The best post i have ever seen on affairs. READ

[MissBee]

I also wanted to note that, only a particular set of posters seem overly concerned about the advice given on LS about affairs. I have read older threads to get a feel for the board and it's the same tune. We all know the tune and posters who are veterans to these parts also commented that it is an ongoing topic of convo.....

 

I don't know what to make of it....

 

All I can say is, while I am anti-affair, I have no desire to tell those pro-affair to stop posting on the boards, I do not chase them around asking them to stop talking about their great affair, I do not accuse them of brainwashing unsuspecting women into conducting affairs, I do not care to tell them how they can or cannot post, what advice they should or should not give etc. I will say I disagree when I disagree, I will say where I think they are wrong or I will gloss over their post. I will discuss if it is a discussion thread and advise the OP if it is a thread asking for advice.

 

As for me being disgruntled and needing to always comment and complain about those more pro affair or whatnot than I and accuse them of this that and the third atrocity, like I have seen others accuse others against affairs of being closed-minded, preachers, this that and the lot...I have no care to. I have my opinions about particular mindsets....but I LOVE LS and I LOVE IT ALL! I am comfortable and confident in my own outlook on life and will continue to share it, I will argue a point as I see fit, but otherwise have no desire to convert or to continuously complain about the type of posts I dislike. Everything isn't for everyone, and if one person on LS in my entire stay finds something I've said half-decent and worth something, then I am happy. To reorder LS to suit my own views, to change others to my views, to attract and keep newbie posters, to whip someone into submission.....no desire for that.

[Got it]

To be honest, I haven't seen any posts saying Yay Affairs!! Everyone should be in one!!. What I have seen is new posters coming here in pain and confusion, saying things like "my MM says he is leaving but I'm not sure if he will" and several posters will tell her that it is unlikely that he will leave, that she deserves better, that she is worth more than hanging on to a promise of someday made by a cheater. Then a pro-affair poster will come on and tell the new poster to just ignore the naysayers because they are all bitter betrayed spouses (which is nowhere close to the truth) and they just want to unload their anger onto her. Then the same pro-affair poster will proceed to critque and pick apart every post that is telling the OP to save herself and leave the affair behind her. The pro-affair posters will tell the OP things like 'hang in there, lots of MM do leave their wives and children for the OW, encouraging her to believe in a fantasy and fight for her prize (a lying deceitful cheater:sick:).

 

Saying that lots of cheaters leave their wives is crazy in itself. Lots of people win in Vegas, yet most people wouldn't tell someone to go ahead and bet their life savings because they personally know of someone who did just that and they won big! I use this analogy because I actually do know someone who just won 75 thousand dollars in Vegas:). Yay for him but I don't for one second believe that I should hop on the next flight out there to gamble away all of my money because since my friend was a big winner it means I can be a winner too! I'd be aghast if my family or people that claimed to care about me encouraged me to do something so potentially damaging. However, there is mind set here along the lines of "well I know of people who did have a succesful outcome in their affair, therefore nobody has any right to discourage an affair or casts affairs in negative light. It's just like Vegas. Some people win, but it's a gamble and the odds are against you. And most people would warn somebody about investing their hopes and dreams for their future on a crap shoot.

 

 

I will have to say I am not here much. But I have seen positive threads, including one that I know I started, that quite a few nay sayers came on and bashed. There was nothing indicating that was needed or appropiate but . . .

 

I am not sure where someone said that "a lot of cheaters leave". I can't recall seeing that but will take your word for it. I have seen where there are nay sayers, someone will offer a counter argument, myself in a few posts, and that will be insulted and dismissed. That is fine, to each their own, but the advice has never been "pro affair" but it hasn't been "anti-affair" either.

 

Relationships are a gamble, no two ways about it. Putting your heart into the hands of another is risky business and I think both OP and BS can agree. And your analogy is great, one should not stake everything on a relationship or another person.

 

You are right one shouldn't bet their home on being a winner. Though many go to Vegas looking to win a few hundred or to have some fun. A degree of the same idea. And many will go into affairs with the same mentality. The MP should be the icing on the OP's cake due to the dynamics that are in place. The OP should not bet the farm on the MP.

