Fieldsofgold Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 . . . but most As happen because there are pre-existing conditions at home, spoken or not for both parties involved in the A. I TOTALLY disagree with this statement. I think most A's happen because of a lack of integrity on the part of the WS. If there are serious issues in the marriage, grow some ovaries and deal with it - get counseling, divorce, whatever needs to happen. There is no reason to have an A. The statement, "I can't help who I fall in love with," I personally believe is true. HOWEVER, I CAN choose whether I act on my feelings or not. And I can choose when to act on those feelings, i.e., after divorce.
califnan Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 I TOTALLY disagree with this statement. I think most A's happen because of a lack of integrity on the part of the WS. If there are serious issues in the marriage, grow some ovaries and deal with it - get counseling, divorce, whatever needs to happen. There is no reason to have an A. The statement, "I can't help who I fall in love with," I personally believe is true. HOWEVER, I CAN choose whether I act on my feelings or not. And I can choose when to act on those feelings, i.e., after divorce. --------------------- Absolutely .. There can be "pre-existing" conditions in all homes .. Is life perfect? No. And there are overcomers as well..
2sure Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 There was a period of my life when I was single when I specifically & exclusively dated other people's husbands. I have since realized that what I did was not harmless...not to MM, BS, or myself. I have regret. But that wasnt your question. What was the appeal you ask? Why did I want to be involved with someone else's husband? Ever heard the term: DRIVE IT LIKE YOU STOLE IT That, for me, pretty much summed it up.
joey66 Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 Before I came on LS, I had no idea how rampant the phenomenon of single people dating married people was. No freakin' clue. I knew it happened, of course. I even knew it was common. But I had no idea infidelity was a full-blown subculture all its own. An infidelity subculture, so to speak. I was amazed the infidelity subculture even has its own language, its own vocabulary. For example: BS for "betrayed spouse"; EA/PA for "emotional affair" or "physical affair"; D-Day for the day a clandestine affair is finally revealed. Hi ADF: Thank you for an insightful post. Did you ever read something and say, "Yes, of course. It's so obvious! Why didn't I think of that?" That's how I felt when I read your post and in particular the label "infidelity subculture." It could be a book title. I do think there is an infidelity subculture. (And it includes married people dating other married people, not just married people dating single people.) I would even speculate that the advent of online forums such as this one has been a catalyst for the infidelity subculture, or at least for its expansion. For me, and I think for many others here, there is nobody to talk to IRL. Finding this forum meant finding a place in which I can discuss A-related issues with others who have been there and can understand exactly how I feel. At the same time I can retain my anonymity. I cannot overstate how valuable that is to me. I feel a bond with the people here. (Some of them anyway.) We share something that I can never share with my friends IRL. The appeal is at least partially due to the fact that affairs are taboo. Name any activity that society frowns upon and you'll find a "subculture" of people who like to participate in that activity. For evidence, just read the posts on this thread! Maybe there are those that do seek these things out. I didn't, I wasn't even considering it. Like a lot of people I even had the mentality "how could anyone ever do a thing like that!". Then I started a friendship with someone I really connected with and over time things escalated and I didn't stop them from escalating because I wanted more of that connection and I had never had felt a connection like I did with this one person. This subculture exists as an outlet for people to understand and navigate what they might be experiencing. I'd say from my own experience, you may find your in too deep before you even realize the house is already on fire. Many of the posts here I've read are people asking what's happening? what should I do? And, there's a lot of sound advice. Hopefully some will turn away from a lot of heartache and disaster, others might just embrace it because their individual needs aren't being met to their satisfaction. Soooo right. Most of the people here didn't go seeking out EMRs. There are those folks out there, mostly men but some women too, who are serial cheaters. But most of those people don't need a forum such as this. I would add that, for most folks, by the time they find this place, it's too late to turn back. They are in the A already, whether they are willing to admit it to themselves or not.
