Met on dating site, he's married, and I don't care...

[Steadfast]

You doubt MY sincerity? Are you out of your mind?

 

Maybe. I'm not blind to the fact that my thoughts on the subject have been ignored...except for this comment, which indicates other issues not yet mentioned. IMO, if you sincerely wished that cheergirl take care you've advise her away from her current direction. But, perhaps it's exactly like you say...that she hasn't asked for advice. I can't deny that.

 

Still, I find little value in the "I'm ok, you're ok" mindset. I think it's pretty weak.

 

get your perspectives right.

 

I sincerely think they are. I'd like it to be known that someone (in this case, me) can state an opinion or thought without being accused of dropping a moral hammer. I'm not forcing it, I'm presenting it.

 

Both you and cheergirl could be very nice people. I am! Promise-

[tami-chan]

OP asked a simple question, are there others like her?

 

The answer is yes, and I didn't limit my response to cheaters or other persons or faithful but unhappily married people.

 

The only reason she picked this particular guy was because there was no one else available. She claims she had some sort of set of standards which caused her to winnow out hundreds of other men, but if OP herself was all that desirable surely she would have been able to find someone unattached as an option.

 

Seriously???? and you know this...how? Creepy.

[tami-chan]

Maybe. I'm not blind to the fact that my thoughts on the subject have been ignored...except for this comment, which indicates other issues not yet mentioned. IMO, if you sincerely wished that cheergirl take care you've advise her away from her current direction. But, perhaps it's exactly like you say...that she hasn't asked for advice. I can't deny that.

 

There is no IF, you cannot parse my words to fit your thoughts. I am not advising her because, as you well understood, that is not what she is here for. I am saying she needs to take care because the fallout could be damaging.

 

I sincerely think they are. I'd like it to be known that someone (in this case, me) can state an opinion or thought without being accused of dropping a moral hammer. I'm not forcing it, I'm presenting it.

This statement is so dishonest that it is almost funny. You are saying I am insincere which means you think I am lying...which is immoral. And yet, you sit there in front of your comp saying you are not passing moral judgments. Ha!

 

Both you and cheergirl could be very nice people. I am! Promise-

. There is a disconnect to what you claim and say. See if you can identify it.

[tami-chan]

Because OP herself said so.

 

Read the thread.

 

She had hundreds of responses on the dating site and only ONE was "suitable." So for lack of any other choices--that's who she chose.

 

I see. So in your world SUITABLE is the same as AVAILABLE. Good one ! Unbelievable. Dictionary.com is free, try it.

[cheergirl]

And because she did not come "wanting/needing advice" right away she is suspect???? . Live a little, huh?

 

 

 

Sure people can respond, why not? but perhaps in the spirit of "Giving respect"...why not respond to the ACTUAL post and actual questions? No, we feel the need to shame, belittle, guilt the people who do not share our moral values...maybe it makes some of us feel better about ourselves/our situations..don't know...Besides, last time I heard, doing those things is not exactly OPEN dialogue...don't know...maybe in your world, it is...

 

My thoughts exactly...

[tami-chan]

TamiChan, this is post no. 110 on this thread, where cheergirl indicates "why" she ended up with a MM. She also said, in another post on this thread, that she has no attraction to MM--it wasn't something she was "looking for."

 

 

 

So although she said she has no desire for or attraction for MM (after all some people DO go "looking" for an affair, but cheergirl is clear that she was NOT looking for an affair), she had to "settle" for an affair because she had no alternatives, at all.

 

She has no alternative to what she believes is SUITABLE for her-not AVAILABLE to her...big difference. But hey if you do not think there is a difference...<shrug>!

[cheergirl]

Yes many are like you.

 

Next time you enter your house and are wiping your feet look downward, it's called: "Doormat."

If you really believe that, it's hardly empowering or compassionate or kind thing to say... As it's not the truth, it's meaningless...

 

It's a shame you thought you had to settle for the ONLY man out of hundreds who met your requirements. You didn't, really. You need to do something to make yourself more attractive :lmao:so you have more viable options. That way you won't have to settle for being the OW of a married man, next time.

 

I agree. She made it clear that this is only for a very casual non-committed sexual relationship, so her standards for men have to be very very low (she doesn't have to worry about making a mistake with a long-term serious relationship partner choice). But even with hundreds of responses she only found ONE that was remotely suitable AND that guy happened to be a married man/cheater. SHE HAD NO BETTER AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES, even for a very casual purely sexual relationship.Not a very good place for anyone to be.

Fighting with everyone on the internet doesn't change the fact that OP chose this guy because she had nothing else available.

