Jump to content

What if your MM or MW had other Affairs?


Recommended Posts

JamesM,

 

Did you miss the first part of my post. Let me make this clear:

 

No I did not, and you were clear. I did not intentionally change what you said. While it is good logic, I don't think it accurately describes what I think is the issue. That is why we are not in agreement.

 

BOTH SPOUSES CONTRIBUTE TO THE HEALTH OF A MARRIAGE. BOTH SPOUSES ARE TO BLAME WHEN A MARRIAGE FAILS. THE CHEATER MAKES THE CHOICE TO CHEAT AND HE OR SHE MAKES THAT CHOICE WITHOUT THEIR SPOUSE'S KNOWLEDGE SO, THEY ARE THE ONE TO BLAME FOR THAT CHOICE. IMO!

 

And I have said many times before that I agree that if I choose an affair, I am responsible for that CHOICE. The thing (as said a few posts ago) that we seem to disagree on is that while you say BOTH contribute to the health or sickness of the marriage, it seems that this health or lack of health has NOTHING to do with WHY "I" (or a MM) chose an affair, counseling, or divorce.

 

And no, not all men sink into affairs because of their marriage. Some simply choose affairs for other reasons.

 

And then we get to donna's comment about marrying POS. Who chose to marry? Who is responsible for that choice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fault or no fault, there is a big distinciton between reacting to dissatisfaction above board by instituting a divorce and the lying inherent in cheating.

As for reasons, for cheating, I guess all actions are motivated by a reason. Hitler had his "reasons", so did Manson, Bundy, et al. They chose an immoral, disgusting course of action based on their "reasons".

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some of those POS are very good at hiding who they truly are until the ring goes on. You should have a little more sympathy for their victims. How do you think Ted Bundy was able to sweet talk those girls into his VW?

 

I do have sympathy. I know that when we date we tend to overlook things that are red flags. I did, too. Looking back, I can see signs that I ignored. I am sure my wife can, too. And I am thankful that things turned out as they did. (They just could be so much better).

 

So a "victim" of an affair is comparable to a "victim" of Ted Bundy? :eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fault or no fault, there is a big distinciton between reacting to dissatisfaction above board by instituting a divorce and the lying inherent in cheating.

As for reasons, for cheating, I guess all actions are motivated by a reason. Hitler had his "reasons", so did Manson, Bundy, et al. They chose an immoral, disgusting course of action based on their "reasons".

 

And society calls those actions inexcusable. When Hitler is mentioned in a thread like this I think it's time for me to go to lunch. I can somewhat see your analogy, but I really am hungry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for reasons, for cheating, I guess all actions are motivated by a reason.

 

Thank you. And how many posts did it take to reach that conclusion? :D

 

Hitler had his "reasons", so did Manson, Bundy, et al. They chose an immoral, disgusting course of action based on their "reasons".

 

:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Good one, Reggie! But I'm gonna bet you a month's paycheck there will be some rationalizations coming right behind it.

 

Please let me share that paycheck. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
And society calls those actions inexcusable. When Hitler is mentioned in a thread like this I think it's time for me to go to lunch. I can somewhat see your analogy, but I really am hungry.

 

Yeah, I was reluctant to bring him up, as he is such an extreme example it weakens the point.Let's go with Spiro Agnew, instead. Have a good lunch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's very unlike you to try to key on something like that.

 

Was that a compliment? :D

 

I'm saying Ted Bundy was also very good at hiding his true nature. You gonna blame his victims for what he did to them as well because he hid his true self from them and they didn't catch on in time?

 

I think most if not all of his victims never met him before the day he killed them. When we date someone, this is our opportunity to discover the "Ted Bundy" prior to marrying him.

 

Like hereand now, I am a bit perturbed that we have now progressed down the road to comparing men and women in affairs to the most evil murderers we know.

 

Or are you going to tell me that a BS isn't a victim in any way, shape, or form?

 

No.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's very unlike you to try to key on something like that. I'm saying Ted Bundy was also very good at hiding his true nature. You gonna blame his victims for what he did to them as well because he hid his true self from them and they didn't catch on in time? Or are you going to tell me that a BS isn't a victim in any way, shape, or form?

 

Anyone that has been in a relationship with a disordered person(and infidelity is rampant among them), knows what you mean, D. They are incredible at hiding their true selves until you are enmeshed. Then, when the mask starts to come off, denial, fear, obligations, kids etc. ,as well as their skill at convincing you that you are the problem, keep you in for a long time while you are being destroyed.

No question that a BS has been victimized. A BS has been lied to, stolen from(time theft, esp), often gaslighted and abused by a WS who is trying to justify the A by demonizing the BS.

In the context of affairs, the words"victim" and "judgement " get a bad wrap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Was that a compliment? :D

 

 

 

I think most if not all of his victims never met him before the day he killed them. When we date someone, this is our opportunity to discover the "Ted Bundy" prior to marrying him.

 

Like hereand now, I am a bit perturbed that we have now progressed down the road to comparing men and women in affairs to the most evil murderers we know.

 

 

 

No.

If you "dated" Ted Bundy, you got no chance to discern his nature.

As for comparing killers to adulterers, get some help with those reading comprehension skills, James. The post refers to all actions being motivated by "reasons", not the degree of evil associated with the actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone that has been in a relationship with a disordered person(and infidelity is rampant among them), knows what you mean, D. They are incredible at hiding their true selves until you are enmeshed. Then, when the mask starts to come off, denial, fear, obligations, kids etc. ,as well as their skill at convincing you that you are the problem, keep you in for a long time while you are being destroyed.

