what's wrong with saying...

[jj33]

NID as a former OW I know it was important to me because it helped me to find closure. We all put our memories behind us in certain ways and write our own history in certain ways.

 

So while its true that it doesnt matter its in the past, the way we write our history is part of how we see ourselves. And when people say he never loved you etc etc etc it matters because in many instances our view of the past informs how we see ourselves moving forward.

 

Some people feel stupid and used. others see themselves as victims and others look back and say we shared something special but its the past now.

 

I dont see any reason to take the latter away from people when they are obviously trying to heal. We (on the board) werent there. So whats it to us to allow someone a positive view of the past where they werent used etc etc.

 

There are certain stories where the MPs behavior was so appalling that its important for the AP to see that. But most of the time its not that dramatic.

[jennie-jennie]

It could be that he never loved the OW at all and would say anything to keep her offering him sex (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article789090.ece

for a man's take on it).

 

Have you been over on Yonville? For real?

[GreenEyedLady]

...that. the WS spouse fell in love with another, and then simply decided they had love in their M worth working on rather than abandoning a life work.

 

Why is there so much discussion about whether they really loved AP or BS?

 

They probably loved both, and made a life choice based on many factors.

 

I feel no bad feeling knowing xMOM stayed with his W for love. That seems entirely natural.

 

I also feel he was with me briefly for love.

 

What I find hard is either OW/OM saying the WS doesn't love the BS but stays, and equally the BS saying the WS does not love the OW/OM and it's only fog. A minimizing tactic.

 

Why can't we take them at their word?

 

Honestly, I think that it is very individualized.

 

I myself can only love ONE man at a time. I really don't even understand how someone can sleep with another man when they are married to another man. To me it means, leave the man you are with.

 

Conversely, I was with a MM. He never professed his love for her EVER. He gave reasons for marrying her, but love was not one of them. So while it is hypocritical, I understand his side. But whatever, I never let him off the hook for staying with her and me.

 

To me personally, I can only love one person at a time and put forth my effort in one relationship. And if my H had ever told me he loved the XW in any capacity I would have ended the R totally. I will not be in competition with anyone when I love someone with all my heart. I just WON"T do it. It is all me or it is not me at all.

 

And really I don't believe the loving two people at the same time propaganda.

I think that is really speak for : I love myself first and foremost.

 

I was married to my first husband who was (and still is) a closeted gay. I never cheated on him because it is against who I am. I do my best to keep vows I have made in life. I didn't even love him by the time I left, and maybe that is why I have felt right and never second guessed a choice I have made.

 

I think the discussion is important for those who are like me. If my H ever cheated on me, I could not bear staying with him if he said that he loved the AP. It would KILL me. It would be like him saying he loved someone more than me and I could not bear it. I love him soooooooo much. I sacrificed soooo much to be with him to have him throw it away would be complete relationship destruction.

 

I think alot of betrayed spouses would agree with me.

 

I want to be my H number 1.

 

I want my H to forsake all others for me.

 

I don't want my H to lie to me or take another to bed.

 

I want to have a R with my H that is pure, real and meets both of our needs.

 

So I think the AP or the W want to know so that they can make an informed decision.

 

I mean, would you want to be with someone just because you're the default and they couldn't get what they REALLY wanted.

 

I think it's so sad. Betrayal makes you second guess even yourself.

 

GEL

[NoIDidn't]

Have you been over on Yonville? For real?

 

Obviously you have. I see you read there too.

 

[NoIDidn't]

NID as a former OW I know it was important to me because it helped me to find closure. We all put our memories behind us in certain ways and write our own history in certain ways.

 

So while its true that it doesnt matter its in the past, the way we write our history is part of how we see ourselves. And when people say he never loved you etc etc etc it matters because in many instances our view of the past informs how we see ourselves moving forward.

 

Some people feel stupid and used. others see themselves as victims and others look back and say we shared something special but its the past now.

 

I dont see any reason to take the latter away from people when they are obviously trying to heal. We (on the board) werent there. So whats it to us to allow someone a positive view of the past where they werent used etc etc.

 

There are certain stories where the MPs behavior was so appalling that its important for the AP to see that. But most of the time its not that dramatic.

 

I'm not sure why you feel I am trying to take anything away from someone. I'm stating my opinion. That's it.

 

The OP asked if we could take the profession of love at "face value". Well, most of the time the MM being spoken of here aren't present to say anything at "face value". We only have the word of the person telling ultimately what they hope to be the case.

 

And my point was, I'm not going to argue with them - because they could be right. Or they could be wrong. That was my point. My point is why argue with people when they have decided to believe whatever it is that they have decided to believe. Its the reason that I said it really doesn't matter.

