Reformed other women

[jennie-jennie]

I don't think that everyone that can agree with some of what the self-identified as "reformed" say about affairs or about the married people that engage in them. Because I do come at this as a former BW, I can agree with the "happy" OW and say that the MM is not completely bad or evil or intending great harm to the OW. Its not because I "have" to believe this to stay married to him, its because its true. My H is an honorable man that has done a dishonorable thing. I can agree that is the case with many MM.

A very good way of putting it.

I think that labels have their place, but I have a huge problem when they lump all that disagree with one view in the same group. I don't think there is a such thing as a "reformed" MP. Just because a person returned to their marriage to make it work and regrets the things they did in their affairs, they are called "reformed"? What exactly is a "reformed" BS? One that has decided to cheat?

 

Nope, that is not what reformed OW means. Not the way I use it at least.

[BB07]

Reformed.....vs non reformed, maybe we are being a bit to nit-picky here?

 

The truth lies in that there are lots of different viewpoints here (and that is a great thing) and we all have our personal experiences that influence us and it all depends on where we are at this particular stage in our lives and heck sometimes what we say depends on what day it is and what our emotions are that minute.

 

Personally I don't think it's fair to try to pit one against the other here, most of us here are here to offer support and as I said the support offered comes from where each individual is in life. No one can pretend that our past or experiences doesn't influence us........and yes that is OK. It's up to the person asking for help or compassion to weed out what's valuable and what's not. Differences of opinions are fine, but should we be pitting one against the other..........no I don't think so.

[NoIDidn't]

I can't understand how you can not figure this out by yourself. It stares in your eyes when you are an unapologetic other woman at least. Perhaps if you share their views it is more difficult to see?

 

This is a true statement. And' date=' it goes both ways. Its easier to be offended by a view you don't share or agree with. And I think that's the problem here. Like I said in a previous post, I think both views are valid for those holding them.[/quote']

 

Reformed.....vs non reformed, maybe we are being a bit to nit-picky here?

 

The truth lies in that there are lots of different viewpoints here (and that is a great thing) and we all have our personal experiences that influence us and it all depends on where we are at this particular stage in our lives and heck sometimes what we say depends on what day it is and what our emotions are that minute.

 

Personally I don't think it's fair to try to pit one against the other here, most of us here are here to offer support and as I said the support offered comes from where each individual is in life. No one can pretend that our past or experiences doesn't influence us........and yes that is OK. It's up to the person asking for help or compassion to weed out what's valuable and what's not. Differences of opinions are fine, but should we be pitting one against the other..........no I don't think so.

 

I agree with you mostly, BB. The above quotes between me and jennie-jennie show where I am with this discussion on what makes some considered "reformed" or not.

 

I don't think I'm nit-picking, though. I don't think its fair or logical to deny others their opinion just because it at odds with your (general) own.

[BB07]

I agree with you mostly, BB. The above quotes between me and jennie-jennie show where I am with this discussion on what makes some considered "reformed" or not.

 

I don't think I'm nit-picking, though. I don't think its fair or logical to deny others their opinion just because it at odds with your (general) own.

 

 

I guess I'm in the frame of mind today.......can't we just all get along.

 

It's always good to get different opinions......I will always agree with that. I almost always find something that I can use or can relate to in almost every post I read, regardless of which side it's on, but that's just me I guess.

[White Flower]

Reformed.....vs non reformed, maybe we are being a bit to nit-picky here?

 

The truth lies in that there are lots of different viewpoints here (and that is a great thing) and we all have our personal experiences that influence us and it all depends on where we are at this particular stage in our lives and heck sometimes what we say depends on what day it is and what our emotions are that minute.

 

Personally I don't think it's fair to try to pit one against the other here, most of us here are here to offer support and as I said the support offered comes from where each individual is in life. No one can pretend that our past or experiences doesn't influence us........and yes that is OK. It's up to the person asking for help or compassion to weed out what's valuable and what's not. Differences of opinions are fine, but should we be pitting one against the other..........no I don't think so.

