BS prefers long term OW

[blissfullyoblivious]

It occurred to me that a BS may actually prefer that their spouse cheats with the same woman because she is "safe". There is security in knowing that WS is not having multiple liaisons but strictly devoted to one "friend".

 

Any thoughts?

[silktricks]

My thought is that you must be severely delusional to think most BS would "prefer" or accept either situation.

[Owl]

Where would the security in that be for a BS? Not sure I'm tracking...

[bentnotbroken]

It occurred to me that a BS may actually prefer that their spouse cheats with the same woman because she is "safe". There is security in knowing that WS is not having multiple liaisons but strictly devoted to one "friend".

 

Any thoughts?

 

My questions are one person less likely to be infected with something than multiple people are? Is one person less likely to turn bunny boiler than multiple people are? Is one person less likely to cause the BS less pain than multiple are? Is one partner less likely to cause damage to a family than multiple people are? Hmmm. Maybe I need to give this some thought.

 

 

Okay I thought about it. I think most BS would prefer a spouse that didn't cheat at all. And they would probably prefer the spade is called a spade instead of a friend.

[Silly_Girl]

I see the reasoning. If the A had continued for a long time but not seriously threatened the existence of the marriage, perhaps that's a safer bet than the cheater who shops around and might find someone they wish to marry.

[sally4sara]

The security would be an illusion because while I can see that cheating with only one other person would limit how many people's sexual history you're exposed to - there is no way of knowing who all that one other person is sleeping with. And if that one other person has such low standards to who they find suitable to share their body with, why would you be assured they are monogamous? For all you'd know, they are sleeping with anyone who will tell them pretty lies.

 

But one other person for your spouse means an emotional connection is at risk to happen where as many others - they're as important as toilet paper.

 

Don't sell yourself short. If you can't be someone's everything in a partnership, its best to be nothing to them at all.

[blissfullyoblivious]

Obviously, you cannot unring the bell!

MM has cheated and BS has found out. I was wondering whether a single realtionship was easier to deal with than multiple partners. Not necessarily from the safe sex perspective (abstinence is the only guarantee) but from only having to worry about the one person that turned the spouses head.

 

It seems to me that there is a belief that people only enter into affairs to "win" the WS. However, not all relationships have marriage as an end goal. Frankly, it would be a poor risk betting on someone who enjoyed cheating.

No matter how remorseful the cheater is when caught they damn well enjoyed what they were doing at the time.

[silktricks]

Obviously, you cannot unring the bell!

MM has cheated and BS has found out. I was wondering whether a single realtionship was easier to deal with than multiple partners. Not necessarily from the safe sex perspective (abstinence is the only guarantee) but from only having to worry about the one person that turned the spouses head.

 

It seems to me that there is a belief that people only enter into affairs to "win" the WS. However, not all relationships have marriage as an end goal. Frankly, it would be a poor risk betting on someone who enjoyed cheating.

No matter how remorseful the cheater is when caught they damn well enjoyed what they were doing at the time.

 

OK, sorry for my super-sarcastic original reply . FOR ME, it would have been an immediate deal-breaker had there been multiple partners. I could forgive one, but had there been more than one I would have been gone. That would have been an entirely different situation - of serial cheating - not of getting caught up during an emotionally bad time in the marriage. But please note, that doesn't mean it was because she was "safe" it was because he was remorseful.

 

And the same would go in the future for ANY cheating at all. It would be game over. But, I don't worry about it, because I know right down to my bones that it will never happen again.

 

uhmmmm, I will also add that you have made a few assumptions that may very well not be valid - i.e. getting caught. Not all are caught - some confess all on their own...

Edited March 3, 2011 by silktricks

[bentnotbroken]

All of it is deal breaker. If I don't respect you, there is no reason for me to waste any of my life on you or for you. One or ten....it makes the person unworthy to be in my life.

[findingnemo]

Obviously, you cannot unring the bell!

MM has cheated and BS has found out. I was wondering whether a single realtionship was easier to deal with than multiple partners. Not necessarily from the safe sex perspective (abstinence is the only guarantee) but from only having to worry about the one person that turned the spouses head.

 

It seems to me that there is a belief that people only enter into affairs to "win" the WS. However, not all relationships have marriage as an end goal. Frankly, it would be a poor risk betting on someone who enjoyed cheating.

No matter how remorseful the cheater is when caught they damn well enjoyed what they were doing at the time.

