Article about Affairs; 'Love Triangles'

[Amour7]

'Affairing down'? I hear a lot of BSs claim that.

 

Hmm... I don't like the idea of labeling people "down" or "up." People have so many qualities an outside observer wouldn't be aware of. Obviously, though, there is something about OW that is "up" enough for a MM to risk his marriage for.

 

In the case of my xMM, people who meet his W are always surprised when they meet her. She is fairly average in looks while he is very striking. She's in average fitness; he's a triathlete. She doesn't have an advanced degree and he is highly educated. She isn't career-oriented and he is. Does that mean he "married down"? I wouldn't say that. She obviously had qualities that attracted him to her when they were dating. People who know me well but didn't know about the A would say things like, "It's too bad he's married because you two would be so good together," in that we're both high achievers, career-oriented, intellectual, athletic, etc. However, xMM seemed to really find comfort in being married to someone that he knew, in his words, would never leave him. He has abandonment issues stemming from his childhood. When he talked about the two of us marrying, he said he would never cheat on me (right- serial cheater!) in part because he was afraid I would leave him. So, I guess what I'm getting at is that the MM might feel a need to have someone in their life that they know will "settle" to some degree and won't leave them. This could be either the BS or the OW.

 

As far as stabilizing the M, I'm not so sure. I know that xMM was happier around his family when we were in the A but he spent most of his free evenings with me and had only weekend days with them. Because he was gone so much of the time and getting his needs met, he felt "charged up," full, and ready to be a top-notch dad and husband on the weekends. However, I can only imagine that the BS didn't like having her H gone so much, leaving her to care for their children as a virtual single mother. Now a month into NC, he is apparently spending most of his time at home and he is feeling unhappy about it. I believe the W is happy, though, that he's home more often now.

[Breezy Trousers]

Hmm... I don't like the idea of labeling people "down" or "up." People have so many qualities an outside observer wouldn't be aware of. Obviously, though, there is something about OW that is "up" enough for a MM to risk his marriage for.

 

In the case of my xMM, people who meet his W are always surprised when they meet her. She is fairly average in looks while he is very striking. She's in average fitness; he's a triathlete. She doesn't have an advanced degree and he is highly educated. She isn't career-oriented and he is. Does that mean he "married down"? I wouldn't say that. She obviously had qualities that attracted him to her when they were dating. People who know me well but didn't know about the A would say things like, "It's too bad he's married because you two would be so good together," in that we're both high achievers, career-oriented, intellectual, athletic, etc. However, xMM seemed to really find comfort in being married to someone that he knew, in his words, would never leave him. He has abandonment issues stemming from his childhood. When he talked about the two of us marrying, he said he would never cheat on me (right- serial cheater!) in part because he was afraid I would leave him. So, I guess what I'm getting at is that the MM might feel a need to have someone in their life that they know will "settle" to some degree and won't leave them. This could be either the BS or the OW.

 

As far as stabilizing the M, I'm not so sure. I know that xMM was happier around his family when we were in the A but he spent most of his free evenings with me and had only weekend days with them. Because he was gone so much of the time and getting his needs met, he felt "charged up," full, and ready to be a top-notch dad and husband on the weekends. However, I can only imagine that the BS didn't like having her H gone so much, leaving her to care for their children as a virtual single mother. Now a month into NC, he is apparently spending most of his time at home and he is feeling unhappy about it. I believe the W is happy, though, that he's home more often now.

 

Not saying this is true in the instance described above, but it reminded me of a book I read a year ago concerning powerful, successful men and domestic violence. Apparently, it's a consistent pattern for these guys to to marry "down." The women are initially delighted to be chosen by such a man, feeling they won Prince Charming. Later, of course, they realize the reason for this. Prince Charming is trying to control things to avoid abandonment issues, and that control only escalates in time. Affairs are typical, too -- another form of abuse toward the spouse and an attempt to control abandonment/engulfment issues by juggling two relationships.