 

How many people warn against going to Vegas at all? Or going to Vegas and betting at all?

[Got it]

Answers Bolded.

 

 

 

 

Frankly I think you picked out certain parts of what I said and concentrated on them, reading more into them and missing the points. Let's not forget that I NEVER said I begrudge someone else's happiness.

 

If I missed a point, my apologies, just took your line of logic/argument and went with it. I do believe I was reading into it just gave a different perspective to your argument.

 

I did not say you were whipping anyone. What I am saying, based on your comment about something being more emotionally hurtful to someone. Maybe avoiding that environment may be a good idea.

 

In regards to quoting other posts. You stated a fact, I asked for that evidence. So your facts are based on what are posted here on LS. . . okay.

 

And in regards to seeing happy OW posts. . . do you wonder why that is? I know of other HOW posts on other forums so I know they exist. So why do you think they aren't here?

 

Do you think the enivornment here may not encourage such postings?

[Got it]

Your right. Attending animal hunters meetings to promote animal rights would probably be an exercise in futility. As sole mate said, she not interested in helping those who are firm believers in the rightness of their affairs. She feels she can be more helpful to those who are in pain and on the fence or to those who haven't yet quite taken the dive into an affair.That makes sense to me and I believe that most animal activists would also take advantage of the opportunity to sway someone undecided to their way of thinking. That's part of being a activist afterall, educating the general public and making them aware that there is an ugly side that they maybe haven't considered before.

 

Your posts here reads like the people here that are anti-affair shouldn't be advising others on their affair. That their beliefs are their "baby to rock" and they shouldn't be expressing there views here. LOL....This is Loveshack, a public board where everyone is allowed to post their views as long as they are respectful. Everyone here is expressing their opinions and beliefs, that's how Loveshack works. If you have a problem with that perhaps you should take that up with the forum owner. Tell them that you don't agree with them letting everyone state their beliefs and opinions and ask them to lock out the anti affair posters. Or maybe you could join a board that only allows people involved in affairs. There are several to chose from. Because just like you say it makes no sense to for an animal activist to try to change the beliefs of hunters, it makes no sense to complain about people expressing their views on a public forum where everyone is allowed to express their views. Take your own advice.

 

Can you please cite where I said those that are anti-affair shouldn't post here. I don't recall saying that in any statement I have made in any thread I have posted on.

 

I do recall that the main point of discussion prior to me coming on was about those that were pro-affair and their right or allowance to post here.

 

Hello pot?

[Got it]

I thought about this statement some more while doing other things. Actually who is here currently that posts is a HOW? Owoman was, but she is married now, she doesn't post about any problems. SG I don't think was ever a happy OW (she wanted more) and now she is with her guy but she doesn't post about any issues here. GEL who is no longer here has been married for quite a while to her MM so HOW she isn't. Jennie jennie who is no longer here, was a ow but she said plenty of times that she had rather not be the ow, she wanted him full time, so I wouldn't call that a HOW. You are no longer the ow, right? So no HOW there.

I can think of a few who have come and gone but none currently, can you?

 

Please see my comments to your previous post on some questions about this.

 

You are right, I am no longer an OW but I was a HOW at that time.

 

Do youthink there are no HOWs posting anywhere?

 

 

Why do you think there aren't any HOWs here?

[Got it]

Good question, but I am afraid you are setting up a straw man. That is not the typical pro-A post. A much more typical pro-A exchange goes like this:

 

OW or W being groomed for A by MM: "I have questions about my situation. He has made and broken promises, lied to me, told his W that I am stalking him. Please advise." or "A MM has made it clear that he is very interested in me and has been pursuing me relentlessly. It seems like a bad idea, but would it really be so bad just to have a little affair? I am quite sure I am only in it for the sex." etc.

