Define rOW...good or bad?

[NoIDidn't]

And I believe this is one of the angriest, most accusatory and insulting posts I have ever read at LS....naming names too!

 

And your soul is healed? You are kidding? And what does this have to do with labelling people repentant as to diminish their advice.

 

Angry much?????????????

 

Sorry for the t/j Finding Nemo.

 

I think this post is a GREAT EXAMPLE of the intention of those that throw around the "reformed OW" label and other labels. Until you stated that it "named names", I'd actually not read the entire thing.

 

A great example.

 

Its not done to create balance. Its done out of obvious dislike for a poster. Its done to call that poster out.

 

And the poster that posted that has been doing some cyber stalking of her own. Its really a sad day for her. She's just made a fool of herself and will likely come to regret hitting "Submit Reply", IMO.

 

I don't care if people post on other boards - even ones that make fun of people and satirize their behavior. But it shouldn't be brought here. That's practically trolling. It seems that new board exists not to actually talk about affairs, but to talk about the people they disagree with here.

 

Nemo, I'm really sorry to see your thread rehashing the past over and over again. I understand your confusion of the term "reformed OW". I think this banned poster just gave a great example of what the term really means even though she thinks she's calling people out. Its really true that the one giving the label is saying more about themselves than about the person being labelled.

[NoIDidn't]

Abso-blooming-lutely. That word was not used accidentally.

 

Silly, if you can't understand it after all the time and care that posters have taken to be civil about it, I can't help you.

 

Good luck while you seek an explanation as to why what really boils down to name-calling is never a positive or helpful experience.

[Silly_Girl]

I agree NID!

 

And whose perceptions are the "right" ones?

 

And I am back to where I started: If a poster perceives their perception is the only one that is "right and true" and then labels others who are not in agreement, yep....that IS a form of censorship!

 

It's not censorship. No one is prevented from posting. Some posters offer newbies further commentary on another's post. I have been grateful for that at times with the likes of Dexter!

[Silly_Girl]

Dear lost

 

I'm just saying even if you and yours are just on LS to stir the pot, you obviously still love LS, so why complain about things..

 

I was commenting on the fact that I could see some of the viewpoints that had been mentioned. Regardless of whether I agreed with them.

 

I do hope you're not trying to censor me, DIC.

[NoIDidn't]

It's not censorship. No one is prevented from posting. Some posters offer newbies further commentary on another's post. I have been grateful for that at times with the likes of Dexter!

 

What would have been so hard about simply ignoring him like most other posters did? Was there really a need to publicly label him over and over again as what happens when people are labelled as ROWs? I've seen a newbie hit with "be careful with posters here because there are nasties among us" as early as the first response. I could understand if it happened after a few such responses, but not when its the first one. There is a concerted effort made to discredit posters and only have one train of thought dominate this forum.

 

It seems that some really are advocating that OW/OM are gullible and will fall for anything when they assume that they need to protect them from other posters by attempting to discredit them.

 

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it stops working. Sometimes people over-estimate their hand and overstate their position.

 

I think that is happening here. Eventually the posters that feel the need to label others to discredit them will find themselves discredited and ignored.

[Silly_Girl]

What would have been so hard about simply ignoring him like most other posters did? Was there really a need to publicly label him over and over again as what happens when people are labelled as ROWs? I've seen a newbie hit with "be careful with posters here because there are nasties among us" as early as the first response. I could understand if it happened after a few such responses, but not when its the first one. There is a concerted effort made to discredit posters and only have one train of thought dominate this forum.

 

It seems that some really are advocating that OW/OM are gullible and will fall for anything when they assume that they need to protect them from other posters by attempting to discredit them.

 

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it stops working. Sometimes people over-estimate their hand and overstate their position.

 

I think that is happening here. Eventually the posters that feel the need to label others to discredit them will find themselves discredited and ignored.

 

I'd never used a board like this before, and I'd never seen a poster like Dexter before. And the state I was in, I was unlikely to 'just ignore him' like I would each and every time now. In fact, it's almost funny. Not back then.

 

And I didn't ask anyone to comment on him. But someone did.

[jthorne]

I think this post is a GREAT EXAMPLE of the intention of those that throw around the "reformed OW" label and other labels. Until you stated that it "named names", I'd actually not read the entire thing.

 

A great example.

 

Its not done to create balance. Its done out of obvious dislike for a poster. Its done to call that poster out.