[Spark1111]

Not saying this is true in the instance described above, but it reminded me of a book I read a year ago concerning powerful, successful men and domestic violence. Apparently, it's a consistent pattern for these guys to to marry "down." The women are initially delighted to be chosen by such a man, feeling they won Prince Charming. Later, of course, they realize the reason for this. Prince Charming is trying to control things to avoid abandonment issues, and that control only escalates in time. Affairs are typical, too -- another form of abuse toward the spouse and an attempt to control abandonment/engulfment issues by juggling two relationships.

 

I'm thinking Betty Broderick, aren't you?

 

This is exactly the type of woman who sacrifices her entire life to prop up and support an ambitious man, and when he leaves her for someone more accomplished...well, we all know the violent scenario that can ensue.

 

As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Think about it: A married man or woman feeling vulnerable or depressed do to inner issues, often exacerbated by life stressors, surveys the herd until he/she senses a link as broken as him, as needy as he/she is.....and starts the pursuit.....maybe of one, maybe of many, until he receives a positive response. Then he/she zeroes in on "the one."

 

If you are in a strong secure phase of your life, he likely will NOT pursue you. He can't afford to have his face smacked, his inappropriate behavior shouted to the masses, or how uncomfortable he made you feel with his flirting and off-color jokes gossipped about the office.

 

He is not willing to risk his marriage, his status, yet. He is looking for someone to make him feel good about himself, to admire him and laugh at his jokes, but will NOT out his behavior to the world.

 

He is looking for someone who will buy into the duplicity necessary to carry out his pathology; and that has to be someone as needy and vulnerable and possibly depressed as he is.

 

To me, that is what affairing "down" means. You were chosen or targeted, all on a subconcious level, because you were weak and would participate at any cost.

 

Love, schmove, I do not care what you told yourself or he told himself.

[Silly_Girl]

I'm thinking Betty Broderick, aren't you?

 

This is exactly the type of woman who sacrifices her entire life to prop up and support an ambitious man, and when he leaves her for someone more accomplished...well, we all know the violent scenario that can ensue.

 

As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Think about it: A married man or woman feeling vulnerable or depressed do to inner issues, often exacerbated by life stressors, surveys the herd until he/she senses a link as broken as him, as needy as he/she is.....and starts the pursuit.....maybe of one, maybe of many, until he receives a positive response. Then he/she zeroes in on "the one."

 

If you are in a strong secure phase of your life, he likely will NOT pursue you. He can't afford to have his face smacked, his inappropriate behavior shouted to the masses, or how uncomfortable he made you feel with his flirting and off-color jokes gossipped about the office.

 

He is not willing to risk his marriage, his status, yet. He is looking for someone to make him feel good about himself, to admire him and laugh at his jokes, but will NOT out his behavior to the world.

 

He is looking for someone who will buy into the duplicity necessary to carry out his pathology; and that has to be someone as needy and vulnerable and possibly depressed as he is.

 

To me, that is what affairing "down" means. You were chosen or targeted, all on a subconcious level, because you were weak and would participate at any cost.

 

Love, schmove, I do not care what you told yourself or he told himself.

 

Spark, I wasn't sure if you were talking about a celebrity, your husband, or all spouses who are unfaithful?

[LilyBart]

I'm thinking Betty Broderick, aren't you?

 

This is exactly the type of woman who sacrifices her entire life to prop up and support an ambitious man, and when he leaves her for someone more accomplished...well, we all know the violent scenario that can ensue.

 

Are you kidding?!

 

Dan Broderick didn't leave Betty for someone more accomplished - she was his secretary-turned-"assistant". Of course, unless you're saying a secretary is more accomplished than a SAHM?

 

If we're talking about abandonment issues/need for control/abuse, I would say it was BETTY would took the prize on that one. For all the talk about MM "targeting" a weak needy person, it sure seemed like it was Betty who had no sense of SELF - other than being someone's wife. Pretty weak and needy if you ask me.