 

LS anti-A poster: "Don't start, or please consider stopping, the affair, this will almost certainly end up in sorrow. Heartbreak, loneliness, and feeling used and foolish, is the norm for A. You are in (or teetering towards) a uniquely hurtful and destructive relationship and you will likely regret it, but only after years have been wasted. No r/s has any certain guarantee. However, the OW/MM comes closest to certain knowledge of the outcome - i.e. a disaster."

 

Pro-A OW: "Don't listen to the naysayers, they are mostly bitter scorned wives and/or people who don't know how to stick up for themselves in r/s and/or other people with (unspecified) cognitive and emotional deficits that cause them to have kneejerk, conventional reactions against affairs. My A has been great. I structured my relationship to get exactly what I want from it and the A was a very positive experience in my life. R/s with MM are much better than r/s with single men, because MM are never clingy. OW have a high degree of control in affairs (as long as they are superwomen with total self-confidence and the ability to turn off their emotional attachment to MM in a heartbeat should that ever become tactically advisable)."

 

Although I'll assume as a courtesy, that the pro-A story paraphrased above is factually correct for the one person who posted it, it is utter falseness to state, or imply, that it is or might be true for any but the tiniest fraction.

 

As an analogy, about 12 people of over 1,000 Golden Gate Bridge jumpers have survived. That's 1.2% survival. If I see someone planning to jump, I'll shout or beg, "No! You'll die if you do that!" If someone then pops up to counter me by saying, "But people do survive the jump, and in fact I am one of them", then yes, I'll probably tell them to shut up. What would motivate someone, to give hope of jump survival to someone wavering on a parapet? Likewise, what would motivate someone, to give hope of a happy, fulfilling affair, to someone being manipulated and groomed by an MM? Could the motivation be, misery loves company?

 

****EDIT: Oh, whoops! I just caught up on the thread and see that Alexandria already made the point. All I can say is that great minds think alike.

 

I am sorry, I lost track of your point. I did get that my posting was typically so for that I guess I will say thank you.

 

Please explain how my questions was a straw man?

 

And are you a man? Remind me of someone who loves to say everything is a straw man.

[Got it]

Great post! I've used a similar analogy myself about the lottery and how it is possible to win millions and certainly people have but most people do not win the lottery and there are far more people who have gambled their life away on the lottery than those who have gambled with much success.

 

When I joined this side of LS the first thread I ventured into was one discussing people claiming affairs never work. I found it quite silly as no one said that in the thread and most sensible people realize that there are exceptions to every rule, but the point is that, there IS a rule!

 

I don't really get how it's even arguable the whole matter of affairs being more often than not, a bad idea....I really don't. I am not a BS or some person who never had an affair and is talking based on pure speculation or intelligent guessing, I have lived that reality twice, technically, and while in the affair my sentiments would have probably been the same. I quite like the poster, Loni. She was an OW and is now married to the guy and would be considered a "success story" yet her posts and advice are much like how I imagine mine would be.Acknowledging it worked, she is happy with her life, but she doesn't have an air about her where she downplays the reality or plays up the odds and she isn't very apologetic about the whole matter at all. She doesn't take people to task about it and to me, I can believe in her story or that she is in fact happy, as her style of posting displays confidence in her own life choices and it is also realistic as well, I think she even calls herself an anecdote. She seems to acknowledge her unique scenario and doesn't feel the need to prove to others that affairs can be good things.

 

Again, who says this?

 

I am very confused as I don't recall ever seeing someone promoting affairs as the new way to date.

[donnamaybe]

So the advice now is to avoid hurtful environments, but when someone advises that A's should be avoided because they truly believe it generates a hurtful environment they get labeled bitter by the few posters who "won" the cheater.

[Glinda]

The fact that those posts are deemed to be pro-affair says a lot more about those making the claims than it does about me.

Incorrect again. What you say says more about you. Your comments reveal your character.

[Silly_Girl]

Incorrect again. What you say says more about you. Your comments reveal your character.

 

My post was about people seeing pro-affair comments where there are none. Is that what you see gg? Affair 'cheerleading'?

[MissBee]

Again, who says this?

 

I am very confused as I don't recall ever seeing someone promoting affairs as the new way to date.