 

The OP also asked from both sides, so this wasn't a question only directed at why argue with the OWs. It was why argue about it period, and I happen to agree.

[White Flower]

...that. the WS spouse fell in love with another, and then simply decided they had love in their M worth working on rather than abandoning a life work.

 

Why is there so much discussion about whether they really loved AP or BS?

 

They probably loved both, and made a life choice based on many factors.

 

I feel no bad feeling knowing xMOM stayed with his W for love. That seems entirely natural.

 

I also feel he was with me briefly for love.

 

What I find hard is either OW/OM saying the WS doesn't love the BS but stays, and equally the BS saying the WS does not love the OW/OM and it's only fog. A minimizing tactic.

 

Why can't we take them at their word?

If we suspected their word was the truth then we'd have no problem with it.

 

But many of us really know some crazy inside stuff. I know he doesn't love her and I know he has fears that he has a hard time overcoming. If I know this, then I'm going to have a problem with him staying with her because I for one could not stay in a loveless M. I think it is cruel to her, it is cruel to me, and it is cruel to himself. How can I stand in silence when I believe there is cruelty going on?

 

I can imagine the posts going off in all sorts of off-topic ways since I stated that, but that is the jist of it. If I believed for a minute that he really loved her I would have no problem watching him stay put. To me, love is to be honored more than the institution of M. I think deep down most of us feel that way, even if we don't admit it.

[BB07]

If we suspected their word was the truth then we'd have no problem with it.

 

But many of us really know some crazy inside stuff. I know he doesn't love her and I know he has fears that he has a hard time overcoming. If I know this, then I'm going to have a problem with him staying with her because I for one could not stay in a loveless M. I think it is cruel to her, it is cruel to me, and it is cruel to himself. How can I stand in silence when I believe there is cruelty going on?

 

I can imagine the posts going off in all sorts of off-topic ways since I stated that, but that is the jist of it. If I believed for a minute that he really loved her I would have no problem watching him stay put. To me, love is to be honored more than the institution of M. I think deep down most of us feel that way, even if we don't admit it.

 

But..........WW, it's his choice as to where he is. You have to let go of it, regardless of what your opinion of it is. Who it's fair to, why he is there, none of it really matters, because he CHOOSES to be there.

 

Hugs.....

[White Flower]

Interesting premise but I disagree with it.

 

The person, as BNB pointed out, the WS loves most is himself/herself at the expense of others. This is not a desirable trait in my eyes.

 

They choose the BS almost always - so few leave.

They choose "their money" over both the BS and the AP - we see this in many derivations.

They choose to "not devastate the W" which is saying "I value her emotional well being over the AP's"

They choose to "not hurt the kids" even when the kids are ADULTS (or mid teens who have the capability to handle it). My IC and my own primitive research also supports D is NOT so traumatic for kids...I know as I live it everyday. What, from what I have been told and read, is loving, active and involved parents. Single parent or not.

 

In all of those above, and I'm sure there are more, they choose their OWN comfort and needs over everyone. Always taking the course of least resistance in terms of THEIR OWN LIFE.

They won't work on their M

They won't work on leaving it either.

They won't give up "half" so to speak to be out of the M (placing his material comfort over the emotional needs of others - bad trait imo).

 

Its almost always about the WS. Its not about loving one or the other but how happy the WS is.

 

Because they are proven liars - over and over and over again. That's why.

When you dance with the devil you don't change the devil, he changes you.

 

I WOULD put faith in their ACTIONS. What are they doing? There's the truth if you choose to see.

I really like this post! The only thing I disagree with is that you say people can't change. It's rare, but they can, JFTR.

[White Flower]

But..........WW, it's his choice as to where he is. You have to let go of it, regardless of what your opinion of it is. Who it's fair to, why he is there, none of it really matters, because he CHOOSES to be there.

 

Hugs.....

LOL, you're right BB. I have no trouble walking away, just have trouble in accepting his 'reason' behind his choices. His 'word' during the entire A doesn't gel with his actions on D-day.

[pureinheart]

It would be easier to take them at their "word" if it stopped changing so much.

 

First the MM says "I don't love my W anymore. I love her but I'm not in love with her. The marriage is dead" to the OW.

 

Then, when busted he says to the W "It (meaning SHE) meant nothing to me".

 

Then, when the why this, why that starts from the OW he says "She made me say/do it"

 

Then, a few months later when the A is over and he's had some time and effort actually put back into his M, he says "What was I thinking?!!!"

 

Its hard to take that at face value.