 

I wonder how many other Betty's are out there, who can't get over the fact that their Hs found someone else to love & marry....and haven't been able to get over it because their "sense of self" couldn't stand alone, by itself?

[MissBee]

Amour & Breezy Trousers: I agree with both of your assessments. I have a friend who makes it a point to date men whom she feels are not on par with her. While I do not believe that external things like having degrees, income levels, physical appearances etc are reflective of compatibility, she diligently avoids men she assesses to be compatible in that regard or who she feels are "more than her". She admits to dating down because of the belief that she will get a more loving and faithful partner. She thinks that by choosing a man who is less well off, less educated, etc he will put her on a pedestal and be eternally grateful that she chose him and therefore be faithful, loyal, loving and treat her like a Queen. Smh....thus far, it hasn't worked out for her. She either tires of them quickly or they STILL cheat, which is an even bigger slap in the face of her self esteem when someone she is "better than" has the "audacity" to step out on her. It is reflective of issues of fear of abandonment and rejection.

 

My last relationship was in fact an odd scenario in which I was the first woman my ex had dated who was "on his level". He would continuously say that I was the only gf he had whom his mother would like, I was the only one who had my own opinions (foolish me ignored that red flag at the time ) and the list went on. Essentially we broke up as his issues surfaced. He normally dated women who weren't as educated, weren't very attractive to him and who would fawn all over him and felt he was the best thing since then would tire of them. I do believe he suffers from narcissism. I however did not turn out to be that way and on one hand he said he liked me because he couldn't manipulate me (wtf...I again at the time ignored this red flag ), he liked me because I called him on his bullshyt, I wasn't in awe of his achievements as I had my own, that were comparatively "greater" and then so his inferior feelings came out and fears that I would leave him. This also lead him to downplaying me and belittling the things I would do as he never wanted me to feel like I was too good. He always wanted to be in a position where he was the great one to be looked up to and it just didn't work that way with me. The other women were great narcissistic supply and didn't threaten him in any way and even in his circle of friends, he is more accomplished than ALL of them and they all look up to him as well. He in essence created this world for himself where he was king. He went to college and had NO friends and his colleagues aren't his friends either, he only is friends with his people from highschool who never went to college almost guaranteeing that he would always be better whereas perhaps having friends from college would force him to enter a world where he was not the greatest thing since. He never attached to these girls and could discard them at will then would almost brag that he had a knack for breaking hearts smh.... so sickening that I was so blind. With me however, I threatened his sense of superiority and my friends were on par with me so when he hung out with us it was strikingly obvious that the world was bigger than him and none of my friends would think he was the greatest since nor would I, which didn't go over well with him as it made him feel more and more insecure. What a messy dynamic that was!

 

 

I think dating up or down is not so much about external things that outsiders look on and try to assess the relationship on, but about true compatibility and complement and being a good fit for someone else. When one removes degrees, jobs, looks etc, people are people and you need to find someone who is a complement to you as a person. When people beforehand go into a scenario feeling better than or less than their partner, then that is a recipe for disaster. I personally want a man who can respect me in my own right, appreciates me and what I bring to the table and feel like I enhance his life because he is secure within himself likewise I want to feel the same. I shouldn't feel lucky in the sense that "against me being not enough he still chose me" neither should I feel like "He better treat me right since I could do so much better".

Edited June 12, 2011 by MissBee

[pureinheart]

I'm thinking Betty Broderick, aren't you?

 

This is exactly the type of woman who sacrifices her entire life to prop up and support an ambitious man, and when he leaves her for someone more accomplished...well, we all know the violent scenario that can ensue.

 

As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Think about it: A married man or woman feeling vulnerable or depressed do to inner issues, often exacerbated by life stressors, surveys the herd until he/she senses a link as broken as him, as needy as he/she is.....and starts the pursuit.....maybe of one, maybe of many, until he receives a positive response. Then he/she zeroes in on "the one."