 

Who says what? That affairs can be a good thing? Who was having the argument about whether or not no affair ever works out? If I recall the name of that thread and the many many others where there is that back and forth or those proclamations, I will gladly point you to it versus name names and misquote someone. My post that you quoted didn't accuse anyone of promoting affairs as the new way to date. I had to re read it to make sure I didn't do that...and I didn't. What I did point out was:

 

When I joined this side of LS the first thread I ventured into was one discussing people claiming affairs never work. I found it quite silly as no one said that in the thread and most sensible people realize that there are exceptions to every rule, but the point is that, there IS a rule!

 

I don't really get how it's even arguable the whole matter of affairs being more often than not, a bad idea....I really don't.

 

She seems to acknowledge her unique scenario and doesn't feel the need to prove to others that affairs can be good things.

 

 

I think the contention comes down to one set of posters feeling that affairs should be avoided and another set who do not feel the same for whatever reasons cited. I have always said that your beliefs about affairs color your posts and what you take exception to. I think both sides may see offense where there is none sometimes or unknowingly push their side of the issue, ignoring the OP or bringing up irrelevant points that reiterate their stance versus addressing the matter. Both are guilty and all we can do is try to have a more balanced outlook, without surrendering our own, if we see no need for it.

 

I pointed out Loni as someone I admire who displays a good middle ground IMO, as her affair did work out for her but she just doesn't seem to feel the need to go on and on about how it worked out for her or to go on about how the low statistics are faulty or display an attitude that shows an underlying peeve for the sentiment that affairs generally are not good things. She doesn't seem to feel hurt or offended when someone points out the cons outweighing the good often times. She sees no need to argue with anyone about affairs being possibly good things, although in her situation she could claim a "right" to say so, afterall she is proof, but she can still offer insights to the OW about the road to ending up in a non-affair R with the AP and life after the A, in a manner that seems authentic to me.

 

I like Loni's posts usually, because it feels truthful and like she is genuinely happy and aware of all sides whereas for some other OW turned wife or currently HOW it doesn't come off that way as most of their posts seem to be heavily to the side of proving something or for others their situation is so unique and out of this world that almost no affair scenario relates to them...and if so, I do not deny them that experience, but I would hope that they can separate their experience from what is relatable to most. Which is also another point of contention: there seems to always be some argument about whether or not X represents what normally happens or is it bitterness, gross exaggeration, scare-tactics, narrow-mindedness, "doom and gloom" or an accurate depiction of reality. There has to be a generally accepted reality outside of personal experience and from there we can diverge....however, maybe the two "camps" do not share the same view of reality. One side is accused of painting all affairs with the same brush, although IMO, such is life, often large brush strokes are necessary and what the large brush leaves out, you then go back in with a precision brush. There is contention about what is typical and what isn't and once there isn't an agreement upon that...then we have what we have.

[mzdolphin]

Man, I can't tell you how much truth is in that post. Although the affair I was in didn't start in a typical way, some of the experience was similar.

 

We dated 20 years ago when we were both single. Then when we reconnected he lied and said he was divorced. By that time I was in the relationship and kept flip flopping until I finally decided to get out.

 

He said, continues to say, that he loved me. He felt the deep connection, blah, blah, blah. His pursuit and pledges of love seemed to intensify after I stopped seeing him. So I agree with what one person stated that the chances of the person leaving WILL NEVER happen if you keep seeing them. Besides, even if they do leave, what you win, at best, is a a person you know to be a liar and a cheat.

 

I'm not saying there aren't exceptions, but anyone who can sleep next to someone and lie like that and claim to care about you or their spouse, is somebody who will suck the life out of you. Run for your life away from these parasites. Run Forest Run.

Edited July 25, 2011 by mzdolphin
spelling

[MissBee]

I will have to say I am not here much. But I have seen positive threads, including one that I know I started, that quite a few nay sayers came on and bashed. There was nothing indicating that was needed or appropiate but . . .

 

I am not sure where someone said that "a lot of cheaters leave". I can't recall seeing that but will take your word for it. I have seen where there are nay sayers, someone will offer a counter argument, myself in a few posts, and that will be insulted and dismissed. That is fine, to each their own, but the advice has never been "pro affair" but it hasn't been "anti-affair" either.