These are valid points you make BB07. One's own outcome is very different from that of another as we are all seeking different lessons in our lives. Some may be involved in an A and decide that affairs are bad while others could have the same duration A and decide it was the best experience of their life. Both are right in their own eyes. The difference is sometimes the end decision is carried into a righteousness that tries to dehumanize or at the very least devalue those still in As as if they are not learning any valuable lesson at all.

 

What I find interesting in this thread is that the rOW is being defended by those who have never been one. I'm not saying it's wrong but it is interesting.

[torranceshipman]

I remember when you were with that guy and posting...I was going to ask you what happened...wow, that was a trip...

 

Hey Pureinheart, yes that was crazy! I got out so quick though, thanks in no small part to LSers That was so many years ago...its nice to say it ended up as nothing but a footnote amongst lots of other entertaining dating stories from my past as I just didn't hang around, or look back once I'd got out of it It was a mistake but I learnt loads and didnt waste much time in that situation. Thats what I wish more people would do - get out quick. Anyway....I'm with a gorgeous guy now and everything is really good. I have to say I learnt some invaluable stuff from that whole situation though...how are you doing these days?

[awkward]

I am very puzzled as to how it can be difficult to understand that the above can be hurtful.

 

I rarely see people refer to *ALL* in those terms. What I see mostly is people responding to the 'specific' poster and their story. The words might be hurtful to the OW because she doesn't believe them or thinks everyone doesn't know the truth in her situation. Which is a valid point because we don't know the truth. But what we do see in her story sounds like so much that has been seen before.

 

IMO that is why people use generalizations. Most people believe that if it walks and talks like a duck, it is in fact a duck. For instance, an OW will say he is staying for the kids. Well that could be true. Some men do stay for the kids. But if he is still sleeping with his wife and telling her I love you, etc. then it might not be true. Or if he doesn't spend any time with his children, then that might not be true. If someone points out these inconsistencies to the OW then she feels attacked.

 

It hurts the OW because she doesn't want her MM to be that duck, he is different. But when it turns out he isn't, she is then able to look back and see he was that duck. Of course in some instances those generalizations are wrong. Those are exceptions. Everyone hopes that their affair is the exception. That's all well and good, but usually the OW ends up hurt.

 

I don't see posters here as OW, ROW, BS, WS, others, etc. I think there are those that have BTDT and don't do it again, there are those that have never BTDT, and there are those who are currently involved in an affair.

 

Most of the ones that are currently involved in an affair want to end up with their MM. What happens when they do marry their MM? Do they then have a different view of marriage? Would they have the same view if their husband cheated on them? Are they then ROW?

[NoIDidn't]

I rarely see people refer to *ALL* in those terms. What I see mostly is people responding to the 'specific' poster and their story. The words might be hurtful to the OW because she doesn't believe them or thinks everyone doesn't know the truth in her situation. Which is a valid point because we don't know the truth. But what we do see in her story sounds like so much that has been seen before.

 

IMO that is why people use generalizations. Most people believe that if it walks and talks like a duck, it is in fact a duck. For instance, an OW will say he is staying for the kids. Well that could be true. Some men do stay for the kids. But if he is still sleeping with his wife and telling her I love you, etc. then it might not be true. Or if he doesn't spend any time with his children, then that might not be true. If someone points out these inconsistencies to the OW then she feels attacked.

 

It hurts the OW because she doesn't want her MM to be that duck, he is different. But when it turns out he isn't, she is then able to look back and see he was that duck. Of course in some instances those generalizations are wrong. Those are exceptions. Everyone hopes that their affair is the exception. That's all well and good, but usually the OW ends up hurt.

 

I don't see posters here as OW, ROW, BS, WS, others, etc. I think there are those that have BTDT and don't do it again, there are those that have never BTDT, and there are those who are currently involved in an affair.

 

Most of the ones that are currently involved in an affair want to end up with their MM. What happens when they do marry their MM? Do they then have a different view of marriage? Would they have the same view if their husband cheated on them? Are they then ROW?

