OM/OW Telling the BS?

[SoMovinOn]

There are a lot of really good responses and good points from a variety of perspectives.

 

It's fine that we discuss this however, but I would point out many are answering the wrong question. The question is not whether the OW/OM should tell the BS about the A. That question gets asked and answered frequently enough here.

 

The question I asked assumes the answer to "Should the OW/OM tell the BS..." is *yes*, because the BS has a "right to know" (or however you'd like to say that)...

 

So then the question is, assuming the spouse has a right to know the type of person he/she is married to, does the responsibility of telling them something you know, which is indicative of the type of person they are married to, carry over to other situations.

 

The best example thus far is the H spending his days at the horse track, but lying to his W, saying he is going to work.

[Mme. Chaucer]

So, what you are asking is whether an OW/OM should tell the BS of their AP any and every negative thing that they know about their AP - excluding the fact that they are having secret sex with the spouse of the BS?

 

is this correct?

 

Just want to make sure I am not answering the "wrong question."

 

Have you ever considered that you might have some pretty deep control issues?

[MissBee]

As I mentioned in another response - don't get hung up on the details of the examples. I was simply trying to clarify the intent and meaning of my question.

 

A better example came up in one of the responses - the H saying he was going to work, and spending his days betting on the horses instead.

 

 

 

A right to know, what? Any negative information about their spouse?

 

I am gathering that you're making an implicit assertion that if one believes the BS has a right to know about affairs then they have a right to know about all indiscretion, big or small....and since the small indiscretions most would disagree with them needing to know those, it is supposed to make the argument that they should know about an affair not hold water.

 

I think that you're setting up a straw man argument in which these other "negative" things are not that big of a deal to most reasonable people and therefore most reasonable people would not agree that coworkers, neighbors etc should be the life police, trailing others to report library fines, speeding tickets, job performance and so on to spouses.

 

If someone's spouse is engaged in high risk behaviors or something crazy (they are a serial rapist on the low, they molest children on the low, they are embezzling from their company, they are a part of a drug cartel, they sleep with prostitutes)..then yeaa those "negative" things are more pressing and can ruin lives and if someone knows, they may want to volunteer the info....low risk activities like those mentioned, most people wouldn't notice anyway furthermore to tell.

[SoMovinOn]

I see good answer on both sides here - tell/don't tell.

 

The circles I spend most of my time in, you mind your own business and you pretty much never tell anyone something you know, except in perhaps a few rare instances.

 

The first thing I would say is, in telling anything, you had better know what you are talking about, and you better have proof. Nothing worse than telling your friend that you saw her H having lunch with another W, and they seemed very friendly, only to find out it was his sister.

 

Additionally, what about potential violence? You see your friend's W with another man, you tell your friend. He flips out and beats or kills her. How do you feel about it now? Might you have opened yourself for potential legal complicity?

 

Also, as some have mentioned... it seems often, the messenger becomes the bad guy, and whatever it is they were reporting gets ignored, continues, etc., so, do you really want to take that risk?

 

Since many want to discuss the OW/OM telling the BS aspect - and I'll mention again, that wasn't part of the question, but rather was assumed to be a "yes" ... I saw a couple of responses that bring an interesting point to that question. If telling the BS is the right thing to do, and having an A is the wrong thing to do... if the OW/OM is interested in doing the right thing, why not do it from the beginning and skip the A? Why the sudden interest in doing the right thing after having played a role in creating the problem to begin with?

[SoMovinOn]

So, what you are asking is whether an OW/OM should tell the BS of their AP any and every negative thing that they know about their AP - excluding the fact that they are having secret sex with the spouse of the BS?

 

is this correct?

 

Just want to make sure I am not answering the "wrong question."

 

No. That's not correct.

 

The question assumes the spouse has a "right to know" what type of person they are married to. (i.e., it assumes the answer to the question of whether the OW/OM should tell the BS, based on that "right", is Yes)

 

So, the key setup to the question is - the spouse has a "right to know" what type of person they are married to.