 

If you are in a strong secure phase of your life, he likely will NOT pursue you. He can't afford to have his face smacked, his inappropriate behavior shouted to the masses, or how uncomfortable he made you feel with his flirting and off-color jokes gossipped about the office.

 

He is not willing to risk his marriage, his status, yet. He is looking for someone to make him feel good about himself, to admire him and laugh at his jokes, but will NOT out his behavior to the world.

 

He is looking for someone who will buy into the duplicity necessary to carry out his pathology; and that has to be someone as needy and vulnerable and possibly depressed as he is.

 

To me, that is what affairing "down" means. You were chosen or targeted, all on a subconcious level, because you were weak and would participate at any cost.

 

Love, schmove, I do not care what you told yourself or he told himself.

 

Concerning Betty, I only saw the movie, although based on your description (bold) of her, the movie and the headlines seem match each other.

 

Spark, I have always found it very difficult to believe that a person all of a sudden "goes off". The movie painted Betty to be a selfless person. As a rule "selfless" people have an understanding and compassion that is beyond measure that is rarely shaken...anger can be achieved, although selfless people have great self control. Betty's ultimate behavior, no matter how she was provoked, didn't demonstrate "selfless" in any sense of the word.

 

Her behavior demonstrated selfish and self-centered, and I'm sure she didn't get there overnight. The breakdown of the M was not only his fault IMO.

[Spark1111]

Concerning Betty, I only saw the movie, although based on your description (bold) of her, the movie and the headlines seem match each other.

 

Spark, I have always found it very difficult to believe that a person all of a sudden "goes off". The movie painted Betty to be a selfless person. As a rule "selfless" people have an understanding and compassion that is beyond measure that is rarely shaken...anger can be achieved, although selfless people have great self control. Betty's ultimate behavior, no matter how she was provoked, didn't demonstrate "selfless" in any sense of the word.

 

Her behavior demonstrated selfish and self-centered, and I'm sure she didn't get there overnight. The breakdown of the M was not only his fault IMO.

 

I was responding to Breezy Trousers post where a successful, accomplished and somewhat narcissistic man purposely marries a less accomplished woman because all true narcissists have deep abandonment issues. So by marrying that sort of woman, he not only receives her steady dose of admiration and hero worship and total support, she successfully subjugates herself to his life and career. He becomes her total identity and she likes it like that.

 

He is then free to dally with many and she may turn a blind eye until he leaves her, in which case her total co-dependency, in that she has no other means in which to validate herself, explodes and turns violent.

 

Narcissists often seek and attach to low self=esteem co-dependents. It is the only way they can sustain a long term R.

 

So if he left her for his administrative assistant, younger and prettier, than he may have found another co=dependent.

 

Narcissists never affair up. They can't handle it. They would nver choose a partner they feel is equal or better.

[Spark1111]

Are you kidding?!

 

Dan Broderick didn't leave Betty for someone more accomplished - she was his secretary-turned-"assistant". Of course, unless you're saying a secretary is more accomplished than a SAHM?

 

If we're talking about abandonment issues/need for control/abuse, I would say it was BETTY would took the prize on that one. For all the talk about MM "targeting" a weak needy person, it sure seemed like it was Betty who had no sense of SELF - other than being someone's wife. Pretty weak and needy if you ask me.

 

I wonder how many other Betty's are out there, who can't get over the fact that their Hs found someone else to love & marry....and haven't been able to get over it because their "sense of self" couldn't stand alone, by itself?

 

Plenty! Plenty of OW too! In fact, the last two national news cases of murdering the BS or the WS were at the hands of OW.

 

One was a OW of a man who's wife was a teacher and very, very pregnant. OW killed her in her garage and tried to make it look like a robbery. She received life.

 

The other was a young OW who actually thought the football hero was leaving his wife and four kids for her. When she found out otherwise, she killed him and committed suicide.