 

Miss Tami-chen already pointed out the differing definitions of available and suitable, di you get a chance to read them yet?

 

If she felt that lack of being "suitable" meant they were undatable then to cheergirl they were "unavailable" as dating partners.

 

This is obvious and now you are just arguing to cause trouble.

 

If she was willing to date the people who she thought were "unsuitable" then they would be both "suitable" and "available." To HER. Which is all that matters. Obviously just because SHE didn't find them suitable didn't render them generally "unavailable."

 

But have it your way. She actually had hundreds of other choices available but she just didn't know that.

I had hundreds of other offers, but I rejected them...

You seem to conveniently forget the part where i said it didn't matter if he was married single whatever...

[tami-chan]

If she felt that lack of being "suitable" meant they were undatable then to cheergirl they were "unavailable" as dating partners.

 

LOL..you have a warped sense of logic. They were available to her, she just did not find them SUITABLE to what she thinks she wants/need.

 

This is obvious and now you are just arguing to cause trouble.

 

Really? and coming here throwing the word DOORMAT, is not to provoke?

 

She actually had hundreds of other choices available but she just didn't know that.

 

Perhaps, but I am not stalking her.....

[cheergirl]

My preference is for an D/s sexual relationship...

His answers to my ad fit exactly what I was looking for.

He could have been single, I really am not bothered, My desire for a D/s relationship overrides everything else at this point.

Our specific needs and desires match up, exactly...

His wife won't do it.

She knows, and guess what? life goes on... (as it has been for a few years)

He's an experienced Dom and continues w/wife's knowledge...(maybe not consent so much. )

I was trying to spare the DPWA brigade the details, but my new thread was deemed "not in the spirit of LS" because I asked for "women like me" and said I wouldn't argue anymore with people who wanted to tell me how wrong I was and bitch at me... there ya go...

[tami-chan]

And isn't that EXACTLY what you're doing? hmmmmmmmm......

 

oh and I excluded myself where? hmmmmm???? ...point is, I am not bashing her for her choices or giving her advice on what she should do or not do -as that was not what she came her for...at least, not on this thread. I sent her good wishes, because in any relationship that society frowns upon there is a fallout..society will make sure of it-how severe, I do not know.

[Steadfast]

I am saying she needs to take care because the fallout could be damaging.

 

If that is what you meant then I sincerely apologize. I was wrong.

 

This statement is so dishonest that it is almost funny. You are saying I am insincere which means you think I am lying...which is immoral. And yet, you sit there in front of your comp saying you are not passing moral judgments. Ha!

 

You're assuming too much. I am not anyone's judge, nor can I pass moral judgement on anything except what I'd accept for myself. If you choose to believe I'm dishonest, there's nothing I can do. Still, please tell me what aspect of my position is insincere? Warning of the many pitfalls that await such a lifestyle? The documented despair of those who've lived it before? Gaining pleasure at the expense of others? I get it that she might not care.

 

I am also aware she did not ask for opinions. I am aware that I stuck my foot in the door of this conversation. I know she's looking for validation.

 

. There is a disconnect to what you claim and say. See if you can identify it.

 

Before you close the book on me as a manipulator, consider that I truly believe that people are not all bad, or all good for that matter. As a young man facing discipline, my father would lay out to me what it was that I was doing wrong, why it wasn't good for me and others, then encourage me by bringing up certain aspects of my personality and past accomplishments.

 

This reinforcement was to insure me that I had the tools to make positive changes in my life. I didn't always ask for his opinion, but he gave it anyway. Is this to be considered a fault? By some, perhaps and even by me at the time, but experience and wisdom has revealed its value now.

 

To conclude, I read a post from someone on the internet asking for validation to hurt and damage other people and responded with my views. Obviously, I have no control over how those views are taken.

[cheergirl]

Well obviously if your desire for ANY kind of a relationship is the overriding concern then you will be too willing to compromise or settle, which is exactly what you've done here. You just don't want to confront that.

 

I don't want ANY kind of relationship, (you keep projecting) I want a D/s sexual relationship. Google it because it's clear you have no idea what you're on about... I'm afraid it's not something the DPWA brigade will ever understand...

 

It has nothing to do with what anyone else thinks. You are perfectly well within your rights to have an affair with a cheating married man (if his wife doesn't know) or to just be part of his harem (if his wife does know, and accepts it), but then don't get offended if someone else interprets that as indicating a total lack of self-respect on your part.

Wake up, wake up, you don't live in the movies, geez no wonder so many guys cheat. You and many people in this thread have not attempted to understand one iota of what's been said or whats going on here. Just talking incessantly...As usual...Do you ever listen?