 

And the poster that posted that has been doing some cyber stalking of her own. Its really a sad day for her. She's just made a fool of herself and will likely come to regret hitting "Submit Reply", IMO.

 

I don't care if people post on other boards - even ones that make fun of people and satirize their behavior. But it shouldn't be brought here. That's practically trolling. It seems that new board exists not to actually talk about affairs, but to talk about the people they disagree with here.

 

Nemo, I'm really sorry to see your thread rehashing the past over and over again. I understand your confusion of the term "reformed OW". I think this banned poster just gave a great example of what the term really means even though she thinks she's calling people out. Its really true that the one giving the label is saying more about themselves than about the person being labelled.

I agree, but would also like to point out that it's often said that certain groups can project their ideology onto others. I think it was a great example of that. I know for myself that had I "won" I would never have been unapologetic about it! I know for myself that I have more decency and humility than that. Looking back, I can see that it wouldn't have been a "win" at all, thus, nothing to be bitter about. I think there are others in my "group" that see things similarly, yet the accusation still stands from others with the (self-labeled) unapologetic ideology.

What would have been so hard about simply ignoring him like most other posters did? Was there really a need to publicly label him over and over again as what happens when people are labelled as ROWs? I've seen a newbie hit with "be careful with posters here because there are nasties among us" as early as the first response. I could understand if it happened after a few such responses, but not when its the first one. There is a concerted effort made to discredit posters and only have one train of thought dominate this forum.

 

It seems that some really are advocating that OW/OM are gullible and will fall for anything when they assume that they need to protect them from other posters by attempting to discredit them.

 

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it stops working. Sometimes people over-estimate their hand and overstate their position.

 

I think that is happening here. Eventually the posters that feel the need to label others to discredit them will find themselves discredited and ignored.

Thanks for the bolded. I was trying to figure out why this topic keeps coming up. This was what I was thinking, but unable to express in words.

[jthorne]

And, again, with about 5,300 posts in only a month and a half, the MM must not be giving her much time.

I think that's sad. But what's sadder is the line of thinking that one who messed up and once accepted crumbs is being hypocritical if they advise others not to do what they did. They have to be labeled by others, as if their advice to someone that isn't even them is a threat to OW's everywhere. It speaks to their own insecurity, and I think it's sad that they would feel so insecure in their relatonships.

(no I'm not saying that sacrastically either)

[donnamaybe]

And some are in complete denial. Accepting to be second fiddle for years, with the hope that "one day when the kids are older, when the timing is better, he'll leave and be with me..." That's not a healthy thing either.

 

I'm just sayin'!

The phrase "physician, heal thyself" comes to mind...

[desertIslandCactus]

And some are in complete denial. Accepting to be second fiddle for years, with the hope that "one day when the kids are older, when the timing is better, he'll leave and be with me..." That's not a healthy thing either.

 

I'm just sayin'!

 

Hey, that reminds me of a label .. cdOW

[Spark1111]

What would have been so hard about simply ignoring him like most other posters did? Was there really a need to publicly label him over and over again as what happens when people are labelled as ROWs? I've seen a newbie hit with "be careful with posters here because there are nasties among us" as early as the first response. I could understand if it happened after a few such responses, but not when its the first one. There is a concerted effort made to discredit posters and only have one train of thought dominate this forum.

 

It seems that some really are advocating that OW/OM are gullible and will fall for anything when they assume that they need to protect them from other posters by attempting to discredit them.

 

Sometimes it works. Sometimes it stops working. Sometimes people over-estimate their hand and overstate their position.

 

I think that is happening here. Eventually the posters that feel the need to label others to discredit them will find themselves discredited and ignored.

 

And NID, the above bolded is what is soooo insulting! That I, a strong, independent, opinionated woman needs anyone's protecting from the slings and arrows of public opinion.

 

I came here to learn, heal, and help. Thinking you have to protect me is not only insulting.....but terribly condescending in attitude also!

 

Thanks for saying it better than I did!

[Spark1111]

Yes. Espcially when the horse is already lame.

 

Bent, forget the bullets!

 

Bring shovels.:p:p

[donnamaybe]

Bent, forget the bullets!

 

Bring shovels.:p:p

Indeed. Most definitely a HUGE shovel - and a garden waiting for fertilizer.

[Silly_Girl]

And NID, the above bolded is what is soooo insulting! That I, a strong, independent, opinionated woman needs anyone's protecting from the slings and arrows of public opinion.

 

I came here to learn, heal, and help. Thinking you have to protect me is not only insulting.....but terribly condescending in attitude also!