No question that a BS has been victimized. A BS has been lied to, stolen from(time theft, esp), often gaslighted and abused by a WS who is trying to justify the A by demonizing the BS.

In the context of affairs, the words"victim" and "judgement " get a bad wrap.

 

One could use the same argument for the BS who has created an atmosphere in which the WS feels completely helpless.

 

His back is against the wall. "You have three choices....live with it, or lose your family through divorce, or publicly humiliate yourself when you get caught cheating. As for me, I am happy as I am. If you have a problem, then it is your problem. I am not interested in sex anymore, and if you are then you are selfish wanting me to change."

 

He is a victim and then decides to call the bluff in a way that would hurt her. Of course since forced celibacy is not morally wrong, then he becomes the one who is at fault for his choice, and she is given the sympathy of a "loving wife" who did everything she could to make him happy...except sex.

 

To say that the BS is the only victim would be less than completely honest.

 

But, yes, if you are describing an individual who never loved the person he or she betrayed, then I have no argument with you. However, I think you would agree that most couples start out with love for one another...not hatred.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you "dated" Ted Bundy, you got no chance to discern his nature.

 

I don't believe any of his victims got to know him prior to the fatal meeting with him.

 

As for comparing killers to adulterers, get some help with those reading comprehension skills, James. The post refers to all actions being motivated by "reasons", not the degree of evil associated with the actions.

 

Perhaps I missed the comparison of someone less evil than the killers listed?

 

Then why did you bring in Hitler and Bundy?

 

Because the awfulness of their crimes was being compared to the "awfulness" of the actions of a cheater.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, if your spouse hid the fact that he or she intends to withold sex, or , even if that change comes about post marriage for non-health related reasons you have been hoowinked and are within your rights to divorce, James.

I think you have an urealistic view as to how folks would look at you for divorcing under those circumstances. And, you seem to care a lot about how folks would look at you, despite having the knowledge that you are acting in a justifiable manner by divorcing.

My family as well as my ex-wife's famil urged me to divorce her and have supported me to the max. I was surprised by her family's support, especially.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't believe any of his victims got to know him prior to the fatal meeting with him.

 

 

 

Perhaps I missed the comparison of someone less evil than the killers listed?

 

Then why did you bring in Hitler and Bundy?

 

Because the awfulness of their crimes was being compared to the "awfulness" of the actions of a cheater.

 

No, just to show that incredibly irrational acts are still based in "reasons", at least "reasons" as the actor defines that word.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Please let me share that paycheck. :D

 

Not to worried about James' rationalization. They are nice and circular.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actaully D, what James is doing by mischaracterizing what you are saying(and I hope it is intentional as, if not, the candlepower is low) is a very common technique among the disordered, themselves. It's called deflection.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Actaully D, what James is doing by mischaracterizing what you are saying(and I hope it is intentional as, if not, the candlepower is low) is a very common technique among the disordered, themselves. It's called deflection.

 

The assumption is that your candlepower is high? :laugh:

 

Now I am disordered? :(:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
The assumption is that your candlepower is high? :laugh:

 

Now I am disordered? :(:D

 

It's all relative, James. Think I'll just stick by you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

James are you very bored this week?

 

You are debating with people whose positions are very polarized... who see the affair in terms of the betrayal to the family and dont recognize any shades of gray. Its like debating abortion with teh moral majority. There is no real debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I get it Donna. You think I am a horrible immoral irresponsible, etc etc person because I was involved in adultery and dont apologize for it and apparently herenow believes that because the man I was involved with didnt leave his wife he really didnt love me. Reggie just likes to taunt people because he was hurt.

 

I hear you all loud and clear. I dont on the other hand find the constant invective useful as a mode of "discussion" when people are looking for support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I get it Donna. You think I am a horrible immoral irresponsible, etc etc person because I was involved in adultery and dont apologize for it and apparently herenow believes that because the man I was involved with didnt leave his wife he really didnt love me. Reggie just likes to taunt people because he was hurt.

 

I hear you all loud and clear. I dont on the other hand find the constant invective useful as a mode of "discussion" when people are looking for support.

 

Sorry, jj33 I don't see any posts where we said anything about you. I believe our posts are just giving our opinion that the cheater is responsible for his own actions.

 

And yes, I truly believe that if a MM loves an OW, he will leave his marriage. Carrying on with an OW while still married, IMO, doesn't show love for anyone. But hey believe what you want. Sure he loves you and he stays married because life with his wife is a better option than being with you for whatever reason. Works for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
James are you very bored this week?

 

You are debating with people whose positions are very polarized... who see the affair in terms of the betrayal to the family and dont recognize any shades of gray. Its like debating abortion with teh moral majority. There is no real debate.

 

No, what we see is a decision that has been made by the cheater and others that are giving that cheater a "reason" to lie and cheat. We are not "debating" the cheating, that is a whole other story. We are debating who is a fault for the choice to cheat. IMO, it is 100% the cheater that should be blamed. Others disagree and say that the BW is partially to blame. Yes, the BW shares the blame for the problems in the marriage, but not for the choice of the MM to cheat.

 

Personally, I have found this to be a very good discussion. If you want to put yourself in the middle of it, welcome. But, we aren't talking about the same things at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I get it Donna. You think I am a horrible immoral irresponsible, etc etc person because I was involved in adultery and dont apologize for it and apparently herenow believes that because the man I was involved with didnt leave his wife he really didnt love me. Reggie just likes to taunt people because he was hurt.

 

I hear you all loud and clear. I dont on the other hand find the constant invective useful as a mode of "discussion" when people are looking for support.

Well, it's nice taunting, though.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...