Relationships are a gamble, no two ways about it. Putting your heart into the hands of another is risky business and I think both OP and BS can agree. And your analogy is great, one should not stake everything on a relationship or another person.

You are right one shouldn't bet their home on being a winner. Though many go to Vegas looking to win a few hundred or to have some fun. A degree of the same idea. And many will go into affairs with the same mentality. The MP should be the icing on the OP's cake due to the dynamics that are in place. The OP should not bet the farm on the MP.

 

How many people warn against going to Vegas at all? Or going to Vegas and betting at all?

 

One can surely go to Vegas and have fun and bet some money versus all their money and everything is A-OK, no harm done. You don't have to lie, betray someone sneak around or anything. You go, you spend YOUR money that you set aside for your trip and hopefully have a responsible but still fun time. Having fun with another person's spouse is another ball game, if it is an affair all the same, as if one is in an open relationship or polyamorous set up then your spouse is not against you doing that, the more the merrier and you can have a great time! People are against affairs for the lies, betrayal, and often times shadiness involved, where transparency is often questionable. If affairs didn't include that, then they wouldn't be affairs. When lies, deceit, a triangle, someone being in the dark are added to a pot, it's usually not a responsible idea hence people advise against it.

 

 

Likewise, if one was to tell others of their plan to go to Vegas to gamble with counterfeit money, stolen money, playing with loaded dice or otherwise go there and not play fairly, people would probably advise against doing that as chances are the casino will find you out and your fun may not be worth it after all when you're hauled off to jail.

 

In college I had acquaintances who were all about fun, which included unnecessarily dangerous activities like drinking and driving and drag racing under the influence. A couple of them spent nights in jail and got their licenses revoked, one crashed and the air bag that deployed burned his face. They were very irresponsible people, needless to say, in which their idea of fun always came at an unnecessary price and those who found other means of fun besides such stunts, were considered boring. *shrug* I still have my license, I've never been to jail and an air bag has not exploded on me giving me 2nd degree burns all because I wanted to have fun...so that's that...I can't feel bad for people who get themselves into risky scenarios for the sake of fun when it's perfectly avoidable.

 

I think all the things people can gain from affairs, they can gain from non-affairs, therefore if one cites their reason for having an affair as for the fun of it....I have a little less empathy for that than one who got caught up or are in it for love. As the former seems to be a more willful form of inserting one's self into a possibly precarious scenario for frivolous reasons.

Edited July 25, 2011 by MissBee

[Silly_Girl]

SG...........I NEVER said you were a cheerleader nor even implied it. Please don't accuse me of something that I did NOT say. The truth is......I think you post to someone in pain in a helpful way. What you do here that I don't care for has nothing to do with the support you give to someone in pain.

 

BB, I've no way of trawling back right now. If I've mixed you with someone else I'm genuinely sorry. It wasn't deliberate.

[OWoman]

To anyone considering starting an affair, I would recommend ordering some asbestos boy shorts and camisoles, because if LS seems to fling unfair statements towards OW, you will see and hear things 10 or 100 times worse out in the real world.

 

 

:lmao: :lmao:

 

This has not been my experience at all! I have not seen any of the nastiness, hatred, personal attacks and attempts at character assassinations that I've encountered on LS, out in the Real World. No one IRL has called me a whore, a homewrecker, or any of the multitude of epithets I (and other OWs) have been called on these boards. No one IRL has armchair diagnosed me as any of the myriad psychopathologies that regularly get ascribed to OWs here. No one has been rude, unpleasant or downright nasty to me as a result of my R choices IRL. And I imagine that scenario to be similar for many OWs who don't live in Jerry Springer trailer parks.

 

I'm really saddened to think some people may be exposed to that level of bigotry and hatefulness IRL. I hope people who live in those kinds of hostile RL environments are able to find support online, because fortunately there are decent, civilised people in the world who don't allow their knee-jerk prejudices to colour the way they give advice and support to others - even if they idea seems novel to some that those people should be found on LS!