 

I agree. Especially with the bolded. We are all just posters here. The labels that got us here help to explain the reasons for some of our views, but not all.

 

And the rest of the post has great points as well. Getting chided for being too general, and then the offense taken when a poster is specific is particularly...ironic.

 

Given the things listed in a previous post that the "reformed" have been found guilty of, it seems to follow that all that aren't gungho for affairs and the actions taken to maintain them are reformed too.

 

I, too, wonder if after a former OW marries her former MM, does that make her a ROW? I still remember jennie-jennie reporting to the board that her MM asked if GEL had married her MM because of something she had posted. I found, and still find, his response peculiar as there is nothing reform-ish about GEL. She always tells people to follow their own heart all while recognizing the truth and not deluding themselves.

[awkward]

Given the things listed in a previous post that the "reformed" have been found guilty of, it seems to follow that all that aren't gungho for affairs and the actions taken to maintain them are reformed too.

 

I guess that's my point. *Most* people in general (in the US) believe that affairs are not healthy. Even some current OW used to have that view. Unless you are a current OW, with a small exception, most people are going to land towards the ROW viewpoint because not only do they not want to see the BS/family hurt, they don't want to see the OW hurt either.

 

My viewpoint is own it. If the MM want the OW then divorce and marry her. If only it could be that simple. There is so much involved with a divorce including whether the MM actually wants to divorce. So that's why I feel that the OW should walk away until he does in fact divorce. Otherwise, she "might" get hurt on that rollercoaster.

 

I don't post things to attack OW. It's not my life. I'm not emotionally invested in the relationship. But what if something I do post helps them? Maybe something I say will help them see what I see in their story. Maybe they won't waste years of their life on a relationship that probably isn't going anywhere.

 

And if I see a truly happy other woman, good for her. She is happy where she is at. But then there are other generally happy other woman that want more and you can see from their story they aren't likely to ever get more. They don't want anyone to point out inconsistencies and if you do, then they feel attacked. IMO a truly HOW accepts the inconsistencies and knows things probably aren't going to change. They are okay with things the way they are.

 

Think about KG's story. Remember how bad she was hurting. Everyone could see it but her. Now she is able to see things she couldn't see before because she was emotionally invested.

 

She always tells people to follow their own heart all while recognizing the truth and not deluding themselves.

 

This is exactly how I feel. The trouble comes when people aren't willing to see everything for the way it is. You can still be happy and see the flaws but when you aren't even able to recognize that there are flaws then it becomes delusion.

Edited March 15, 2010 by awkward
spellng error

[jennie-jennie]

I, too, wonder if after a former OW marries her former MM, does that make her a ROW? I still remember jennie-jennie reporting to the board that her MM asked if GEL had married her MM because of something she had posted. I found, and still find, his response peculiar as there is nothing reform-ish about GEL. She always tells people to follow their own heart all while recognizing the truth and not deluding themselves.

 

How many times do we have to bring up the misinterpretation some LS posters made of what my MM said about GEL? I thought we were done with that already, NID. In his opinion there is something reformish about her and that is what he reacted to. Can we please let this go now once and for all, NID?

 

OWoman is certainly a proof that an OW can marry and still not be a reformed OW. It is interesting how in Awkward's account of LS members, "I think there are those that have BTDT and don't do it again, there are those that have never BTDT, and there are those who are currently involved in an affair.", no mention is made of "those that have BTDT and would do it again", like OWoman. She is made invisible, just like she said in an earlier post in this thread.

 

I am uncomfortable discussing specific posters. I apologize to GEL and OWoman if they find anything offensive in what I have said.

[White Flower]

I' date=' too, wonder if after a former OW marries her former MM, does that make her a ROW? [/quote']

Not sure I should name names or speak for anyone but it would appear by their posts that GEL, OWoman, and Together Forever wouldn't consider themselves rOW. I suppose GEL is different in that she didn't know she was an OW in the beginning; however, did carry on in the A because once she was in love she found it hard to walk away.