 

How sad!

[Breezy Trousers]

I'm thinking Betty Broderick, aren't you?

 

This is exactly the type of woman who sacrifices her entire life to prop up and support an ambitious man, and when he leaves her for someone more accomplished...well, we all know the violent scenario that can ensue.

As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Think about it: A married man or woman feeling vulnerable or depressed do to inner issues, often exacerbated by life stressors, surveys the herd until he/she senses a link as broken as him, as needy as he/she is.....and starts the pursuit.....maybe of one, maybe of many, until he receives a positive response. Then he/she zeroes in on "the one."

 

If you are in a strong secure phase of your life, he likely will NOT pursue you. He can't afford to have his face smacked, his inappropriate behavior shouted to the masses, or how uncomfortable he made you feel with his flirting and off-color jokes gossipped about the office.

 

He is not willing to risk his marriage, his status, yet. He is looking for someone to make him feel good about himself, to admire him and laugh at his jokes, but will NOT out his behavior to the world.

He is looking for someone who will buy into the duplicity necessary to carry out his pathology; and that has to be someone as needy and vulnerable and possibly depressed as he is.

 

To me, that is what affairing "down" means. You were chosen or targeted, all on a subconcious level, because you were weak and would participate at any cost.

Love, schmove, I do not care what you told yourself or he told himself.

 

Wow! Well said! That's probably more accurate, Spark: As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Years ago, as my husband was beginning recovery for sex addiction, I noted in MC that he had a fondness for single women with young sons. I asked him why. I worried perhaps he wanted a child or had rescue fantasies about being some fatherless boy's dad. He said, no, that wasn't it at all. He told me & the therapist that these single moms were struggling to make ends meet. He knew they saw him as a way out of their struggle -- that if they had an affair with him and made him feel special, he might end up marrying them. He took advantage of their rescue fantasies for his own ends. I told him that was creepy, and he agreed it was, but it was reality.

 

I was financially secure and very married when MM approached me. I was also the eager-to-please new kid on the block, and MM was The Establishment. Initially, his attention didn't make sense to me and confused me (i.e., I wondered if I was imagining things), but in time, it grew blatant and I became flattered by the fact that this man would "risk" his marriage and reputation for me. (hahahaha) I was strong enough to stay away, though. As I grew in confidence and awareness, my feelings changed. And Sparks, you're right. In time, I saw he wasn't attracted to me but to my subordinate status and eagerness to please. It was really all about him. If I had been a diva, he would have never said hello .... In fact, MM felt so comfortable that I would not * out * his behavior to the world, that he openly threatened me at work after I turned away. And I still didn't out him -- for reasons I won't go into here -- so I guess that was a good call on his part!

 

Not all affairs involve serial cheaters, of course, but, from what I've seen, serial cheaters often have a consistent target "type." They will target single parents, compliant subordinates, partners who have just gone through a divorce, partners who are much younger and more naive, etc., and they will target these types more than once because, if worked once, they know it will work for them again.

 

Of course, the "vulnerable targets" are still responsible for the rescue fantasies which play into this, whether conscious or not -- among many other things.

[pureinheart]

Plenty! Plenty of OW too! In fact, the last two national news cases of murdering the BS or the WS were at the hands of OW.

 

One was a OW of a man who's wife was a teacher and very, very pregnant. OW killed her in her garage and tried to make it look like a robbery. She received life.

 

The other was a young OW who actually thought the football hero was leaving his wife and four kids for her. When she found out otherwise, she killed him and committed suicide.

 

How sad!

 

Yep, and I don't get any of it, either way....

[whichwayisup]

Yep, and I don't get any of it, either way....

Some people do crazy things they normally wouldn't do when pushed past their emotional limit and lose it completely.

 

That's why it's called crimes of passion.

 

Hello, can we say OJ??