[Got it]

Who says what? That affairs can be a good thing? Who was having the argument about whether or not no affair ever works out? If I recall the name of that thread and the many many others where there is that back and forth or those proclamations, I will gladly point you to it versus name names and misquote someone. My post that you quoted didn't accuse anyone of promoting affairs as the new way to date. I had to re read it to make sure I didn't do that...and I didn't. What I did point out was:

 

 

 

 

I think the contention comes down to one set of posters feeling that affairs should be avoided and another set who do not feel the same for whatever reasons cited. I have always said that your beliefs about affairs color your posts and what you take exception to. I think both sides may see offense where there is none sometimes or unknowingly push their side of the issue, ignoring the OP or bringing up irrelevant points that reiterate their stance versus addressing the matter. Both are guilty and all we can do is try to have a more balanced outlook, without surrendering our own, if we see no need for it.

 

I pointed out Loni as someone I admire who displays a good middle ground IMO, as her affair did work out for her but she just doesn't seem to feel the need to go on and on about how it worked out for her or to go on about how the low statistics are faulty or display an attitude that shows an underlying peeve for the sentiment that affairs generally are not good things. She doesn't seem to feel hurt or offended when someone points out the cons outweighing the good often times. She sees no need to argue with anyone about affairs being possibly good things, although in her situation she could claim a "right" to say so, afterall she is proof, but she can still offer insights to the OW about the road to ending up in a non-affair R with the AP and life after the A, in a manner that seems authentic to me.

 

I like Loni's posts usually, because it feels truthful and like she is genuinely happy and aware of all sides whereas for some other OW turned wife or currently HOW it doesn't come off that way as most of their posts seem to be heavily to the side of proving something or for others their situation is so unique and out of this world that almost no affair scenario relates to them...and if so, I do not deny them that experience, but I would hope that they can separate their experience from what is relatable to most. Which is also another point of contention: there seems to always be some argument about whether or not X represents what normally happens or is it bitterness, gross exaggeration, scare-tactics, narrow-mindedness, "doom and gloom" or an accurate depiction of reality. There has to be a generally accepted reality outside of personal experience and from there we can diverge....however, maybe the two "camps" do not share the same view of reality. One side is accused of painting all affairs with the same brush, although IMO, such is life, often large brush strokes are necessary and what the large brush leaves out, you then go back in with a precision brush. There is contention about what is typical and what isn't and once there isn't an agreement upon that...then we have what we have.

 

Miss Bee - I have to say I agree 100% with the first part of your post. You are absolutely right, both sides need to address and acknowledge that their beliefs, experiences, etc color and skew their perspective. And that one may "read more into" what is being said/written than what is actually there.

 

In regards to commonality in affairs. I guess I always come back to what is common in relationships in general? While there is a wide spectrum of what is done and not done I think the norm/middle ground is pretty run of the mill and boring. From my experience, and I cannot speak for others, it really wasn't too different than relationships in the past. I guess from not having much involvements or knowledge of protocol in affairs I missed out on the FAQs and expectations. So I went with what I knew from dating in the past and proceeded as such.

 

I was thinking more about this and what I have found very interesting is those that are "anti-affair" have a very similar stance and tactic, in my observation, as those that are anti-abortions. There is the rolling out of religion and social mayhem/misconduct. There is the generalization of those that support the right to choose as being pro-abortion/affair, and there are the many cited stories of things going wrong, basic doom and gloom.

 

And maybe that is the crux of the issue. Maybe those perceived as "pro-affairs" are really just arguing the right to choose or at least a more grey acknowledgement to the decision of it which does not necessarily mean that one is going around promoting abortions or affairs. Affairs, like abortions, can have horror stories attached to them as well as not horror stories (for lack of a better term).

 

Thoughts? And the ball is looped back to you . . .

[bentnotbroken]

Miss Bee - I have to say I agree 100% with the first part of your post. You are absolutely right, both sides need to address and acknowledge that their beliefs, experiences, etc color and skew their perspective. And that one may "read more into" what is being said/written than what is actually there.