 

All three tend to support OW in this forum. I know if I were to M MM I would come back and support as well even if I found many aspects of the A difficult. Each case is different and everyone has a different lesson to learn. I try to support based on the individual.

 

And I think that is the crux of this thread, isn't it? That rOWs seem to not support as much as try to convince you to end the A because 'all As are bad'?

[jennie-jennie]

But then there are other generally happy other woman that want more and you can see from their story they aren't likely to ever get more.

 

This pretty much describes me. I claim my right to be generally happy and still want more. My MM gives me so much, so I want to be with him all the time. What is strange about that? There is no inconsistency in that in my opinion.

 

I know the flaws in our relationship. I live with them. Still the pros way outweigh the cons. And as long as they do, I will stay with my MM.

[White Flower]

This pretty much describes me. I claim my right to be generally happy and still want more. My MM gives me so much, so I want to be with him all the time. What is strange about that? There is no inconsistency in that in my opinion.

 

I know the flaws in our relationship. I live with them. Still the pros way outweigh the cons. And as long as they do, I will stay with my MM.

I wanted more from my M but didn't get it there either.

[jennie-jennie]

And I think that is the crux of this thread, isn't it? That rOWs seem to not support as much as try to convince you to end the A because 'all As are bad'?

 

Which brings us back to my question in the OP: What made the rOW change their minds so drastically about affairs and MM?

[White Flower]

Which brings us back to my question in the OP: What made the rOW change their minds so drastically about affairs and MM?

It is probably a blend of what they were looking for, what they got, and the lessons somewhere in the middle. Again, every lesson is different to every individual.

 

I am sure if they got their 'happy ending' they would be here more often with supportive posts instead of advising and warning posts.

[jennie-jennie]

It is probably a blend of what they were looking for, what they got, and the lessons somewhere in the middle. Again, every lesson is different to every individual.

 

I am sure if they got their 'happy ending' they would be here more often with supportive posts instead of advising and warning posts.

 

That's why you need to be in it for the journey, not for the destination. If you enjoy the journey, you can think when the affair ends: "Oh well, I did not get where I hoped to go, but I sure did enjoy myself!"

[awkward]

OWoman is certainly a proof that an OW can marry and still not be a reformed OW. It is interesting how in Awkward's account of LS members, "I think there are those that have BTDT and don't do it again, there are those that have never BTDT, and there are those who are currently involved in an affair.", no mention is made of "those that have BTDT and would do it again", like OWoman. She is made invisible, just like she said in an earlier post in this thread.

 

I am not aware that OWoman's views on marriage has changed. She appears to feel the same way toward marriage as she did while in the affair. I also wasn't aware that she would want to be the other woman again. I was under the impression she was happy with where she is at now. I wasn't trying to make her invisible but you are right that I did leave off the group that has BTDT and would do it again. I apologize it was an unintentional mistake.

 

Most of the ones that are currently involved in an affair want to end up with their MM. What happens when they do marry their MM? Do they then have a different view of marriage? Would they have the same view if their husband cheated on them? Are they then ROW?

 

Are OWoman's views on marriage the norm here? If so, unless out of necessity why even marry the MM? Not speaking to why OWoman married as she has stated her reasons before.

 

All three tend to support OW in this forum. I know if I were to M MM I would come back and support as well even if I found many aspects of the A difficult. Each case is different and everyone has a different lesson to learn. I try to support based on the individual. OWoman is not a ROW, but I have seen her give advice to walk away because the pain is so bad. I really think it depends on the specific poster and their story and not the label of the person responding to the story.

 

And I think that is the crux of this thread, isn't it? That rOWs seem to not support as much as try to convince you to end the A because 'all As are bad'?

 

Maybe I have misunderstood the crux of this thread because I didn't understand that ROW always try to convince the posters to end the affair because they are bad. I genuinely believe that the posters were speaking to the specific case that was being posted. Perhaps it's because I don't really know what label applies to each of the people that are responding? I have seen a couple of posters do drive by's but they didn't appear to be ROW.