[wheelwright]

In my case the triangle was meant to de-stabalise if we can look at it in that way. That wasn't conscious intention, but I was aware that my subconscious leanings were going to rock the boat to the point of capsize.

 

However, I am comfortable with and like triangles for this reason. I like to observe and be a part at the same time. I think we see more of a person in a three way split. They are being their social persona while staying true to you knowing you are present.

 

I don't mind triangles, even if I am the third party. Sometimes we find that another person - not our SO - relieves our loneliness.

 

People who are lonely will always invite someone. Whether they are genuinely lonely or just narcissistically so.

[Breezy Trousers]

I was responding to Breezy Trousers post where a successful, accomplished and somewhat narcissistic man purposely marries a less accomplished woman because all true narcissists have deep abandonment issues. So by marrying that sort of woman, he not only receives her steady dose of admiration and hero worship and total support, she successfully subjugates herself to his life and career. He becomes her total identity and she likes it like that.

 

He is then free to dally with many and she may turn a blind eye until he leaves her, in which case her total co-dependency, in that she has no other means in which to validate herself, explodes and turns violent.

Narcissists often seek and attach to low self=esteem co-dependents. It is the only way they can sustain a long term R.

 

So if he left her for his administrative assistant, younger and prettier, than he may have found another co=dependent.

 

Narcissists never affair up. They can't handle it. They would never choose a partner they feel is equal or better.

 

Narcissists never do affair up. I believe most domestic violence -- verbal, physical --can be traced to involvement with partners with some form of pathological narcissism, either NPD, BPD or psychopathy. While codependency does not create the abusive situation, it will inadvertently support it.

 

Some BPD expert was quoted on an BPD board as saying that a non-codependent person will walk away from a personality disordered person (PD) within 18 months of dating. Like most people, they become hooked in by the honeymoon/love fog. No one can woo like a PD!!! In time, though, they see the cracks and walk away.

 

Someone with strong codependency issues, however, will stay. That relationship/marriage typically lasts 15 years -- or until the youngest child is safely in college --and grows increasingly abusive behind closed doors. As the years pass, the codependent sees through the PD and grows stronger. The PD, recognizing this, starts looking for a replacement codependent, usually via an affair (affairs are common with PDs), then dumps the first spouse as a means of avoiding abandonment. People with PD cannot be alone. They must always have narcissistic supply, both primary (affairs/new acquaintances) or secondary (spouses on the back burner).

 

Unfortunately, because PDs are resistant to treatment (and because treatment is so inadequate for their needs right now), the pathology only worsens in the subsequent marriages.

 

My husband argues that narcissism is a form of codependency, though -- just the other side of it. I'm inclined to agree. The narcissist can't live without supply and resents supply for that fact. They need their partners more than their partners need them, which is why they are constantly working to confuse & control the partner. This is why anyone involved with an NPD will end up being completely devalued. Those with NPD cannot respect those who love them. Ever.

[MissBee]

I was responding to Breezy Trousers post where a successful, accomplished and somewhat narcissistic man purposely marries a less accomplished woman because all true narcissists have deep abandonment issues. So by marrying that sort of woman, he not only receives her steady dose of admiration and hero worship and total support, she successfully subjugates herself to his life and career. He becomes her total identity and she likes it like that.

 

He is then free to dally with many and she may turn a blind eye until he leaves her, in which case her total co-dependency, in that she has no other means in which to validate herself, explodes and turns violent.

 

Narcissists often seek and attach to low self=esteem co-dependents. It is the only way they can sustain a long term R.

 

So if he left her for his administrative assistant, younger and prettier, than he may have found another co=dependent.

 

Narcissists never affair up. They can't handle it. They would nver choose a partner they feel is equal or better .

 

Well said and soooo very true!

[wheelwright]

Narcissists never do affair up. I believe most domestic violence -- verbal, physical --can be traced to involvement with partners with some form of pathological narcissism, either NPD, BPD or psychopathy. While codependency does not create the abusive situation, it will inadvertently support it.