 

In regards to commonality in affairs. I guess I always come back to what is common in relationships in general? While there is a wide spectrum of what is done and not done I think the norm/middle ground is pretty run of the mill and boring. From my experience, and I cannot speak for others, it really wasn't too different than relationships in the past. I guess from not having much involvements or knowledge of protocol in affairs I missed out on the FAQs and expectations. So I went with what I knew from dating in the past and proceeded as such.

 

I was thinking more about this and what I have found very interesting is those that are "anti-affair" have a very similar stance and tactic, in my observation, as those that are anti-abortions. There is the rolling out of religion and social mayhem/misconduct. There is the generalization of those that support the right to choose as being pro-abortion/affair, and there are the many cited stories of things going wrong, basic doom and gloom.

 

And maybe that is the crux of the issue. Maybe those perceived as "pro-affairs" are really just arguing the right to choose or at least a more grey acknowledgement to the decision of it which does not necessarily mean that one is going around promoting abortions or affairs. Affairs, like abortions, can have horror stories attached to them as well as not horror stories (for lack of a better term).

 

Thoughts? And the ball is looped back to you . . .

 

 

I love being a contridition. I am anti affair(since that is the new term floating about) and pro choice. Ahhh the joys of life.

[Got it]

LS is not my website so it's not up to me to set the tone nor dictate how people should post, nor do I have any influence over what others post, so I don't spend much time thinking about it. It is.........what it is. I don't have the power to change it. If LS was a site that catered to HOW's I'd have nothing of value to say here. It's nothing personal just not where I am or where I've been. I'm not an HOW nor was I ever.

 

Also..........as MissBee pointed out when people are happy, there isn't much reason to post here.

 

As for evidence you asked for.......I explained that it's against the TOS to post link's to other threads (I oughta know since I've been whacked for it before) but you tell me, how many happy threads do you see on the 1st 2 pages of the site? I know of one. Most of the rest of them are from men and women who feel like they are sometimes in the pits of hell because of an affair.

 

Then how is it not against the rules for you to post something is a fact when you cannot back up that claim?

 

Where have I said that this is your site or you have control over it. It is asking for your opinion to the questions.

 

You have never pondered, why certain people aren't posting? Okay, fair enough.

 

What I can tell you then, that LS is not necessarily the norm for OP forums and there are HOWs that post in other venues.

 

In regards to catering to, what do you mean by that? Do you believe that HOWs would need to be catered to to post?

 

I would think just a neutral ground would suffice, in general, for all audiences. But that is my personal opinion on it.

[Got it]

I love being a contridition. I am anti affair(since that is the new term floating about) and pro choice. Ahhh the joys of life.

 

Aww, the complexity of the human race.

 

And anti-affair was coined, at least by me, to give a different label (oops crossing over into another thread ) to give a name to the counter voice to the perceived pro-affair.

 

Is that an unfair assumption, are you not anti-affair?

[bentnotbroken]

Aww, the complexity of the human race.

 

And anti-affair was coined, at least by me, to give a different label (oops crossing over into another thread ) to give a name to the counter voice to the perceived pro-affair.

 

Is that an unfair assumption, are you not anti-affair?

 

 

Hmmmm. I am anti the term affair. I say let's take the hollywood pretty out of it. I am anti lying, gas lighting, exposure to crazy people, financial ruin, anti emotional devastation, anti passive aggressive, lacking in backbone, balls or good ole gumption. I am anti let me play with your life without giving you a choice in that decision. I am anti STD exposure, anti cake eating, anti fence sitting, anti anything that involves using another person without their knowledge, I am anti disrespectful of the stability of a person one made promises to.

 

I am not anti divorce, anti true wub, anti being with one's true sole mate(yes I know I spelled it incorrectly for this usage)I am not anti going to be with whom ever rocks your world, floats your boat or set rockets off over the moon. I am not anti walking away like a mature male/female with the love of their lives and showing respect to the person they no longer want to be with.

 

So I guess my answer is..........