 

Are you saying that all of the ROW here aren't really trying to provide support but are only trying to encourage OW to end their affairs?

 

This pretty much describes me. I claim my right to be generally happy and still want more. My MM gives me so much, so I want to be with him all the time. What is strange about that? There is no inconsistency in that in my opinion.

 

I know the flaws in our relationship. I live with them. Still the pros way outweigh the cons. And as long as they do, I will stay with my MM.

 

There is nothing strange about it. Of course you can want more. I never stated that there is an inconsistency with that opinion. Please re-read what I stated about inconsistencies here for clarification. I definitely wasn't taking a jab at being happy and wanting more.

 

You accept the flaws and have made a decision to be happy with what you have. That is good for you as the relationship is not causing you pain. It's only when an OW wants more than a MM is willing to give that it becomes a problem for her.

 

I wanted more from my M but didn't get it there either.

 

And so you divorced right?

Edited March 15, 2010 by awkward
Clarification

[jennie-jennie]

There is nothing strange about it. Of course you can want more. I never stated that there is an inconsistency with that opinion. Please re-read what I stated about inconsistencies here for clarification. I definitely wasn't taking a jab at being happy and wanting more.

 

You accept the flaws and have made a decision to be happy with what you have. That is good for you as the relationship is not causing you pain. It's only when an OW wants more than a MM is willing to give that it becomes a problem for her.

 

Now I am really confused. I DO want more than my MM is willing to give, and yet I am happy with what I have.

 

This is considered an inconsistency by some LS posters. I thought from your prior post that you thought so too?

 

It is really tiresome to continuously be told that the way you perceive the world can not be correct. This is my reality, so apparently it is possible!

[awkward]

Now I am really confused. I DO want more than my MM is willing to give, and yet I am happy with what I have.

 

This is considered an inconsistency by some LS posters. I thought from your prior post that you thought so too?

 

It is really tiresome to continuously be told that the way you perceive the world can not be correct. This is my reality, so apparently it is possible!

 

While you want more you are happy with what you have, right? I was pointing out inconsistencies with what MM says to the OW compared to what he actually does and how many OW don't want these pointed out. I was not the referring to the OW's viewpoint on wanting more. Just about everyone wants a little more.

 

I'd like a little more money myself but I'm generally happy with how much I have. However, I don't ignore how much I have in the bank. I accept that that's all I have and unless I get another job then it's probably going to remain the same. Here comes the exception... I could always win the lottery and hope that one day I will. Normally I only buy a ticket twice a year and the chances of winning are slim so I don't really think it will happen. There is nothing wrong with wanting more but it is important to be happy with what you have. I am generally happy with how much I have although it's nice to dream and sometimes I do.

 

IF you become unhappy and want more than MM will give you, then you might become hurt. See the difference.

 

What happens if MM never gives you more? You'd still be generally happy wouldn't you?

[awkward]

I wanted to add this in case anyone took it the wrong way.

 

I am not saying that the odds of you getting what you want from your MM is the same as me winning the lottery. Although I do feel the odds are stacked against you, I think you have a better chance than me.

[jennie-jennie]

While you want more you are happy with what you have, right? I was pointing out inconsistencies with what MM says to the OW compared to what he actually does and how many OW don't want these pointed out. I was not the referring to the OW's viewpoint on wanting more. Just about everyone wants a little more.

 

I'd like a little more money myself but I'm generally happy with how much I have. However, I don't ignore how much I have in the bank. I accept that that's all I have and unless I get another job then it's probably going to remain the same. Here comes the exception... I could always win the lottery and hope that one day I will. Normally I only buy a ticket twice a year and the chances of winning are slim so I don't really think it will happen. There is nothing wrong with wanting more but it is important to be happy with what you have. I am generally happy with how much I have although it's nice to dream and sometimes I do.

 

IF you become unhappy and want more than MM will give you, then you might become hurt. See the difference.

 

What happens if MM never gives you more? You'd still be generally happy wouldn't you?

 

I wanted to add this in case anyone took it the wrong way.

 

I am not saying that the odds of you getting what you want from your MM is the same as me winning the lottery. Although I do feel the odds are stacked against you, I think you have a better chance than me.

 

It looks like we pretty much agree then. I am happy about that! It is always nice when someone understands your point of view and agrees that it is valid.

 

My MM has always been very careful not to promise me more than he is actually able to give me. This makes me trust his word. He also has an incredible ability to describe his emotions with words which helps a lot to understand what is going on inside him.

[awkward]

It looks like we pretty much agree then. I am happy about that! It is always nice when someone understands your point of view and agrees that it is valid.

 

Yes it looks like we do agree and I think most opinions here are valid.

 

However ... If tomorrow you post that MM has to go on vacation with his wife because she planned it all behind his back and blah blah blah, if I see the thread I will probably point out to you that it is difficult to plan a vacation for someone else and even more difficult to make someone go when they don't want to. It wouldn't be an attack on you. It would just be me pointing out the inconsistencies in what he says and does.

 

That was an extreme example of me just saying we can agree and disagree on different issues and we can still be friendly to each other.

[NoIDidn't]

How many times do we have to bring up the misinterpretation some LS posters made of what my MM said about GEL? I thought we were done with that already, NID. In his opinion there is something reformish about her and that is what he reacted to. Can we please let this go now once and for all, NID?

 

Sorry, jennie-jennie, but it was a valid point for this thread. Even you say he said that GEL sounded "reform-ish". When it is a valid point, I will continue to bring it up. I still fail to see where it is a "misinterpretation". It was practically posted with the disdain usually shown here by the "happy" towards the "reformed".

 

OWoman is certainly a proof that an OW can marry and still not be a reformed OW. It is interesting how in Awkward's account of LS members, "I think there are those that have BTDT and don't do it again, there are those that have never BTDT, and there are those who are currently involved in an affair.", no mention is made of "those that have BTDT and would do it again", like OWoman. She is made invisible, just like she said in an earlier post in this thread.

 

But OWoman is not made invisible by the so-called "reformed". This is truly reaching. Her unique situation is not rendered invisible because someone forgot to post about it. smh

[NoIDidn't]

It is really tiresome to continuously be told that the way you perceive the world can not be correct. This is my reality, so apparently it is possible!

 

THis is the other issue I have with trying to designate only some former OW as "reformed". Posters have disagreed with the way that you and some others see the world, but I've yet to see them tell you you are wrong for it.

 

Is disagreeing with the way you see the world, stating that the way you see the world is incorrect now?

[White Flower]

Are OWoman's views on marriage the norm here? ?

 

I wouldn't neccessarily say so.

 

Maybe I have misunderstood the crux of this thread because I didn't understand that ROW always try to convince the posters to end the affair because they are bad. I genuinely believe that the posters were speaking to the specific case that was being posted. Perhaps it's because I don't really know what label applies to each of the people that are responding? I have seen a couple of posters do drive by's but they didn't appear to be ROW.

 

Are you saying that all of the ROW here aren't really trying to provide support but are only trying to encourage OW to end their affairs?

 

In my experience I have heard blanket statements such as, 'How can any affair be good, once a cheater-always a cheater, and you know he'll never leave', etc. With blanket statements I don't feel I am getting individual support. Not all rOW do this and to say so would be another blanket statement.

You accept the flaws and have made a decision to be happy with what you have. That is good for you as the relationship is not causing you pain. It's only when an OW wants more than a MM is willing to give that it becomes a problem for her.?

 

Very true.

And so you divorced right?

Absolutely!

 

And even though navigating in a R that is new and unusual for me I have been so much happier with MM. When I post I am usually looking for advice that is consistent with my OP but then, as often is the case here at LS, the thread goes off on a tangent by those who want to stear it in another direction.