what's the point really?

[NoIDidn't]

My point was simple. Other viewpoints are just as valid as the validate at all costs posts. It's not realistic (reality/realism) to only hear what validates your position (wishful thinking).

 

My point was simple, yours was a strawman.

 

 

This is exactly the kind of thing the OP is talking about.

 

You have highlighted the fact that you discount everyone's truth and realism but your own.

 

Perhaps, friend, you view it that you are the one with a vision of realism, while in fact your views lean more to the slant of "wishful thinking."

 

When a poster says "this is a fact of my R", whether it be an affair or otherwise, and you say "NO, that is not a fact, THIS is the fact" then you are the one who is practicing wishful thinking, because you are unwilling to accept that in the poster's world what you want to be reality, and what actually is reality are diametrically opposed.

 

For example, many times a poster indicates that their married lover no longer has sexual relations with their spouse. Some people vehemently claim that they are being lied to, and that a sexual relationship with the spouse is ongoing. The facts are that in some relationships, the married AP has in fact stopped having sexual relations with their spouse. Just because you don't want it to be so, doesn't mean it ain't so.

 

And I am speaking of a general you, not necessarily you specifically.

[NoIDidn't]

Then don't read my posts if they bother you so. I clarified my point in above, if you are interested in reading it.

 

I'm not nearly as stubborn as your negative opinion of me. I don't struggle to understand opposing views. I understand, I just don't agree. Certainly you understand how disagreement works without name-calling.

 

 

Blimey! This, like something gg posted, makes me wonder if it's worth ever reading your posts... It's clear there's the Right way and the Other way and you are going to struggle to accept that someone with a view polarised to yours may have a point.

 

Which is kind of where I'm coming from.

 

My son is heavily in to debating at school, he and I have some interesting chats as a result. Being able to take on board a POV, and see how it's come about, even when it's not yours... That's how you can get your point across. That's how increased understanding (not agreement) can come about. That's how, if you are trying to increase awareness and assist others (which is what i hear), there is a chance of them listening, and heeding.

 

Otherwise you're just sounding like my dear old departed Gran: 'it's not how I see it, so it's wrong, end of conversation'. The other person then will be offended/disinterested/disengaged and what has been achieved then? Them and Us is further substantiated.

[NoIDidn't]

Nemo

 

I was only curious about the missing fifth category. I don't have a "clear objection" to that category, so much as it should be balanced out. Every OW expecting her MM to leave is like every guitar player expecting to become a world famous rock star. It's not realistic. And in the face of the facts many present here, it is clearly wishful thinking.

 

If pointing that out makes me appear to object to validating posts, then so be it. I'm not interested in allowing posters to continue to get hurt by encouraging what seems to be hurting them. If it's not hurting them, I usually don't comment at all, if you haven't noticed. But if they are clearly hurting more than enjoying the R, they need realistic views so they can protect themselves.

 

 

 

NID,

 

I admit that there is a 5th category and I forgot about it not because I disregard it but because I was posting while half asleep. I'm an fOW (or am I an OW in an EA, or...shucks, forget it:confused:) who thinks that nobody should agree to an A and that one should demand as much, if not more, than they would from a normal R. So if I react a certain way and insist that that As are bad, bad, bad news for one's self-esteem, it'd based on my experience and is fine.

 

The point I'm making is that there are different categories which are determined by individual experience of As. Because the outcomes, sequence of events, reasons and circumstances of As are so different, there is bound to be disagreement on this forum. To make matters worse no matter the label one uses, As are a contentious subject and will elicit strong reactions for, against or...whatever. There'll always be someone disagreeing with any given position. This house was divided from its conception. It was designed with different rooms for different purposes.

 

What most of us are saying is that we are human beings who can apply some thought to each situation. We shouldn't be robots conditioned by our individual experiences to the point that we fail to see differences where they exist and respond the same way every time. Reminds me of Pavlov's dogs (no offense to anyone)...And even so, should the response be "anti" rather than "pro", a polite delivery will ensure an audience.

 

(Aside: Interestingly, the first underlined sentence in your post is NOT an opinion on whether its Us vs. Them or a stand on whether there's a point or not. (The second is..sort of). It is not an attack either because it's polite and a matter of fact - your opinion. However, it is a clear objection to having one particular category here and may (shortly) elicit a reaction from that very category. Just an observation:))

[Silly_Girl]

No one can tell someone else what to think and, in turn, what to say or not say.

 

Does this mean you will stop doing it?

[tami-chan]

Does this mean you will stop doing it?

 

:lmao:!!!! I think there was a missing caveat to her statement...must have been deleted by mistake...something like " unless I think YOU are wrong"

 

Just kidding, Donna!

[greengoddess]

(And - I would not have fallen in love with him if he was single when I'd met him, as I'd have been unlikely to consider him suitable for a liaison. So, that's one to add to your "unimaginable" list... )

 

I think it is a very rare mindset that only chases unavailable men. My mindset makes that thinking very unimaginable. I could not imagine just being interested in men who's families would be destroyed if my "liason" was discovered. I can understand the "we fell in love. I don't condone or believe it but I understand but to chase married men and only date them is just unimaginable to me and so beyond my feelings of right wrong.

 

Kind of like when you watch an interview with a serial killer you are glued to it because you find his mindset unimaginable.

[OWoman]

My point was simple. Other viewpoints are just as valid as the validate at all costs posts. It's not realistic (reality/realism) to only hear what validates your position (wishful thinking).

 

I've never seen such a thing as the bolded. Please provide an example so that we can know what you're referring to.

[donnamaybe]

Does this mean you will stop doing it?