 

Personally, I don't care who the MM says he loved. He proves how strong that love is with where decides to reside. It could be that he loves himself most of all. It could be that he chose to be "honorable" and end the affair and mend his M all while still loving the OW. It could be that he never loved the OW at all and would say anything to keep her offering him sex (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article789090.ece

for a man's take on it).

 

Who really cares at the end of the day, if he's not with you its no longer important (be that W or OW). And if he is with you and you are going to spend your time wondering who he loved more, that insecurity should be confronted (be that W or OW).

 

I seriously doubt this is the norm.

[pureinheart]

I really like this post! The only thing I disagree with is that you say people can't change. It's rare, but they can, JFTR.

 

JW, did you say people can't change???? JJJJJWWWW, you know they can.....

[White Flower]

I seriously doubt this is the norm.

I read it. I found it to be typical of what an outsider would think and since the author is supposedly an OM he is an outsider. I could never see Stampdaddy or OOM on this website writing that article.

 

It looked more like a BS wrote it. Some parts I could relate to, but not the overall article.

[turnstone]

Seems to describe the male condition pretty accurately. Ok, its overstating quite a lot to make the point, but baldly speaking, it seems to cover the dynamic.

 

Oh and for the record, I'm sure my opinion will mean FA as a BS. Whatever.

[turnstone]

I need to find out if this guy is the same Jonathan Gornell that writes about child protection issues. What a wheeze!

[seren]

I need to find out if this guy is the same Jonathan Gornell that writes about child protection issues. What a wheeze!

 

Yep, he is the same person. I thought the article to be quite spot on in some instances, but only in relation to H's A, cannot and would not say all A's were the same. But, there are passages that could almost be my H speaking. Hindsight is a kick in the a***.

 

I can understand how some OW would feel quite insulted by the article, and I don't condone the actions of anyone who could treat another's emotions so cavalier. BUT, the crap a BS has to put up with is pretty dire reading too.

 

It all sounds so very calculated and cold, and I can see that some OW who are being told they are loved, treated as though they are loved (I am sure some are) could no more believe that the MM could feel this way, anymore than a BS can believe that their H can say they love them and show they love them and go on to have an A.

 

D day separates the loved from the loved not enough or loved not. It also fails to address that the one who the MM loves the most, is of course themselves and so will do all they can to ensure their needs are being met.

[Ellin]

I'm not sure why you feel I am trying to take anything away from someone. I'm stating my opinion. That's it.

Not aiming it at you particularly NID, but I'd like to point out that "just stating my opinion" can be a smoke screen to say nasty and mean things to someone without any accountability, as nobody wants to be the one who stops people from expressing their "opinions".

[jwi71]

JW, did you say people can't change???? JJJJJWWWW, you know they can.....

 

For you and White Flower....

 

The phrase you are responding to does not mean that people cannot change, in fact, it explicitly states that someone WILL change. However, the person doing the changing is typically the AP and NOT the MM/MW. And seldom for the better.

[jennie-jennie]

Obviously you have. I see you read there too.

 

 

I do find your posts over there about me quite similar to the ones you write here on LS.

 

Could you explain to me how a 3 month EA leads to such hostile emotions towards OW?

[OWoman]

It could be that he never loved the OW at all and would say anything to keep her offering him sex (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/article789090.ece

for a man's take on it).

 

... a man. One particular, very sexist and rather misogynistic man, at that! None of my MMs have been remotely like what he described, nor have any of my As. In fact, the closest to recognising myself in his "article" that I came was in his description of the WS - and I've never been a WS!

 

Have you been over on Yonville? For real?

 

Ah - the site that makes Jerry Springer seem like real class...

 

...that. the WS spouse fell in love with another, and then simply decided they had love in their M worth working on rather than abandoning a life work.

 

Why is there so much discussion about whether they really loved AP or BS?

 

I have had MMs who loved their Ws, and I have no problem with that. I'd have had a huge problem had they loved ME, but that's another matter!

 

My H claimed to love his xW. I had no problem with that either - until I realised that the M was abusive. Loving an abuser is not healthy. Luckily, in IC, he learned to recognise that "love" for what it was, which was fear: fear that if he left her, she'd collapse (again) and that the kids would suffer (again) and that he'd feel really awful. Fear that I couldn't really love him - because I was "so out of his league" - and that if he left I'd turn around and laugh at him, and he'd look like a fool and have to go back to dogs. Fear that he couldn't really sustain a "normal" R with a normal woman after all those decades of dysfunction, and that his shortcomings would be shown up and he'd be emotionally stunted for the rest of his life... etc.

 

Personally, I find it easy to compartmentalise, so if someone says they love someone (while they're with them) and then claims later to love someone else (while they're with the other person) then I have no difficulty believing that.