 

 

Yes...in Africa where polygamy is "acceptable" and......wait for it...in France, where mistresses are the norm.:bunny::bunny:BS can be comfortable with one OW and can accept the R.

 

Having been M and now getting a d, I really like my life as it is now except for the lack of love. I can't imagine willfully walking down the aisle again and giving up my rights. Ideal sitch for me would be to 1) be with MM, 2) W knows and accepts it and 3) no hiding or sneaking around - all friends and relatives are made aware as well.

 

:lmao:..in my dreams, right?

[blissfullyoblivious]

Yes...in Africa where polygamy is "acceptable" and......wait for it...in France, where mistresses are the norm.:bunny::bunny:BS can be comfortable with one OW and can accept the R.

 

Having been M and now getting a d, I really like my life as it is now except for the lack of love. I can't imagine willfully walking down the aisle again and giving up my rights. Ideal sitch for me would be to 1) be with MM, 2) W knows and accepts it and 3) no hiding or sneaking around - all friends and relatives are made aware as well.

 

:lmao:..in my dreams, right?[/quote

 

I am glad that you understand where I was coming from.

 

I would caution that you be careful what you wish for. There are MM who flaunt their OW without a care in the world. You may come to wonder what sort of man does that after a while.

[blissfullyoblivious]

All of it is deal breaker. If I don't respect you, there is no reason for me to waste any of my life on you or for you. One or ten....it makes the person unworthy to be in my life.

 

Direct and concise. Thank you.

[blissfullyoblivious]

OK, sorry for my super-sarcastic original reply . FOR ME, it would have been an immediate deal-breaker had there been multiple partners. I could forgive one, but had there been more than one I would have been gone. That would have been an entirely different situation - of serial cheating - not of getting caught up during an emotionally bad time in the marriage. But please note, that doesn't mean it was because she was "safe" it was because he was remorseful.

 

And the same would go in the future for ANY cheating at all. It would be game over. But, I don't worry about it, because I know right down to my bones that it will never happen again.

 

uhmmmm, I will also add that you have made a few assumptions that may very well not be valid - i.e. getting caught. Not all are caught - some confess all on their own...

 

Good point.

 

My view on WS that confess is as follows:

 

1. They are afraid of being outted and want to manage the fall out.

2. They want BS to know so that s/he realises what a "catch" they are/were.

3. They want to end the affair and It is easier if WS takes control.

 

 

All self-serving. If you are "brave" enough to cheat are you really so weak that you confess out of "guilt".

[silktricks]

Good point.

 

My view on WS that confess is as follows:

 

1. They are afraid of being outted and want to manage the fall out.

2. They want BS to know so that s/he realises what a "catch" they are/were.

3. They want to end the affair and It is easier if WS takes control.

 

 

All self-serving. If you are "brave" enough to cheat are you really so weak that you confess out of "guilt".

 

It's not a manner of confessing out of guilt (no quotations marks required) it's a matter of realizing that you are doing something in direct opposition to your own basic principles and needing to clear your conscience. How can one have a clean conscience if still lying to your SO??? Answer: you can't.

 

Is it self-serving? Partially, yes, of course it is. But most things we do are in the end self-serving. Is the desire to have an honest relationship self-serving? Of course. It's also terribly painful and fearful to tell the person you love that you have done the worst thing possible to hurt them. I know that none of your 3 reasons applied to my husband or to my past, possibly they apply to some people, but to include everyone into that box is fairly silly IMO.

Edited March 3, 2011 by silktricks

[anne1707]

Good point.

 

My view on WS that confess is as follows:

 

1. They are afraid of being outted and want to manage the fall out.

 

As a former WS who confessed, I find your views incorrect (and offensive!). There is no such thing as managing the fall out. I had absolutely no idea what would happen from one minute to the next let alone be in control of the situation.

 

2. They want BS to know so that s/he realises what a "catch" they are/were.

 

This I find particularly insulting especially on behalf of my H. There was absolutely no way either of us perceived me as a "catch". If anything I could not figure out why he would want to be with me considering what I had done.

 

 

3. They want to end the affair and It is easier if WS takes control.

 

This completely contradicts no 1. Plus this is also insulting of BS - my H would not have given me a chance if he did not see me make efforts for us because I wanted to. He had (has) too much self respect to try and control me.

 

 

All self-serving. If you are "brave" enough to cheat are you really so weak that you confess out of "guilt".

 

And I never saw cheating as being brave - but I do see strength and bravery in a couple who try to reconcile.