[tami-chan]

Tregor, this is what you said and I do know how anybody can misunderstand this because right now, you are trying very hard to explain yourself.

 

It's a shame you thought you had to settle for the ONLY man out of hundreds who met your requirements. You didn't, really. You need to do something to make yourself more attractive so you have more viable options. That way you won't have to settle for being the OW of a married man, next time

The bolded statement means nobody was available to her(because apparently, according to you,she is less attractive) and that she had no viable option but to settle for the married man. The statement reeks of malice and you know it.

 

I think you wish for the above to be true, but sadly for you, it is not (at least, not according to cheergirl) and now you are back pedaling and explaining yourself at length when you know very well your post was meant to shame her.

 

Well, I hope you feel better doing that if anything !

[tami-chan]

tami chan,

 

you obviously just love to "stir the pot".

 

If you have something you think is helpful to the OP to post, then do so.

 

I will continue to do the same.

 

I already did....and I didn't tell her to pretty herself up or called her doormat. YOU did. How helpful is that? BTW, how did you know she is unattractive? Would your thoughts be the same on wives whose husbands cheat?

[cheergirl]

tami chan,

 

you obviously just love to "stir the pot".

 

If you have something you think is helpful to the OP to post, then do so.

 

I will continue to do the same.

 

Yeah, you really want to help me...

 

I love the little coded put-downs...

I am amazed that you have the audacity to condemn/insult other posters whose opinions differ to your own and also those who defend them.

 

It's pathetic.

Your arguments are not valid.

 

You madam, are just a sanctimonious bully, like so many others here...

[cheergirl]

I didn't say that either, so don't insinuate otherwise. Yes, you did

 

I said if she wanted to have more suitable options she needed to make herself more attractive to potential partners. Not necessarily physically, or only physically.

That's true of everyone who claims they chose someone because that one person was the only one they could find, out of hundreds, that met their particular criteria.

If you want more choices, you have to make yourself as attractive as possible.Keep digging, we can read, thanks for the dating advice!

 

 

She's an admitted submissive. She deliberately looked to be a submissive and she is one. Her description of her behavior and her relationship indicated to me that she was degrading herself without even knowing that it was a fully deliberate relationship choice on her part. Ho-hum, more armchair psychology based on personal experiences... I am sub w/in a sexual relationship, i am anything but in real life actually...

 

 

Simple. If she was particularly attractive (total package--physically/emotionally/personality/financial/lifestyle/demographically) she would have more than only ONE married guy to choose from.Actually i'm just really unbelievable picky, you have deemed me unnattractive because it suits you. Nothing can be further from the truth actually...

 

I didn't want to keep on this thread, I tried to start a new thread but someone else flagged it and got it closed down... the reason why I posted is continually pushed aside and I am in silly arguments being castigated and insulted.. whatever... I wanted to talk to women like me, but women unlike me can't/won't butt out...what's new?:rolleyes:

[cheergirl]

Lots and lots of men are into D/s and given the relative rarity of women who will openly admit to being game for that type of arrangement, it's no wonder you had lots of offers. I somehow seem to attract Sub men (as in, they often come up to me in the street and propose to me to take them on as Subs, which I don't) although I don't dress in any weird way. Lots of men are like that. But to call what you have "an affair" and advertise how you're not emotionally attached to it (when no-one would expect you to be cause it's just sex)... I dunno, it smells of denial. And I'm saying this compassionately.

when did i use the term affair?

[bentnotbroken]

Yeah, you really want to help me...

 

I love the little coded put-downs...

I am amazed that you have the audacity to condemn/insult other posters whose opinions differ to your own and also those who defend them.

 

It's pathetic.

Your arguments are not valid.

 

You madam, are just a sanctimonious bully, like so many others here...

 

 

Ahhhh, more cute labels. I so love them.

[tami-chan]

Tregor, you are so unbelievably dishonest and you deliberately try to skew what she says to suit you...when she said submissive ( in a sexual way) you skewed it by saying she is a doormat. And yes, you did say for her to make herself more attractive. Stop lying.

[Tenacity]

OMG!!! What is up with all this sniping?

 

This thread was not worth one page, let alone thirteen! Who CARES?

 

Good grief. Doesn't anyone have a life? Are you adults, because it seems like junior high level bickering. Right down to the inflammatory title of this ridiculous thread. Just my observation.

[cheergirl]

Yes, in actuality, if the OM's wife knows about it--this doesn't even rise to the spicy level of "affair."

 

She is not even an OW, with the power of that allure and secrecy over the cheating husband.

Lifetime movie alert! who wants that?

