nothing to do with how someone feels... Link to post Share on other sites
reboot Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 That piece of paper was originally a choice too. Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 That piece of paper was originally a choice too. I'm not sure if you're addressing my last comment? If so, I was referring to the earlier comment that a person cannot love another until they have their divorce papers in hand... Link to post Share on other sites
nittygritty Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Right - love is an action. Yet the self-same action is deemed "love" or "not love" solely depending on a piece of paper? I think not. I'd argue the other way - that because of the piece of paper, in the one context (his W) it's obligation; in the other (the OW) it's choice. Hmm, obligation or choice, which is more likely to be "love"....? It is a choice to be obligated. Choosing to remain obligated when you don't legally have to... now lets see, would that be love or infatuation? Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 It is a choice to be obligated. No it's not, in any sustained sense. One chooses only at the outset, at which point one becomes obligated and the obligation remains. If I sign a contract with a bank to borrow money to buy a house, I'm under obligation until such time as that contract has run its course. I can't simply decide I no longer feel obligated, and ignore my side of the contract. An obligation is exactly that - the revocation of choice and the performance of required duties as stipulated by the contract, so long as it's in force. Link to post Share on other sites
reboot Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 I'm not sure if you're addressing my last comment? If so, I was referring to the earlier comment that a person cannot love another until they have their divorce papers in hand...Sorry, it's hard to keep up sometimes. Link to post Share on other sites
lovernotafighter Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Don't take my word for it, mosey on over to any OW website, just about all the OW get dumped, eventually. It's the rare MM who ends up with the OW in the long run. Very rare indeed. ...and your on how many of those again? why are you hanging around OW boards, I'm just curious? Link to post Share on other sites
Author Jinnah Posted October 6, 2007 Author Share Posted October 6, 2007 No it's not, in any sustained sense. One chooses only at the outset, at which point one becomes obligated and the obligation remains. If I sign a contract with a bank to borrow money to buy a house, I'm under obligation until such time as that contract has run its course. I can't simply decide I no longer feel obligated, and ignore my side of the contract. An obligation is exactly that - the revocation of choice and the performance of required duties as stipulated by the contract, so long as it's in force. I have to respond to this one... a bank loan is different... a marriage can be ended at anytime easily. Link to post Share on other sites
OWoman Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 I have to respond to this one... a bank loan is different... a marriage can be ended at anytime easily. OK this is another of those logical weirdacies, where there's no right answer. A MM leaves his M, he's nailed for "abandoning his children" who're supposed to be his number one priority. He stays, and continues A with OW, he "doesn't love the OW, he's just using her". A marriage can be ended at any time? Not so easily when there are children involved. Also, that depends on where one lives. Some countries you can walk into a divorce court with your memorandum drawn up by lawyers and walk out divorced a few minutes later. Other countries want you to be formally separated for years before they'll declare the divorce official. "At any time" in the former country, yes. In the latter, no - unless you're saying the marriage is "ended" once the MM (or MW) decides to start the process, which isn't the typical (or legal) view. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Jinnah Posted October 6, 2007 Author Share Posted October 6, 2007 OK this is another of those logical weirdacies, where there's no right answer. A MM leaves his M, he's nailed for "abandoning his children" who're supposed to be his number one priority. He stays, and continues A with OW, he "doesn't love the OW, he's just using her". A marriage can be ended at any time? Not so easily when there are children involved. Also, that depends on where one lives. Some countries you can walk into a divorce court with your memorandum drawn up by lawyers and walk out divorced a few minutes later. Other countries want you to be formally separated for years before they'll declare the divorce official. "At any time" in the former country, yes. In the latter, no - unless you're saying the marriage is "ended" once the MM (or MW) decides to start the process, which isn't the typical (or legal) view. ...and the moral of the story is: don't get married if you can't stay faithful. He can complain all he wants, but he is going to have to deal with his consequences (a divorce)... he chose them. All I'm hearing is that he made a bad choice, and instead of dealing with it, he wants his W to instead (sucks b/c he is putting her life at risk - STD's happen)... which is so selfish since she didn't make the choice. Anyway, I know nothing anyone else says matters, so... as you were. Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Some people don't know they won't be faithful when they get married...Sometimes people change and grow apart and everything is ok until they meet someone... It's a blanket overgeneralization to say don't get married if you can't stay faithful...most people probably believe they can/will be faithful in the beginning... Link to post Share on other sites
Impudent Oyster Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 It's a blanket overgeneralization to say don't get married if you can't stay faithful...most people probably believe they can/will be faithful in the beginning... I agree, which is why it's tremendously stupid to get involved with someone you already know is unfaithful. An OW should never be surprised when their MM cheats on them, after all, he's already cheating and she's OK with it. Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 I agree, which is why it's tremendously stupid to get involved with someone you already know is unfaithful. An OW should never be surprised when their MM cheats on them, after all, he's already cheating and she's OK with it. Well I guess we can't all be as smart as you...and you've had such good fortune with your own intelligence... Link to post Share on other sites
Author Jinnah Posted October 6, 2007 Author Share Posted October 6, 2007 Some people don't know they won't be faithful when they get married...Sometimes people change and grow apart and everything is ok until they meet someone... It's a blanket overgeneralization to say don't get married if you can't stay faithful...most people probably believe they can/will be faithful in the beginning... Should think about it beforehand then, right? Seeing as though marriage is a death-trap, right? Link to post Share on other sites
Impudent Oyster Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 I can't understand why so many BW harp so on the piece of paper aspect. Surely they, like us OW, know that M is a porous institution, that a piece of paper is actually not much of a trophy? M. OW, you seemed smarter than that. That "piece of paper" represents so much, it's amazing to me that you can't see it. It represents the commitment and responsibility spouses have to each other and it's a legally binding contract, which, practically speaking, carries a whole lot of weight. But so long as you're happy, that's all that matters, right? Link to post Share on other sites
Björk Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Should think about it beforehand then, right? Seeing as though marriage is a death-trap, right? it is?? I will never get married then!! Link to post Share on other sites
GreenEyedLady Posted October 6, 2007 Share Posted October 6, 2007 Should think about it beforehand then, right? Seeing as though marriage is a death-trap, right? Do you actually believe what you've just written? How many couples do you know that got married very young? You think that they were thinking ahead 10 or 20 years? People can't see the future...so they make the most of what they have to work with at the time... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts