Would you consider this cheating?

[nyrias]

I don't know that I agree with that...so what steps do you feel they would have to take to resolve all of this, vs the steps you feel they'd need to do if they called it cheating?

 

Two case:

 

1) Assume there is NO cheating

- they should work on their feelings, and communicate what they want in the R

- they need to deal with anger & jealousy, try to take those under control

 

2) Assume it *is* cheating

- they need to work on remorse, apologies, and NCs

- they need to work on forgiveness

- some of the other stuff in (1) still need to be worked on too .. but remorse, apologies and forgiveness are more important.

[Owl]

I can see your point...but I'd say that the need for remorse/apology would depend on how the spouse who DIDN'T date/etc... during the 'seperation' viewed the other person's activities.

 

If they viewed it as cheating...then there might be more need for those things.

 

If they felt that it wasn't...then what you say does make a good bit of sense.

 

How anyone else feels about it remains kind of irrelevent.

[reboot]

It wasn't cheating because the husband had already ended the marriage (other than legally/technically) by abandoning his wife.

 

And even if it was "cheating" he had full knowledge of it before his decision to reconcile.

 

Perhaps you didn't actually read the OP. They separated, then husband moved back home, supposedly with no other man/woman involved for either of them. THEN wife found a new man while on vacation, asked husband to leave AGAIN, and moved the new man in. Husband didn't abandon anyone.

[confusedinkansas]

I don't think it's cheating! He left!

When you leave a marriage you leave yourself open to WHATEVER can & will happen during that separation.

It's like being ticked off that a spouse has moved on & dating others when YOU yourself wanted the separation/divorce. You...as the one wanting the split....have no right to be mad nor do you have any say.

 

Now with that said - I think that the husband & wife together determine if it's cheating or not. Not the general public, since every scenario (behind the scenes) is different. We don't know WHY he left. We don't know what happened prior to the day he left. We only know what happened from the time he did leave to the time he came back.

[John Michael Kane]

Yes it's cheating.

[John Michael Kane]

OP didn't think so at the time it happened though.

 

There is nothing in his post bearing any indication that there was anything on his part other than acknowledgment/acceptance at the time it actually happened.

 

Yes, his ego was hurt--but just because his ego was hurt doesn't mean there wasn't an understanding that they both had the freedom to see other people--which is what must have actually been the scenario even though OP wants to deny it now.

 

OP said he was hurt and shocked and there's nothing that gave her the green light to screw him over with a bunch of men and bring one of them near their children. They were married.

 

It's the same thing as any cuckold who brings another man into the bedroom but then decides say, this is not so much fun after all, is it.

 

It is a cuckold situation, but he clearly he didn't like what his wife was doing to him.

 

This is why OP is relentlessly asking "Was it cheating? Was it cheating?" Because if he can convince enough people, and himself, that she "cheated" rather than that he abandoned her and she quickly found other guys to screw--to his dismay--then it's all her fault. Not the consequence of his rash decision to leave.

 

Just because he left for a little while doesn't mean it's okay for her to bring in random men into their house and sleep with them on their bed. She knew they were separated to see whether they were going to divorce or reconcile, not tramping around with the whole world the moment he left.

 

Listen if he thought he was in the right and she shockingly cheated on him, at the time, he would have easily divorced her, because HE HAD ALREADY LEFT HER.

 

Betrayed spouses' actions are unpredictable when they're in shock.

 

He has already decided he didn't want to be with her anymore, for other reasons, but he wasn't quite sure to actually divorce her. Or, it was all a bluff or power play on his part which backfired magnificently.

 

He did not decide that he didn't want to be with her anymore and even if he did, it doesn't excuse her tramping around with men in their home, around their kid. Separation is used to solve those marital issues, not sleep with a bunch of men and bring them into their home. That's callous.

 

Why did he come back? Because HE knew, at the time of the events, not after thirty years of accumulated regret and hindsight, that he had messed up.

 

You're right he messed up. He screwed up by not divorcing her selfish arse decades ago.

 

Why didn't he divorce her? Because HE knew he didn't really have a good reason to.

 

Nah, more likely he was afraid and in denial about the magnitude of what his wife did. His mentality is here on this site. It's common.

 

OP, had the opportunity presented for him to have sex with another woman while separated, would have taken it, and would have said "There were no stated rules against it. If she assumed I was not allowed, that's her wrong assumption." HE would have told HER that he'd done nothing wrong if she complained about it.

 

Sure he had the opportunity technically, but not morally in regards to his marriage, and neither did she.

 

But since he wasn't the one who brought women into his home, on his marital bed and around his kid, this theory of yours is irrelevant.

 

(He's been asked about this earlier in the thread and hasn't responded to the point.)

 

Obviously the guy needs some help.

 

Nothing about his wife's behavior is like a typical cheater's.

 

Oh wow, really? Because her going out and having sex with men and not caring about her husband's feelings is a pretty clear indication of a selfish, unremorseful POS cheater.

 

She didn't lie to him and she didn't hide anything from him.

 

Just because she didn't lie or hide it from him doesn't mean it's not cheating. Most cheaters hide it but some will cheat and not attempt to cover their tracks.

 

What she did do was act exactly like a woman whose husband has effectively decided to set her free (and set himself free) from the obligations of their marriage (even if technically still married) and is getting on with her life.

 

A wife tramping around is not getting on with life, that's a woman who's getting on top of random men to "live for the moment."

[John Michael Kane]

Oh she thinks she wasn't cheating because they were "seperated" and now has decided after screwing at least 2 men in her marital bed that she loooooves her husband and wants him back?

 

This woman is trying to pour syrup on sh*t and call it pancakes. I don't care what you call it, or when it was. It was cheating...ugh skank.

 

Love this post.

[Owl]

Wow...welcome back. I'm impressed...<24 hours to make a new account. That must be a record.

[reboot]

It's really weird watching them talk to themselves.

[reboot]

GW, this thread is not about drifter.....

[nyrias]

I can see your point...but I'd say that the need for remorse/apology would depend on how the spouse who DIDN'T date/etc... during the 'seperation' viewed the other person's activities.

 

If they viewed it as cheating...then there might be more need for those things.

 

If they felt that it wasn't...then what you say does make a good bit of sense.

 

How anyone else feels about it remains kind of irrelevent.

 

It would NOT be fair to the spouse who dated if the determination is ONLY by the spouse who did not dated.

 

If the non-dated spouse CLEARLY set the expectation, by explicit communication, or other behavior (for example, silent acceptance of certain things, or silent ok when the dating spouse asked for permission), then he/she cannot claim the dated spouse cheat at a later date.

 

That would be changing the rule, and not fair to the spouse who goes out to date in good conscious.

[Owl]

It would NOT be fair to the spouse who dated if the determination is ONLY by the spouse who did not dated.

 

If the non-dated spouse CLEARLY set the expectation, by explicit communication, or other behavior (for example, silent acceptance of certain things, or silent ok when the dating spouse asked for permission), then he/she cannot claim the dated spouse cheat at a later date.

 

That would be changing the rule, and not fair to the spouse who goes out to date in good conscious.

 

This assumes "fair" exists in a relationship that's become this dysfunctional...which you've clearly indicated in prior posts you don't believe is the case.

 

I do agree with you that if the expectation was CLEARLY set at the beginning of the seperation...and both parties agreed to it...then there'd be no cause for dispute.

 

But that doesn't appear to have been the case here.

[nyrias]

This assumes "fair" exists in a relationship that's become this dysfunctional...which you've clearly indicated in prior posts you don't believe is the case.

 

I do agree with you that if the expectation was CLEARLY set at the beginning of the seperation...and both parties agreed to it...then there'd be no cause for dispute.

 

But that doesn't appear to have been the case here.

 

I suppose i would concede the "fair" point since the "fairness" can be ambiguous and there is literature showing that people may not agree what is "fair" anyway.

 

Your condition is more CLEAR. However, I do NOT agree that you need both parties to agree to it. I think all is needed is ONE party to communicate it clearly. For example, if a husband told a wife, I am going to leave, and find a new girl TOMORROW, then he will be guilty of ABANDONMENT, but NOT cheating since there is no lying or deception.

 

In this case, there is so much debate because communications were not clear and the existing communication (by words or by action), can be construed either way.

[turnera]

Even if he didn't go out with others, and it sounds like he didn't, if he moves out and leaves the marriage, then he has no claim on his wife.

Yep.

 

Technically, of course, they're still married, but since HE was the one who put the breaks on the marriage, he doesn't have a lot of room to complain that she COMPLIED with what he wanted.

 

As for what I think, I think they shouldn't have gotten married so young in the first place because this 'urge' to try on other people is all too common with people their age.

[carhill]

IMO, no cheating (lies and deception) occurred, not to be confused with perhaps inappropriate relationships. However, as the young lady with 3yo child found other penises to quickly and easily slip into her vagina, I would also rule out a reconciliation. Work out the details, hug the child and call it done.

 

As I read the thread, I found myself switching the genders to envision the responses. It was an interesting journey.

[road]

This why people are not to date when separated. They are still married. This WW muddy up the recovery waters by banging other guys while separated.

 

This BH may be able to move past these affairs but this past will always come back and be remembered by him.

[turnera]

Shall we reclaim this post?

This wife may be able to move past her husband abandoning his wife and young child - first, but this past will always come back and be remembered by her.

[turnera]

I will add that, for the woman to bring OM into her home with her child there - especially at such an early date - is unforgivable.

[carhill]

I will add that, for the woman to bring OM into her home with her child there - especially at such an early date - is unforgivable.

Yes, I should have been more specific about that part of my post. I agree. Had she been more discreet with her activities I'd have felt more positive about reconciliation. As it is, date in marital home with child present while parents still married = fuggetaboutit IMO

[nyrias]

IMO, no cheating (lies and deception) occurred, not to be confused with perhaps inappropriate relationships. However, as the young lady with 3yo child found other penises to quickly and easily slip into her vagina, I would also rule out a reconciliation. Work out the details, hug the child and call it done.

 

As I read the thread, I found myself switching the genders to envision the responses. It was an interesting journey.

 

This^^^. There is no cheating because there is no lies and deception. Inappropriate relationships and even cruel actions to the spouse != cheating.

[carhill]

Wife moves OM in unilaterally:

 

Husband is shocked, hurt but decides he must accept this and moves the rest of belongings out. Husband will not enter the house but continues to see child regularly.

 

I would have done things quite differently; my assertion is that such a unilateral violation of the marital home is something I would never reconcile. You can do whatever you wish. I really don't care.

[KathyM]

They both screwed up. First the husband, then the wife. If the husband hadn't moved out of the home and left the wife, none of this would have happened. He can take the blame. It was not fair to expect her to remain as married when he separated. She should not have moved the other guy into the family home, but the H has no right to act like the injured party here. He left the wife. He left the marriage. At that point, she was free to date others.

[drifter777]

Wow, letting this thread percolate has resulted in some really interesting opinions. Thanks to everyone for contributing, I hope you all continue.

 

The first thing to remember is that many of the details that accompany the actions and decisions outlined in the OP have to be left out or it would be 100 pages long. After reading replies a couple things need to be clarified.

 

1) When husband left the first time the intention was divorce. Both were free to date by mutual agreement. I did not state this and that was a mistake.

 

2) When they began to "see" each other again and begin the reconcilation process, it was understood by both that any legal stuff was on hold and their intentions were to proceed slowly before making any final decisions. Obviously, seeing other people was out of the question as they were trying to reconcile. They lived as a family although husband did not spend every night at home for reasons too complicated to get in to & not important to story. The state of the relationship was active reconciliation.

 

3) Wife's trip with parents was planned before reconcilation as many vacations are planned months in advance.

 

4) When wife returned and told husband she met someone and she wanted him to leave, I'm not sure what else he could have done other than leave. Staying would have meant physical confrontation and subsequent jail time. Don't understand why this is an issue for some people. At the time this occured it was a fact that when married people split up the wife gets the child. Period. She can invite Ted Bundy to live with her and there's nothing the husband can do other than intiate a physical confrontation that quickly leads to jail and orders of protection and maybe not being able to even see his children.

 

I will add anything else that people think is vital to the story. More than anything I am looking for people to consider the primary facts from both sides before posting their opinion.

 

Finally, I am not trying to split hairs regarding the definition of cheating. This is an interesting dilema and labeling or placing blame may not be possible for some of you. For others, you may see one party as clearly wrong.

 

Again, I thank you all for contributing.

[carhill]

If the agreed upon state of the relationship was active reconciliation, any unilateral action by either spouse which subverted or disrespected or abrogated that agreement would be considered infidelity. If such was undisclosed, then it would be cheating. Given the story shared, if the wife met the OM on vacation while H was in the marital home with children and interacted with OM in any way which would support the prior description of unilateral action, then she was cheating. After she disclosed and moved the OM in, then she was unfaithful to their agreement but not cheating. After H accepted the circumstances, then she was not cheating and he condoned her unfaithfulness.

 

Further information changes my opinion slightly, but no way I would ever reconcile with a person who moved another sexual partner into our marital home while we were married with our young child residing there. It wouldn't happen in my lifetime. In fact, I'd hire the best lawyer I could afford and pound her to bits in court. If criminal conversation were a statute, I'd swear out a complaint.

 

BTW, if the genders were reversed in this situation, the opinion would be exactly the same.

[drifter777]

In fact, I'd hire the best lawyer I could afford and pound her to bits in court.

 

To what end? In 1976 the wife got the kids and support. Period. Proving "unfit mother" was nearly impossible unless child had physical proof of abuse. Nothing she did was germain to anything beyond proving that the marriage was irreconcilable - something that had to be proven to be granted a divorce back then.