bentnotbroken Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 I would add that, for most folks, by the time they find this place, it's too late to turn back. They are in the A already, whether they are willing to admit it to themselves or not. It maybe too late to change the past, but it is never to late to remove yourself from the middle of a jacked up situation and change the future outcome.
jennie-jennie Posted June 9, 2010 Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) Actually, anarchy means no government. Your talking about radical federalism, but government is still government, no matter how localised the power. No government at the local level, people governing themselves at the local level. It was a while ago since I studied syndicalism, but the people form local organisations which gives the people themselves the power. That is how the Twelve Step programs work as well. The group members hold the power. It is a power triangle turned upside down. Edited June 9, 2010 by jennie-jennie
fooled once Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Just because this is the way you live certainly does not mean this is the way most people live, at least not where I come from. To say that most people are unfaithful is just nonsense. Maybe where you live, but not where I live. I am thankful that I don't live in a place where infidelity is commonplace and acceptable behavior. Totally agree banana! I chose to enter into a marriage vs just living with someone. I believe in marriage, I wanted marriage and I am happy in my marriage. My needs are being met and if they aren't, I have no problem being vocal and letting my H know what I do or don't need. I personally don't believe that infidelity is commonplace and acceptable. I think people like to think that, but from the little bit of schooling I remember, I don't recall any place being anti-marriage, pro-cheating. That's just my personal belief. In that case we should erradicate ALL forms of promise making or contracts between parties. What's so tough about just telling the truth? "I am no longer in love with you and want a divorce." There. That didn't hurt much now did it? I agree Donna. I was able to say those words and I am still alive
pureinheart Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Before I came on LS, I had no idea how rampant the phenomenon of single people dating married people was. No freakin' clue. I knew it happened, of course. I even knew it was common. The place in which I worked it was quite normal as I spent 84 hours a week there, along with 3 or 4 thousand others...during business trips with large groups it was rampant. In the town where I live it was normal and happened quite frequent with all of our parents...I didn't see much with my friends as they remained unattached if they wanted to "play the field". My kids contemplated A's, although I councelled them against it and they decided not to. But I had no idea infidelity was a full-blown subculture all its own. An infidelity subculture, so to speak. I was amazed the infidelity subculture even has its own language, its own vocabulary. For example: BS for "betrayed spouse"; EA/PA for "emotional affair" or "physical affair"; D-Day for the day a clandestine affair is finally revealed. Acronyms are normal in all things, along with a language. People within the subculture philosophize about its rules and customs and traditions. Does a MM owe anything to his OW after the affair is over? Does a BS have the right to expose an affair after D-Day? Is an EA as bad as a PA? It is just amazing to me. I don't think it is much different discussion as any other board or forum...it can get heated at times though. I suppose any discussion has the potential for "heated". My question is, what is the appeal of the infidelity subculture for those who participate in it? It seems many women seek out MM for affairs, and that MM seek out women interested in affairs with MM. Again, why is this so? It would seem to me that seeking relationships outside the infidelity subculture would be a lot less hassle. I think it is less common for many to seek out A's, they usually start off priddy innocent then escalate, which leads me to this conclusion: The M was not meant to be in the first place. The A should never have happened. BTW, this is an interesting OP, thank you ADF.
OWoman Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 That's sort of happened already. For example, a slim majorityof children in the US now reside with a single parent rather than in a two parent family. The trouble is, our social institutions haven't kept pace with these changes. Almost every other industrialized country has a national day care policy--we don't. Almost every other indsutrialized country provides for extended, paid maternal/paternal leave--we don't. Every other industrialized country has some form of national health care--we don't. Obama's plan isn't national health care. It is a plan to require people to buy private insurance. All families get in the US is holier-than-thou lectures about "values." As a society, we have no serious commitment to helping families. This was what I was alluding to with my post that you quoted. Thanks for clarifying it. Nuclear families - as in, two parents, and the offspring [biological or adopted] of those parents - are in the minority in many (possibly most) countries, and certainly in the minority numerically across the entire planet. Single parent families, binuclear families, blended families, extended families, polygamous families and all other options outnumber the nuclear option - yet social institutions (and laws, in many places) still regard the nuclear family not just as the ideal, but as the norm.
Fieldsofgold Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Nobody makes anybody get married. Living together these days is really no big deal. Nobody is shocked by it anymore. If you don't wanna, you don't hafta. If someone else wants to, don't bash them. To each his own.
OWoman Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Nobody makes anybody get married. Living together these days is really no big deal. Nobody is shocked by it anymore. If you don't wanna, you don't hafta. If someone else wants to, don't bash them. To each his own. OTC - there are many circumstances where this is required. These can range from seemingly trivial - ensuring that your SO has automatic access to insurance payouts rather than an xS; putting your SO on your medical aid; etc - to more material on a day-to-day basis, such as being able to live together when you are of different nationalities. My H and I wanted to be together. With immigration rules tightening all over the planet, it was necessary for us to marry. This allows us to live together in either his or my country of origin. Without that piece of paper, the "foreign" partner would always be vulnerable to the vagaries of shifting legislation.
pureinheart Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 That's sort of happened already. For example, a slim majorityof children in the US now reside with a single parent rather than in a two parent family. The trouble is, our social institutions haven't kept pace with these changes. Almost every other industrialized country has a national day care policy--we don't. Almost every other indsutrialized country provides for extended, paid maternal/paternal leave--we don't. Every other industrialized country has some form of national health care--we don't. Obama's plan isn't national health care. It is a plan to require people to buy private insurance. All families get in the US is holier-than-thou lectures about "values." As a society, we have no serious commitment to helping families. Personally I would like to know what this day care policy is first, there could be a reason for not having it (I don't trust "the system" ESPECIALLY with my kids and grandkids). Agreed on all points. Holier than thou anything doesn't work...people are tired of being controlled (and there is a lot more in the US than people think...but thanks to certain entities we do have some freedoms left). People want what's real...they don't want to be condemned at every turn...love is the key as people are locked up inside themselves fearing what is going to come next...our world is in a sad state. Everyone used to think it was cute and laugh at me at work as I tried to bring more love into the communication. I wish that those that walk in condemnation could understand that there are better ways to deal with truth. People already know what the truth is, it is up to them if they choose to walk in it or not. Selfrighteousness=holier than thou...excellent ADF
pureinheart Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 Nobody makes anybody get married. Living together these days is really no big deal. Nobody is shocked by it anymore. If you don't wanna, you don't hafta. If someone else wants to, don't bash them. To each his own. Totally agree... I do what's best for me and my convictions/experiences. My dad jokingly referred to one of my living situations as "playing house"..the comment was niether condemning or in agreement...it was a fact. I have my own ideal as to how the rest of my life will go concerning M and that's how it will go down for me or I will stay without a mate. My views are much different from everyone on this board, meaning there is some point that will not be agreed with, but they are mine. In my experiences I see/have seen people marry for the wrong reasons. I think in some cases education is the factor, others I see a lack of maturity. There is a flippant attitude concerning it, meaning the two parties marrying are not on the same page to begin with. Many get caught up in the romantic aspect, then when reality hits after spending tens of thousands of dollars decide they weren't meant for each other. Crisis hits and there was not a solid foundation to withstand the pressure, so thus we have D rate...then we have those that just play games period. A lot more people today I believe are walking around in a somewhat comatose/traumatic state hoping everything will turn out ok...and they don't even realise it.
Shakz Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 No government at the local level, people governing themselves at the local level. It was a while ago since I studied syndicalism, but the people form local organisations which gives the people themselves the power. That is how the Twelve Step programs work as well. The group members hold the power. It is a power triangle turned upside down. Syndicalism? Isn't that just Communism-lite? Trade unions running the economy in a syndicate, ala the mafia? Just messing with you. I hear what you're saying, but I can't imagine how it would work. The little groups would just get swallowed up by more powerful larger groups until you're right back where you started. Beautiful dream, though. It works with something like a 12-step program, or a grange, or even a trade union, because the interests and goals of those involved are very specific and limited. Little homogenous societies.