[Owl]

I seriously doubt this is the norm.

 

Actually Pureinheart, it's a very, very common story. This is very close to what I saw in my wife's situation as well.

 

Before d-day, my wife insisted that OM was "just a friend".

 

On d-day, she admitted she was "falling in love with him, and out of love with (Owl)".

 

For the next several weeks, she teetered back and forth on who she was going to choose. She was finally forced to make a decision one way or another....by me.

 

For about a year afterwards, she insisted that she had been in love with OM, and what she had with him was "true love".

 

Then she, like me, spent a good bit of time learning a lot more about how love forms, what sustains it, etc... This was all part of our marriage counseling and individual counseling.

 

Now, she says "I have no idea what I was thinking".

 

Looking back, she can clearly see (now) that her thinking, her actions, and her perceptions at the time were very, very distorted. The people around her that loved her and cared for her (even those who didn't have a vested interest in our marriage) could see it and tried to help her to see it...but those blinders she had on prevented her from seeing it at the time.

 

So, I'd wrap this up by saying that I believe that she was "in love" with her 'perception' of who she thought OM was. She was unable to see how much of that she didn't know, or refused to consider because of those "in love" feelings at the time. She was as much in love with the "in love feelings" as much as anything else.

 

She still loved me...but that was far overshadowed and overwhelmed by her "in love feelings" at the time.

 

Once OM was out of the picture, and she had time to start actually looking at herself, her actions, and our relationship and marriage...she could more clearly see what she'd been doing, and what she needed to do going forward.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Owl

[jennie-jennie]

So, I'd wrap this up by saying that I believe that she was "in love" with her 'perception' of who she thought OM was. She was unable to see how much of that she didn't know, or refused to consider because of those "in love" feelings at the time. She was as much in love with the "in love feelings" as much as anything else.

 

Being in love starts with us falling in love with the perception we have of someone else. It takes a year before we see them as they truly are. Many relationships do not even last this long.

[In_Repair]

I agree with Owl.

 

It's easy to "love" your AP. You usually only see their good side while you are in the affair. Meanwhile, the spouse is at home dealing with their bull**** on a daily basis. The AP is put on a pedestal and the BS gets thrown in the mud. Then the WS tends to do the whole revisionist history thing and rewrite their pasts to suit their present situation. Suddenly that person who they married and promised to be with forever is nothing but a horrible liar who has them trapped in a loveless marriage. It's usually more of a fantasy than anything else.

[Owl]

Being in love starts with us falling in love with the perception we have of someone else. It takes a year before we see them as they truly are. Many relationships do not even last this long.

 

I would agree.

 

And I'd add...in the case of an affair...it's impossible for the WS not to contrast the marital relationship with the affair relationship.

 

And if you're looking at that affair relationship through that "perception", while contrasting it with the "reality" of the marriage that's no longer in this phase...it's easy to understand why an affair becomes so addictive, why the marriage often seems to pale in comparison.

 

The WS is trying to compare "in love" with "long term love". Like In Repair described...the perception of your affair relationship with the reality of your marital one.

[jennie-jennie]

I would agree.

 

And I'd add...in the case of an affair...it's impossible for the WS not to contrast the marital relationship with the affair relationship.

 

And if you're looking at that affair relationship through that "perception", while contrasting it with the "reality" of the marriage that's no longer in this phase...it's easy to understand why an affair becomes so addictive, why the marriage often seems to pale in comparison.

 

The WS is trying to compare "in love" with "long term love". Like In Repair described...the perception of your affair relationship with the reality of your marital one.

 

While this is true for short term affairs, once an extramarital relationship is long term it becomes like any other long term relationship. Unless you are one of those getting off on the secrecy factor of course. For most people in long term affairs the secrecy factor is a turn off, not a turn on.

[Owl]

While this is true for short term affairs, once an extramarital relationship is long term it becomes like any other long term relationship. Unless you are one of those getting off on the secrecy factor of course. For most people in long term affairs the secrecy factor is a turn off, not a turn on.

 

I don't think it's a "turn on" per se. I think that in short term affairs it does add to the excitement/thrill.

 

I don't think that thrill specifically lasts in a long term affair...we agree there.

 

But...I think that even after an extended time of several years, the "in love" can last much, much longer. A number of books and various authors I've read all tend to concur that the "in love" phase is typically greatly drawn out and exaggerated in the case of an affair.

 

And in those situations...the WS is still comparing the "fantasy" of having a "live in" relationship with the OW/OM with the "reality" of having that same relationship with their spouse. There's little opportunity for the downside of the realities of living together intruding on the affair relationship.