 

The other part of the setup is, there is no A, there is no OM/OW, there is no BS.

 

Now, the question is - does a spouse have a "right to know" what type of person they are married to", in any, or every circumstance?

 

If I know their spouse is a liar, a cheat, a criminal, doing something which may damage or harm the M, do I also have a responsibility in those situations to tell them what I know?

 

 

 

Have you ever considered that you might have some pretty deep control issues?

 

Based on asking questions on an internet forum and enjoying interesting discussions? No. Why do you ask?

[SoMovinOn]

I think that you're setting up a straw man argument...

 

Actually Bee, I was setting up a question to promote discussion. No argument. I have feelings on both sides of this issue and honestly couldn't say what I'd do without actually being in the situation.

[SoMovinOn]

I saw some responses which talk about there being some distinction on whether one is seeing this as a OM/OW or as a BS.

 

I can share my own experience as a BS, whose W had an A with my best friend.

 

After D-Day, I had no expectation of my friend to tell me anything about the A. I could have used him to verify what W was telling me, but didn't, because I think it is *her* responsibility to be honest, and it's *my* responsibility to know her well enough and for us to be able to communicate well enough, that I can know, or at least have a good idea, if she is doing that or not.

 

I did confront my friend about *his* betrayal of our friendship - what was between me and him.

 

I think, if there was a time when he had an obligation as a friend to tell me something, it would have been the very first time W approached him with something inappropriate. At that point, he should have shut her down, then come to me and told me. He didn't. Telling me details about the A after I already knew? I don't see a point in that.

[MissBee]

I see good answer on both sides here - tell/don't tell.

 

The circles I spend most of my time in, you mind your own business and you pretty much never tell anyone something you know, except in perhaps a few rare instances.

 

I think the ability to know when to mind one's own business and when to be a good citizen, friend, relative is crucial.

 

The first thing I would say is, in telling anything, you had better know what you are talking about, and you better have proof. Nothing worse than telling your friend that you saw her H having lunch with another W, and they seemed very friendly, only to find out it was his sister.

 

That's being meddlesome. People who run around reporting things of which they do not know....meddlesome. Most people would struggle with telling a friend/family member something negative about their spouse. No one really wants to be the bearer of bad news and most do consider that person not taking it well. I do not think most people (who are not meddlesome) rush off to report things like that but usually wait and debate it or sometimes don't tell at all.

Additionally, what about potential violence? You see your friend's W with another man, you tell your friend. He flips out and beats or kills her. How do you feel about it now? Might you have opened yourself for potential legal complicity?

Well if that person is going to flip out and kill you because you found out about their affair, then needless to say they have other issues and that friend may have been suffering from that before. Likewise, it could be argued, what if you don't tell and your friend ends up with HIV, how would you feel? I am sure one is not legally complicit because you told your friend their husband is cheating and he killed her...sorry, that is laughable and I'd like to see the court that would try to say that. There can be ramifications to telling as well as not telling, one has to sue their intuition and judgment to make that call. Simply arguing that never telling is best or always telling is best don't make sense...

 

Also, as some have mentioned... it seems often, the messenger becomes the bad guy, and whatever it is they were reporting gets ignored, continues, etc., so, do you really want to take that risk?

How is it a risk if you're ignored? You simply move on with your life. My conscience could not handle knowing my bestfriend's spouse is cheating and I smile with her, talk with her and never mention it. I'd rather tell her the truth and have her be upset at me, and perhaps later realize the truth and apologize, than to never tell. Likewise, if it comes to light and I admit I knew or it somehow comes out I knew...the result would be the same.

Since many want to discuss the OW/OM telling the BS aspect - and I'll mention again, that wasn't part of the question, but rather was assumed to be a "yes" ... I saw a couple of responses that bring an interesting point to that question. If telling the BS is the right thing to do, and having an A is the wrong thing to do... if the OW/OM is interested in doing the right thing, why not do it from the beginning and skip the A? Why the sudden interest in doing the right thing after having played a role in creating the problem to begin with?

 

Responses bolded.

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

 

The other part of the setup is, there is no A, there is no OM/OW, there is no BS.

 

Why the title, then?

 

"OM/OW Telling the BS?"

 

The festive gang of OM, OW and BS are all here, right in the title!

 

How are we supposed to know that between the title and the first post, the little triangle of acronyms has left the equation?

 

I'm not just bugging you - sincerely, if you want people to respond "correctly" to your threads, it would benefit you to be completely clear rather than completely contradictory to begin with.

 

I asked about whether you have control issues because I have noticed that you try to influence how people post in various ways to a larger extent than I have seen from any LS member. So, I asked.

[MissBee]

Actually Bee, I was setting up a question to promote discussion. No argument. I have feelings on both sides of this issue and honestly couldn't say what I'd do without actually being in the situation.

 

I was not using argument in the sense of a fight...I meant argument in the broad sense of what an argument is and particularly what a straw man argument is.

[serial muse]

I suppose one could say that I am one of those that took the OP in a different direction. I did answer the original question, in that I don't agree with the premise and didn't think anyone . So I could just leave it at that...

 

But honestly, OP, as much as you're saying it's not the point, I think that what I wrote is really the point. The premise:

 

Many, maybe most of the responses support telling the BS, generally based on some version of "The BS has a right to known to whom he/she is married."

 

is simply flawed. I don't actually agree that most of the responses support telling the BS based on some version of the BS has a right to know; my perception is that most BS on loveshack, anyway, tend to say that they themselves would rather know, and that they don't want to be protected for their own good from the truth.

 

But, I understand you don't want further discussion of that point on this thread, so I'll bow out of it at this point.

Edited September 29, 2011 by serial muse

[beenburned]

You briefly asked what is the point of the OW telling the BS after the affair is over. REVENGE on the MM, because they found out they were lied to repeatedly.

 

It was O.K. when it was only the wife being used and lied to. But they didn't like it at all when they found out he treated them the same way.

[Owl]

How about we look at it this way.

 

Rather than try to discuss this from a "the BS deserves the right to know what kind of person they're married to"...let's look at it from the much more realistic and practical stance of...

 

The BS deserves the right to know pertinent information about the violation of marital vows and expectations, with the intent to allow them to have enough information to make an informed decision on whether or not THEY want to continue that relationship, in light of the new information that has been deliberately denied and hidden from them up to this point.

 

Comparing this to any other "kind" of information is just ludicrous, and frankly a silly comparison.

 

Let's not try to confuse this discussion with poor comparisons.

 

Does the betrayed spouse deserve to know critical information that is likely to have a direct impact on a decision to remain married to their spouse or not?

 

YES

 

Can't see how anyone could view it under any other light when you look at it on it's own, and don't confuse it with anything else.

[herenow]

This is one of the main things on this board that really baffles me: the BS's claim to "rights of knowledge" ABOUT THEIR OWN SPOUSE - and shifting the responsibility of delivering those rights onto everyone else, whether they know them or not. It's like they're saying, "Everybody owes me, simply because I'm married."

 

The logic of that claim defies all reason and the arrogance of it is breathtaking. It actually helps me understand better why their spouses are cheating on them. People with that attitude, I avoid like the plague IRL. I can't imagine what it must be like to be tethered to them on a daily basis.

 

And the arrogance of people who don't feel obligation to the truth is what helps me understand why most MM would rather stay married to their wives. BTW,if MM were "tethered" to their wives, they wouldn't be having affairs. I read this type of stuff and it really does help make it clear why many MM do not leave to be with the OW. Oh, you will say it's because of the kids. Maybe it's because they know and trust their wives and they don't want to be "tethered" to someone who is just fine with affairs and lying. I will ponder that more. Thank you for this post.

 

I don't feel it's the obligation of the OW to tell the BW, I just think it would be a good idea. But, in the end, the OW doesn't owe anything to the BW and the BW doesn't owe anything to the OW. The OW will often say she isn't part of the marriage, and I believe that. But, IMO the OW should be truthful when or if the time comes.

 

IMO and IRL, I find it hard to live with secrets. If I knew a friend or friend's spouse was doing something that could be hurtful to anyone, I would do something about it. In the case of reckless driving, I would speak to the driver. I would see no reason to go beyond the source. But infidelity is different and always a secret. If it wasn't a secret, it wouldn't be an affair. In most cases, the BW is not aware and she is living a lie. IMO, she should be told so that she can make her own choices based on truth. I really don't care how she finds out.

Edited September 29, 2011 by herenow

[pureinheart]

I'd say it all depends on the circumstances.

 

I had a very close girlfriend come to me once and said, "As your friend, I know you'd want to know that your H made an inappropriate advance towards me".

 

 

It all came down to words at that point. I appraoched him, de denied it.

 

To this day I still don't have proof positive. In the end, it was never the same for she and I. My H, eventually ended up leaving me.

 

There was also an instance where, myself and another mutual friend went to our friend and told her about seeing her H at a party with a woman.

 

It was very obvious they had come as a couple. She thanked us and then got very short with us, asked us to leave as she had things to do.

 

This was someone we'd known for many years and talked to on a regular basis. She stopped calling us and taking our calls. Never figured that one out.

 

So, it's a very tricky situation to find yourselfin. With what may feel like a responsibility to a friend ,and also as a friend ,to stay out of it.

 

As a rule, I don't believe it is the responsibility of the OM/OW to tell the BS. In the instance of STD's, that is another issue.

 

SW, this situation happened with my first marriage. My now exH started a fight with me, and it was already known that I was pregnant and we were planning to marry. He left, storming out of the apartment and was gone most of the night, he returned drunker than a skunk (as usual).

 

My long-time friend saw him at a party and told me he was with another...I confronted him and he didn't tell the truth and turned it on my friend. I shunned her as did others.

 

I think we already know "the truth" and just don't want to go there. It takes a VERY good actor to not let any infidelity traits surface, and the BS truely the unknowing victim. I would say this is not the norm.

 

I would have argued that this statement is incorrect prior to my relationship with my exfiance. He was abusive from day one (he also had good points). I thought it was so weird reading the journal that I kept describing his abuse, only a few days of dating him...I saw him for what he was almost immediately. I chose not "see" that possibly subconsciencly hoping he would change.

[Owl]

As a rule, I don't believe it is the responsibility of the OM/OW to tell the BS. In the instance of STD's, that is another issue.

 

SW, this situation happened with my first marriage. My now exH started a fight with me, and it was already known that I was pregnant and we were planning to marry. He left, storming out of the apartment and was gone most of the night, he returned drunker than a skunk (as usual).

 

My long-time friend saw him at a party and told me he was with another...I confronted him and he didn't tell the truth and turned it on my friend. I shunned her as did others.

 

I think we already know "the truth" and just don't want to go there. It takes a VERY good actor to not let any infidelity traits surface, and the BS truely the unknowing victim. I would say this is not the norm.

 

I would have argued that this statement is incorrect prior to my relationship with my exfiance. He was abusive from day one (he also had good points). I thought it was so weird reading the journal that I kept describing his abuse, only a few days of dating him...I saw him for what he was almost immediately. I chose not "see" that possibly subconsciencly hoping he would change.

 

I agree that the OW/OM isn't responsible to inform the BS. They don't "owe" the BS anything...in fact, IMHO, it's pretty clear that in most cases there's a definite sense of competition or lack of empathy for the BS in most OW/OM that are engaged in an affair. Frankly, if they allowed themselves to have consideration for the BS, it would create a lot of emotional conflict for themselves.