[donnamaybe]

Hmmmm. I am anti the term affair. I say let's take the hollywood pretty out of it. I am anti lying, gas lighting, exposure to crazy people, financial ruin, anti emotional devastation, anti passive aggressive, lacking in backbone, balls or good ole gumption. I am anti let me play with your life without giving you a choice in that decision. I am anti STD exposure, anti cake eating, anti fence sitting, anti anything that involves using another person without their knowledge, I am anti disrespectful of the stability of a person one made promises to.

 

I am not anti divorce, anti true wub, anti being with one's true sole mate(yes I know I spelled it incorrectly for this usage)I am not anti going to be with whom ever rocks your world, floats your boat or set rockets off over the moon. I am not anti walking away like a mature male/female with the love of their lives and showing respect to the person they no longer want to be with.

 

So I guess my answer is..........

BEAUTIFUL! Well done BNB!

[donnamaybe]

I would think just a neutral ground would suffice, in general, for all audiences. But that is my personal opinion on it.

So what does "neutral ground" mean in terms of the above? That no one should voice an opinion based on their personal beliefs and world experiences?

[Got it]

I wasn't pro affair when I was in one, I felt it was wrong. It hurt me terribly and it hurt other people also. I advise people who are in pain and hurting, I don't preach, I try to be kind. I just try to point out what maybe they can't see but yet I realize others don't see things the way I do and they are morally and consciously fine with affairs and I accept that. I don't expect or require everyone to think like me. IMO I am neutral as much as I can possibly be because I have walked in those ow shoes..

 

Why is that so difficult for you to understand and why are you picking apart my words? Why do you take issue with my stand? Is it because it's not in line with yours?

 

BB07 - you are being highly sensitive here. I am not picking apart your words, I am responding to what you post with my thoughts, questions, analogies, etc. I thought the point of posting was to engage in healthy dialogue and discussion.

 

I don't take issue with your stance, that is your stance. I may play devil's advocate on what you post if I see a loophole or have a differnt idea or question.

 

You are not neutral, I think that is an incorrect statement.

 

And how am I making a mountain out of a molehill? Again, I am engaging to engage, to gain insight, to get other's points of views, insight, logic, etc.

 

I really have no emotionally attachment to any of this and I am sorry if you do. I understand many feel differently than me, some will condemn, some will not agree. That is prefectly okay. I am at peace with my actions and who I am. I think the topic is interesting, I think all sides of the argument are interesting, and I like to deep dive things. I believe you are correct in some of your analysis, wrong in others, and I think everyone here has good points and interesting insight.

 

It is just intellectual debate. That is all.

[Got it]

Hmmmm. I am anti the term affair. I say let's take the hollywood pretty out of it. I am anti lying, gas lighting, exposure to crazy people, financial ruin, anti emotional devastation, anti passive aggressive, lacking in backbone, balls or good ole gumption. I am anti let me play with your life without giving you a choice in that decision. I am anti STD exposure, anti cake eating, anti fence sitting, anti anything that involves using another person without their knowledge, I am anti disrespectful of the stability of a person one made promises to.

 

I am not anti divorce, anti true wub, anti being with one's true sole mate(yes I know I spelled it incorrectly for this usage)I am not anti going to be with whom ever rocks your world, floats your boat or set rockets off over the moon. I am not anti walking away like a mature male/female with the love of their lives and showing respect to the person they no longer want to be with.

 

So I guess my answer is..........

 

What is "true wub"?

 

What exactly are you? I mean I get your soapbox speech and that you are against the lying and cheating involved with affairs. And since you I think would safely agree that that is part and parcel in an affair, then one would surmise you are anti-affair, correct?

 

It is okay, you can admit it, the water is warm, come on in.

 

All kidding aside, in thinking is there a reason you would not want to say you are anti-affair? Just pondering?

Edited July 25, 2011 by Got it

[Got it]

So what does "neutral ground" mean in terms of the above? That no one should voice an opinion based on their personal beliefs and world experiences?

 

No donna, I have never said that. If I have, can you please cite it for me so I can explain or apologize.

Edited July 25, 2011 by Got it