 

Thanks for saying it better than I did!

 

You're not EVERYONE Spark. Not everyone comes here feeling 'strong, independent and opinionated'. Some people who rock up at places like this feel like killing themselves, actually.

[findingnemo]

Wow, there is a lot of history here. I've been thoroughly convinced that we do not need additional labels. First off, we can't agree on the meanings of words leaving them subject to everybody's interpretation. Secondly, what really matters is the "advice" itself, not on which side of morality the poster lies. Either the advice makes sense or it doesn't, simple.

 

I spent some time on the other forums. INFIDELITY!! oh..oh...it can get really insulting over there. It may be that there are more males on that forum and men tend not to flower their language much (a generalization). I found some of the comments sexist and frankly anti-women but hey...people have been hurt and are here to vent.

 

The personal attacks: If a poster attacks another, people are quite capable of defending themselves and will do so, as evidenced on this thread. To stop or disallow opinions (rude, polite, rosy and/or direct) would be a form of censor. We are all expected to be tactful but the emotions evoked here can be very strong and will elicit a few differences in opinion. Sometimes it's simply impossible to get angry with tact.

 

So thanks everybody for contributing.

[BB07]

You're not EVERYONE Spark. Not everyone comes here feeling 'strong, independent and opinionated'. Some people who rock up at places like this feel like killing themselves, actually.

 

 

Sadly some people are at their lowest of their life when they come here and unless they give us that information we don't know. You know..........when I think about it, it's scary. For instance what if someone is so fragile they are contemplating driving off the cliff or worse hurting someone else.

 

If we are responding to a new poster who we don't know their history, I think we have a responsibility to treat them kindly.

[OWoman]

If we are responding to a new poster who we don't know their history, I think we have a responsibility to treat them kindly.

 

Agree completely!

 

The front page of LS speaks of a "close knit caring community" and that's probably what many / most noobs are seeking when they come here. If they bare their souls in a vulnerable state and are then subjected to some of the cruel posts that fly around here, there's no telling what someone may be driven to...

[Star_Bright]

I have been reading old threads to see if some of my questions have already been addressed. While doing so, I keep coming across the Reformed OW concept and I'm a bit confused:confused:. In some posts, it sounds like a positive thing. In others, it sounds like a derogatory description.

 

Question: What does the term Reformed OW mean to you? Is it a positive thing or pretense? And to fOWs, would you call yourself a rOW? Why reform?

 

To answer your question personally (I haven't read any responses [yet]). I don't call myself a reformed OW. I guess if anything I would call myself a former OW but I don't really refer to myself as OW anything anymore unless to put it in context (like to describe my past position to another poster).

 

I think that it is/was used in the past as a bad thing, to connotate "preachy" or "holier-than-thou" or something. But when I read/see it, I think of it is as a good thing when applied to me, like "reformed smoker." I never smoked but if I stopped I would be proud to be a reformed smoker. To me personally being an OW was bad for my health (emotionally at least, and in some ways physically!) so I am glad to be "reformed" of it. But again I don't call myself that, I just think of that when I see the term.

[pureinheart]

Wow, there is a lot of history here. I've been thoroughly convinced that we do not need additional labels. First off, we can't agree on the meanings of words leaving them subject to everybody's interpretation. Secondly, what really matters is the "advice" itself, not on which side of morality the poster lies. Either the advice makes sense or it doesn't, simple.

 

I spent some time on the other forums. INFIDELITY!! oh..oh...it can get really insulting over there. It may be that there are more males on that forum and men tend not to flower their language much (a generalization). I found some of the comments sexist and frankly anti-women but hey...people have been hurt and are here to vent.

 

The personal attacks: If a poster attacks another, people are quite capable of defending themselves and will do so, as evidenced on this thread. To stop or disallow opinions (rude, polite, rosy and/or direct) would be a form of censor. We are all expected to be tactful but the emotions evoked here can be very strong and will elicit a few differences in opinion. Sometimes it's simply impossible to get angry with tact.

 

So thanks everybody for contributing.

 

This board has one function and that is NC. They talk of balance, but there is no balance. If a poster decides to stay in the R and communicates that there is this like dog pile of BS's and reformed.

 

If you don't believe me, just watch for yourself the next new poster that chooses to stay in the R and see what happens, see how they are responded to. They will be demeaned and harrassed.

 

Bold...people should vent about their own situations and not ON others. That is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable.