Please point out where I have ever done that?

[donnamaybe]

:lmao:!!!! I think there was a missing caveat to her statement...must have been deleted by mistake...something like " unless I think YOU are wrong"

 

Just kidding, Donna!

 

Yes, I am opinionated. However, I don't tell others what to think. I do tell others sometimes what I think of their beliefs, (i.e., MY MM/MW would NEVER lie to me - and this after stringing someone along for half a decade or more). It belies reality to be SO absolutely certain that a WS who is lying to numerous other people on a daily basis (BS, kids, others they don't want to know about the A) would be so lilly white at every single turn where their AP is concerned. However, I never tell folks they aren't free to believe what they believe and to state their beliefs. That's their right, just as it is mine.

[Silly_Girl]

Please point out where I have ever done that?

 

Aargh!

Not on my phone, it's a nightmare. And LS isn't accessible from work any more. wonder why!

 

Donna, you do tell people they are wrong, or can't see what's right under their nose. Or maybe not speaking directly to a posters but mocking them to someone else as having no clue as to what is REALLY the truth. You're dictating to them what they should believe. Not all the time, don't get me wrong, but it's happened. And not just you.

[donnamaybe]

Aargh!

Not on my phone, it's a nightmare. And LS isn't accessible from work any more. wonder why!

 

Donna, you do tell people they are wrong, or can't see what's right under their nose. Or maybe not speaking directly to a posters but mocking them to someone else as having no clue as to what is REALLY the truth. You're dictating to them what they should believe. Not all the time, don't get me wrong, but it's happened. And not just you.

Again, anything - ANYTHING - I say is my opinion, just as is anything someone ELSE says - and I have seen MANY posts by many people you regularly agree with telling people they're wrong. Perhaps they should be asked to stop telling people what to think. I believe when people don't LIKE my opinion they may view it as me "telling them what to think." I mean, seriously. I don't think I'm THAT persuasive.

[Silly_Girl]

Again, anything - ANYTHING - I say is my opinion, just as is anything someone ELSE says - and I have seen MANY posts by many people you regularly agree with telling people they're wrong. Perhaps they should be asked to stop telling people what to think. I believe when people don't LIKE my opinion they may view it as me "telling them what to think." I mean, seriously. I don't think I'm THAT persuasive.

 

Donna, you asked a question and I answered.

[donnamaybe]

I believe it is quite normal to have ONE confidante. If this confidante happens to be your OW, then so be it.

And if the OW chooses to believe that, it's her right.

[donnamaybe]

Donna, you asked a question and I answered.

And I answered in return.

[mzdolphin]

If my opinion is that a MM/MW is lying when they tell their AP they aren't sleeping with their spouse, that is my right. No one can tell someone else what to think and, in turn, what to say or not say.

 

Married men often lie about not sleeping with their wife. For some reason cheaters think they need to lie to OW so they don't appear to cheating on them. Silly.

 

It's like when the MM I used to date (he lied about being divorced. I found out the truth on my own) expressed jealousy about me being interested in other men. Huh? Dude, you're married.

 

Anyway. Although I believe it's important not to judge, it's also important to not be stupid about these things.

[donnamaybe]

it's also important to not be stupid about these things.

So very true!

[tami-chan]

Married men often lie about not sleeping with their wife. For some reason cheaters think they need to lie to OW so they don't appear to cheating on them. Silly.

 

It was certainly true with my xH (a serial cheater). He was not lying when he told his OW(s) that we were not "sleeping together"!

[donnamaybe]

It was certainly true with my xH (a serial cheater). He was not lying when he told his OW(s) that we were not "sleeping together"!

If I knew my H was a serial cheater, I wouldn't sleep with him either! In fact, I'd boot his arse pronto.

 

However, of the A situations where the BS doesn't KNOW about any OW, I'm pretty certain that WAY more often than not the whole, "Oh, but we're not even having sex" tale is just that. A tale - designed solely to suck in some poor unsuspecting woman.

[Spark1111]

If I knew my H was a serial cheater, I wouldn't sleep with him either! In fact, I'd boot his arse pronto.

 

However, of the A situations where the BS doesn't KNOW about any OW, I'm pretty certain that WAY more often than not the whole, "Oh, but we're not even having sex" tale is just that. A tale - designed solely to suck in some poor unsuspecting woman.

 

fBS here....and I can only speak to my own sitch.

 

FWS told his OW we rarely to never had sex.

 

We had it twice a week.

 

She was oh-so disappointed with the "rarely."

 

But, she then convinced him I, too, must have a boyfreind on the side....

 

He started (wanted?) to believe that.

 

If that is not the height of delusional thinking and fairy-tale communication, I do not know what is!

 

He was also fairly attentive and considerate of me during his affair.

 

Unless she was around. There were a few occasions she showed up at, to check me, us out, I guess.

 

I did not know she was the OW. But, if she WAS around, he made sure not to have any public displays of affection. He wanted to ensure she never knew what a decent marriage we had, I guess.

 

She would have cut him off if his lies of us to her, didn't match our reality.

 

It did not.

[Silly_Girl]

It was certainly true with my xH (a serial cheater). He was not lying when he told his OW(s) that we were not "sleeping together"!

 

My bf had spoken to his sibling c. 2 yrs before even meeting me, when the marriage was up in the air. He told him there had never been any sex. Not prior to marriage, not the wedding night, not since. There was certainly no vested interest for my bf to lie in that instance. I think it's very unusual to meet someone for whom that could be true, but there's nowt so queer as folk. Sometimes the least believable scenarios are the ones which are true.