 

Some BPD expert was quoted on an BPD board as saying that a non-codependent person will walk away from a personality disordered person (PD) within 18 months of dating. Like most people, they become hooked in by the honeymoon/love fog. No one can woo like a PD!!! In time, though, they see the cracks and walk away.

 

Someone with strong codependency issues, however, will stay. That relationship/marriage typically lasts 15 years -- or until the youngest child is safely in college --and grows increasingly abusive behind closed doors. As the years pass, the codependent sees through the PD and grows stronger. The PD, recognizing this, starts looking for a replacement codependent, usually via an affair (affairs are common with PDs), then dumps the first spouse as a means of avoiding abandonment. People with PD cannot be alone. They must always have narcissistic supply, both primary (affairs/new acquaintances) or secondary (spouses on the back burner).

 

Unfortunately, because PDs are resistant to treatment (and because treatment is so inadequate for their needs right now), the pathology only worsens in the subsequent marriages.

 

My husband argues that narcissism is a form of codependency, though -- just the other side of it. I'm inclined to agree. The narcissist can't live without supply and resents supply for that fact. They need their partners more than their partners need them, which is why they are constantly working to confuse & control the partner. This is why anyone involved with an NPD will end up being completely devalued. Those with NPD cannot respect those who love them. Ever.

 

I don't know why but I found this a confusing post.

 

Although I have looked at the dynamics in my life from these perspectives, I suspect it is not helpful.

 

It is not about putting a dysfunctional label on our loved ones.

 

I feel this thinking devalues our emotional experiences. Someone may behave in the way psychologists say a narcissist behaves.

 

But we understand their past and pain. And they see that.

 

It only becomes important when a R doesn't work because of conflicting sadnesses. Drugs and alcohol may make that worse.

 

That's how I think about it after a lot of attention.

[MissBee]

Wow! Well said! That's probably more accurate, Spark: As for affairing down, based on what I've read, it is less related to looks or socio-economic status as it is to vulnerability, neediness and weakness.

 

Years ago, as my husband was beginning recovery for sex addiction, I noted in MC that he had a fondness for single women with young sons. I asked him why. I worried perhaps he wanted a child or had rescue fantasies about being some fatherless boy's dad. He said, no, that wasn't it at all. He told me & the therapist that these single moms were struggling to make ends meet. He knew they saw him as a way out of their struggle -- that if they had an affair with him and made him feel special, he might end up marrying them. He took advantage of their rescue fantasies for his own ends. I told him that was creepy, and he agreed it was, but it was reality.

 

I was financially secure and very married when MM approached me. I was also the eager-to-please new kid on the block, and MM was The Establishment. Initially, his attention didn't make sense to me and confused me (i.e., I wondered if I was imagining things), but in time, it grew blatant and I became flattered by the fact that this man would "risk" his marriage and reputation for me. (hahahaha) I was strong enough to stay away, though. As I grew in confidence and awareness, my feelings changed. And Sparks, you're right. In time, I saw he wasn't attracted to me but to my subordinate status and eagerness to please. It was really all about him. If I had been a diva, he would have never said hello .... In fact, MM felt so comfortable that I would not * out * his behavior to the world, that he openly threatened me at work after I turned away. And I still didn't out him -- for reasons I won't go into here -- so I guess that was a good call on his part!

 

Not all affairs involve serial cheaters, of course, but, from what I've seen, serial cheaters often have a consistent target "type." They will target single parents, compliant subordinates, partners who have just gone through a divorce, partners who are much younger and more naive, etc., and they will target these types more than once because, if worked once, they know it will work for them again.

 

Of course, the "vulnerable targets" are still responsible for the rescue fantasies which play into this, whether conscious or not -- among many other things.

 

I can so relate and it is so insane that you cannot hide your energy. No matter what you THINK you're portraying, by the situations you pull into your life you get a true sense of what is REALLY going on.