[NoIDidn't]

Sadly some people are at their lowest of their life when they come here and unless they give us that information we don't know. You know..........when I think about it, it's scary. For instance what if someone is so fragile they are contemplating driving off the cliff or worse hurting someone else.

 

If we are responding to a new poster who we don't know their history, I think we have a responsibility to treat them kindly.

 

I think that the bolded also implies the courtesy of not throwing them into the drama of longtime posters, or scaring them further to think that people only come here to harm them with their posts.

 

BSs (BH and BW) have come to the forums in much the same fragile state, but no one is rushing to warn them of the "evil, heartless OW" that might post in their threads.

 

Do OW really feel that their pain needs to be protected from potential posters that might not tell them what they want to hear? Its not all the MM's fault that they are hurting. Do OW feel that somehow the hurting BS earned their pain by virtue of their spouse cheating on them?

 

There is an attitude underlying this thought process that the OW needs to be warned. I just don't know what it is.

[NoIDidn't]

To answer your question personally (I haven't read any responses [yet]). I don't call myself a reformed OW. I guess if anything I would call myself a former OW but I don't really refer to myself as OW anything anymore unless to put it in context (like to describe my past position to another poster).

 

I think that it is/was used in the past as a bad thing, to connotate "preachy" or "holier-than-thou" or something. But when I read/see it, I think of it is as a good thing when applied to me, like "reformed smoker." I never smoked but if I stopped I would be proud to be a reformed smoker. To me personally being an OW was bad for my health (emotionally at least, and in some ways physically!) so I am glad to be "reformed" of it. But again I don't call myself that, I just think of that when I see the term.

 

Hi Star! I think this is a good attitude about it too! If we ignore the intended slight, maybe those using the terms will stop using them as they aren't getting the desired effect.

 

Not a bad idea.

 

[Silly_Girl]

There is an attitude underlying this thought process that the OW needs to be warned. I just don't know what it is.

 

If you don't know what it is then is it possible you're not in a position to dismiss or criticise it?

[Owl]

This board has one function and that is NC. They talk of balance, but there is no balance. If a poster decides to stay in the R and communicates that there is this like dog pile of BS's and reformed.

 

If you don't believe me, just watch for yourself the next new poster that chooses to stay in the R and see what happens, see how they are responded to. They will be demeaned and harrassed.

 

Bold...people should vent about their own situations and not ON others. That is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable.

 

Then report the posts that you feel are in violation of the TOS.

 

It's not anyone's function here on LS to "warn" posters about the supposed "limits" and apparent pending demeaning and harrassing posts.

 

Doing THAT really is what's in violation of TOS, IMHO.

 

If you feel someone crosses the line...report them. But trying to "warn" other posters because YOU don't agree with another poster's viewpoint/advice/etc... is potentially more likely to create greater strife and trouble on that thread and on this board than just posting your opposing advice/support...and more likely to lead the thread being shut down and that poster not receiving ANY support.

 

That's all these labels do...create factionism and strife.

 

That's the problem...people need to stop trying to label others...stop trying to 'warn' others to avoid "certain groups of people" because they don't agree with their advice. Just post your own advice and let others post theirs.

 

What's so tough about that? Much easier to stay within the TOS and avoid being banned that way.

[NoIDidn't]

If you don't know what it is then is it possible you're not in a position to dismiss or criticise it?

 

This sounds so much like what a cheating MM would say to gaslight his W. She doesn't know exactly what's going on, but she can sense that there is more under the surface.

 

Wow.

 

Needless to say, I disagree with the implication of your question. I am well within my rights of attempting to identify it and critiquing what I have learned and intuited so far.

[Star_Bright]

Hi Star! I think this is a good attitude about it too! If we ignore the intended slight, maybe those using the terms will stop using them as they aren't getting the desired effect.

 

Not a bad idea.

 

 

Hi NoIDidn't.

 

Half the time I've seen the term, I wasn't sure whether it was meant as an insult or not! So I decided to take it as NOT an insult, and that helped when I saw it written as an insult. I'm not easily offended but I think sometimes there are posters that are purposefully rude and insulting and that's a shame. I've decided not to be offended by anything that someone on the Internet says... I've gotten a lot of help from LS and I take what helps and ignore the rest. (At this point I'm not asking for advice but when I was, especially when I was leaving my affair, it got tough sometimes. I read about how there are posters whose advice it is to always get out of an affair, and I think about when I was in/getting out of mine and feel like there were posters whose advice it was to always stay in the affair! So I guess it's just a matter of perspective.)