pureinheart Posted June 10, 2010 Posted June 10, 2010 No government at the local level, people governing themselves at the local level. It was a while ago since I studied syndicalism, but the people form local organisations which gives the people themselves the power. That is how the Twelve Step programs work as well. The group members hold the power. It is a power triangle turned upside down.[/QUOTE] This is the way it was meant to be:)
NoIDidn't Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 Boy has this thread drifted from the OP! Should it be placed in Politics now? LOL
SavannahSmiles Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 The frequency of extramarital relationships says something about the institution of marriage. Maybe it is time to update how we look at marital vows? Maybe marriage should not be forever? It's not forever if you don't want it to be...hence, divorce.
jennie-jennie Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 Syndicalism? Isn't that just Communism-lite? Trade unions running the economy in a syndicate, ala the mafia? Just messing with you. I hear what you're saying, but I can't imagine how it would work. The little groups would just get swallowed up by more powerful larger groups until you're right back where you started. Beautiful dream, though. It works with something like a 12-step program, or a grange, or even a trade union, because the interests and goals of those involved are very specific and limited. Little homogenous societies. That is why my location is "Anarchist Utopia".
jennie-jennie Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 It's not forever if you don't want it to be...hence, divorce. Divorce is not a concept easily taken on for many. They do feel like the vow they have given should be honored for life. Then when life shows you differently, they end up having affairs. Very unfortunate in my opinion.
HappyAtLast Posted June 11, 2010 Posted June 11, 2010 In that case we should erradicate ALL forms of promise making or contracts between parties. What's so tough about just telling the truth? "I am no longer in love with you and want a divorce." There. That didn't hurt much now did it? The problem is that most often that sentence is followed up with "now please take half if not more than that of my wealth." I believe that is the hard part of the truth telling.
Author ADF Posted June 11, 2010 Author Posted June 11, 2010 Personally I would like to know what this day care policy is first, there could be a reason for not having it (I don't trust "the system" ESPECIALLY with my kids and grandkids). The details vary from place to place. But the point is, most industrialized countries make provisions based on the fact that most parents work. In every country you look, national day-care policies enjoy tremendous public support, and not one country which had implemented such polices has gone back. Sure, there is such a thing as bad day care. But being against day care because it is part of "the system"--whatever that means--is a purely ideological position. It just part of that American tendency to automatically think anything the govenrment does, or has a hand it, is bad.
pureinheart Posted June 12, 2010 Posted June 12, 2010 The details vary from place to place. But the point is, most industrialized countries make provisions based on the fact that most parents work. In every country you look, national day-care policies enjoy tremendous public support, and not one country which had implemented such polices has gone back. Sure, there is such a thing as bad day care. But being against day care because it is part of "the system"--whatever that means--is a purely ideological position. It just part of that American tendency to automatically think anything the govenrment does, or has a hand it, is bad. I said that I didn't trust it...never said there was nothing good in it. I am good in it due to many factors..I give back instead of just taking...although that is a whole nuther thread:) My favorite movie is the Matrix...
White Flower Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 The problem is that most often that sentence is followed up with "now please take half if not more than that of my wealth." I believe that is the hard part of the truth telling. I think you're right. It's just sad that a man would compromise his happiness and his W's integrity for his comfort zone.
NoIDidn't Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 The problem is that most often that sentence is followed up with "now please take half if not more than that of my wealth." I believe that is the hard part of the truth telling. I don't agree. Plenty of judges in my area are making Ws pay alimony and give half TO the Hs they are divorcing. The pendulum is swinging, "half" is really outdated thinking - depending on your state (In the US), of course.
Woggle Posted June 13, 2010 Posted June 13, 2010 I don't agree. Plenty of judges in my area are making Ws pay alimony and give half TO the Hs they are divorcing. The pendulum is swinging, "half" is really outdated thinking - depending on your state (In the US), of course. The fact that more women are paying alimony is what might stop it. All of a sudden people will start caring.
Recommended Posts