She is merely a "concubine"--a known sexual outlet, of lesser status(?) to the wife, serving a functional purpose to the marriage. It probably takes some of the sexual burden off the wife(now you're getting it...)--

she probably doesn't care for the "kinky" stuff such as the golden showers and scat play and whatever else the OP lets this guy do to her. Their sex play must be something pretty bizarre like scat play;

(When we ass-u-me, Mrs...)

if the OP is even moderately attractive

(Why is my level of attractiveness such an issue to you?) but could only find one guy out of hundreds who met her highly specific d/s "criteria."

 

How can you presume to know so much about me, you silly person....

Even if ALL the above were true, (it's not, those were part of my conditions: no serious pain or humiliation, nothing "gross" just roleplaying, exchange of power; ie. light spanking, dressing up etc. if you must know:rolleyes:) why does it bother you so much? Why the need to put me down? It won't change your life... I am pretty sure I am waaaay more attractive to you, I'd bet on it, and a lot...

[cheergirl]

Tregor, you are so unbelievably dishonest and you deliberately try to skew what she says to suit you...when she said submissive ( in a sexual way) you skewed it by saying she is a doormat. And yes, you did say for her to make herself more attractive. Stop lying.

:bunny:

[Mme. Chaucer]

Actually if you insist on making accusations you need to quote what I actually said and the context in which it was said.

 

You did neither, so it is you who are the dishonest one.

 

 

 

 

I never said otherwise. You insinuated that "attractive" means only "physically attractive" which I never said. I pointed out your (deliberate?) "mistake" and you've deliberately ignored it, repeating yourself, so it obviously wasn't a "mistake" on your part.

 

I believe this is our resident multi-headed sock puppet deconstructionist. Twisting the words of whatever post it gets fixated upon is its life's work, I believe, since usually it's present with several identities and posts dozens of times (maybe hundreds) most days.

 

Pay it no heed.

 

Though personally I take great issue with the strident tone, evident vituperous intent behind the original post and many of the following ones from the OP and her sidekick, so it's kinda hard for me to call the sock puppet out right now as I'm slightly enjoying it.

 

Just for the heck of it, I will say it one more time: I believe that it is wrong to consciously choose to get what we want at others' expenses. Many people feel this way. It does not signify "bitterness." Those people can be found on this forum, being disgruntled by folks who post threads boasting loudly that THE GUY IS MARRIED AND I DON'T CARE. Rubs quite a few people the wrong way! Duh!

[cheergirl]

I am helping you.

No. you're not. Stop lying to yourself, no-one believes you...

 

 

Nothing coded, and you're the one who deliberately chose to be the submissive in your relationship. For whatever reason you enjoy being degraded sexually and otherwise. That's your choice and you're entitled to your lifestyle. It still doesn't change the fact that if you didn't care about your dom's marital status, you wouldn't have posted this thread in the first place.

 

FYI,Submission does not equal degradation:)

 

 

 

You weren't insulted at all. You were asked to explain why you posted a thread about something you claim doesn't matter to you. You haven't answered that very simple question. answered before

I'm not making any arguments. I have no argument with you. You on the other hand seem to have an argument with the entire world

.

Uh no, just judgemental rude people like yourself. With people like you I will argue. you are disrespectful and rude.

 

 

 

I didn't bully you. I pointed out the obvious: You only had ONE person to choose from that met your criteria (whatever those were) and that person happens to be married, which you actually do care about, because if you didn't, you wouldn't have posted a thread on the topic. I also pointed out that your behavior in that relationship (but not here on the internet) was like a "doormat." I then read further in the thread where you admitted to being a deliberate submissive, which confirms that you ARE a "doormat" in your relationship.

Your aggressive reactions in the thread is what you would like to do in real life in your relationships but are afraid to do.

As for my fear of aggression in real life, common sense would and your own experiences with me here on this thread suggest a person who has no fear of confrontation in reality, virtual or otherwise...

My RE-actions on this thread stem from a desire to clarify unfounded accusations and outright lies against me... Your calling me "aggresive" is a commonly used tactic to shut down opposing points of view on sites like this. It's a childish, easily spotted and addressed.

As I said before, you've changed tack so many times in your argument it's truly laughable... You try to be tough, then "helpful", then worldly...

You're no challenge virtually nor in real life I suspect. You are just a bully.

Not even a good one at that...

[tami-chan]

Are you stupid?

 

"Low self-esteem" is the keyword here.

 

Jesus.

 

I'm outta here.

 

:lmao:!!!! Jesus, indeed. FWIW, there are many attractive, rich women who have self-esteem issues. I do not know of anyone on LS as I do not anyone here personally. But, yes, I agree with you RD.