[blissfullyoblivious]

As a former WS who confessed, I find your views incorrect (and offensive!). There is no such thing as managing the fall out. I had absolutely no idea what would happen from one minute to the next let alone be in control of the situation.

 

 

 

This I find particularly insulting especially on behalf of my H. There was absolutely no way either of us perceived me as a "catch". If anything I could not figure out why he would want to be with me considering what I had done.

 

 

 

 

This completely contradicts no 1. Plus this is also insulting of BS - my H would not have given me a chance if he did not see me make efforts for us because I wanted to. He had (has) too much self respect to try and control me.

 

 

 

 

And I never saw cheating as being brave - but I do see strength and bravery in a couple who try to reconcile.

 

My opinion is just that - mine.

To ruin your spouse's peace of mind because you were dumped is awful.

[anne1707]

My opinion is just that - mine.

 

I agree but I just know that none of your options applied to me.

 

To ruin your spouse's peace of mind because you were dumped is awful.

 

Sorry but what do you mean by this?

[20Seconds]

My thought is that you must be severely delusional to think most BS would "prefer" or accept either situation.

 

And only believe she does if she tells you herself.

[Snowflower]

And only believe she does if she tells you herself.

 

Yes, and I would like to know if anyone has ever actually heard a BW say this or if this is just conjecture...

[Spark1111]

Obviously, you cannot unring the bell!

MM has cheated and BS has found out. I was wondering whether a single realtionship was easier to deal with than multiple partners. Not necessarily from the safe sex perspective (abstinence is the only guarantee) but from only having to worry about the one person that turned the spouses head.

 

It seems to me that there is a belief that people only enter into affairs to "win" the WS. However, not all relationships have marriage as an end goal. Frankly, it would be a poor risk betting on someone who enjoyed cheating.

No matter how remorseful the cheater is when caught they damn well enjoyed what they were doing at the time.

 

nah, a violation of trust is a violation of trust, period.

 

And if he could cheat on me with you, how can YOU be so sure he is not cheating on you with others?

 

Because the cheater says so?

 

Nope. It goes to character. If that line is crossed once without consequences, that line may be crossed constantly, even on you, the OW!

[Woggle]

It is really sad when a marriage gets to that point.

[silktricks]

To ruin your spouse's peace of mind because you were dumped is awful.

 

Wanting to rile people up???? Why?

 

As almost all BS will tell you. We want the truth. From the above statement it appears that you think:

 

1. If a WS tells the BS that he/she must have been "dumped"

2. Peace of mind (living in ignorance) is better than having an honest relationship.

 

I would disagree.

[TigerCub]

It occurred to me that a BS may actually prefer that their spouse cheats with the same woman because she is "safe". There is security in knowing that WS is not having multiple liaisons but strictly devoted to one "friend".

 

Any thoughts?

 

I actually don't know about that one.

 

Well, to me - cheating would be a deal breaker anyways.

 

But if a BS is "accepting" of the affair (?)

I think that only 1 OW would be more of a threat - mainly because if its long term, the WS would actually have an emotional attachement to that OW.

 

Whereas, with multiple people, its more likely that its just sex and no emotional investment is made.

 

Either way - I personally think it all sucks, and no one should actually "put up" with being lied to and deceived.

[Snowflower]

OP, if you are wondering if a BS would prefer a situation where there is one long term OW, then why don't you just ask respectfully? I'm sure there will be many BS who will respond.

 

Unfortunately, I think this thread is supposed to be inflammatory. So sad...I enjoy reading and discussions with even the most adamant OW. But, to assume that a BS would prefer a situation is just rude...

 

It's as disrespectful as a BS posting a thread about how an OP must like sl*ppy seconds rather than just asking respectfully what it is like to share the person they love with another.

[NoIDidn't]

I don't think a BS would accept either. The LTA implies emotional connection, and most people would not like that. And several ONSs and just sleeping around is dangerous to the health of both the cheater and the unsuspecting spouse.

 

I can't see anyone accepting either, unless it was an agreement made for specific reasons.

 

I read an article in O Magazine about women married to gay men. One woman insisted that her H sleep around so as not to develop emotional connections to the men she allowed him to sleep with. I don't think she wanted him to sleep aroun, but she accepted it on her own terms.

 

I would not want my H having a long term AP, but I also don't like the health risks of multiple sex partners if I'm still sleeping with him.

 

I don't see a spouse accepting it.