 

I disagree with the idea that most BS's know. I would say that many BS's may sense that SOMETHING is wrong...but honestly many don't know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's an affair, nor the scope of the affair. There's a gut feeling that something is wrong...but not concrete EVIDENCE that proves it beyond a doubt...which is what most BS's typically require to make an informed decision about the situation.

 

The OW/OM isn't in any way "required" to tell the BS.

 

But...that doesn't lessen the need that a BS has for actual 'proof' of the affair in order to make an informed decision. It theoretically SHOULD come from the MM/MW...but realistically it can (and often does) come from any source. A friend or relative who learned something they 'shouldn't have'...the OW/OM who felt guilty or for some reason had a desire to inform them of the situation...or they discover the 'proof' on their own through various means.

[donnamaybe]

I think you are focussing on semantics. I suspect the intent behind that phrase is more along the lines of treating others with respect and kindness.

 

But as to the latter part of your post, why wouldn't you divorce someone who you couldn't imagine being tethered to on a daily basis? Having an A is a poor solution since you are still tethered to them on a daily basis.

Spot on, and the simplicity in your logic is breathtaking.

[SidLyon]

So as not to hijack anyone's thread...

 

There are many discussions here, specific instances - Should I tell the BS about our A? ... there are different variations and circumstances.

 

Many, maybe most of the responses support telling the BS, generally based on some version of "The BS has a right to known to whom he/she is married."

 

Based on this premise, should we be telling the spouses of any person we know, any negative information we may know about their spouse?

 

Does a spouse have a right to know his/her spouse is performing poorly at work? They may end up losing their job, being passed up for promotion, or being passed for a pay raise. All of which could have a negative impact on the spouse, the M and the family.

 

If I see my neighbor excessively speeding, should I tell his wife? He may get a speeding ticket which could cost them a significant amount of money. Even worse, he may get into an accident, possibly kill someone else, and maybe himself. Should I tell his wife about his speeding because she has a right to know the kind of man she is married to?

 

Based on my examples, it may seem I am being facetious in asking this, but, I am not. It is a question of - If the spouse has a "right to know" what type of person they are married to, and if others have a responsibility to provide information to them in that regard, in what situation(s) do others have this responsibility? Does it only apply to affairs? If so, why?

 

It's possible to answer all the questions you asked with a straight "yes". No discussion required.

 

Yet your thread again has generated much discussion, which you claim you wanted. That's all good in my view as people are going beyond the questions you asked.

 

Somehow though you've managed to chastise people for not answering the questions or answering the wrong questions. This again seems to smack of telling people how/what to post.

 

I personally think you raise some good issues for discussion which is one of the purposes of this particular forum. However you might raise a few less hackles if you cease "telling" people how to post. This is just for your consideration as you will get fewer uncivil responses if you do this.

 

Another thing you might like to consider is that you often set up straw men arguments, argue from the particular to the general and vice versa and employ the fallacy of the excluded middle. You can Google these and other techniques and see that many are not useful in a discussion environment more for debates. These can detract from discussion as people waste time addressing what are essentially irrelevant side issues

 

Please note I'm not telling you how to post just making a suggestion which you are free to ignore.

 

Just to get back to your original post, if the assumption or premise is that a spouse has the right to know then clearly as the spouse has the right to know then they must be told everything. It is not possible to answer "no" or discuss without negating the underlying assumption.

[MissBee]

It's possible to answer all the questions you asked with a straight "yes". No discussion required.

 

Yet your thread again has generated much discussion, which you claim you wanted. That's all good in my view as people are going beyond the questions you asked.

 

Somehow though you've managed to chastise people for not answering the questions or answering the wrong questions. This again seems to smack of telling people how/what to post.

 

I personally think you raise some good issues for discussion which is one of the purposes of this particular forum. However you might raise a few less hackles if you cease "telling" people how to post. This is just for your consideration as you will get fewer uncivil responses if you do this.

Another thing you might like to consider is that you often set up straw men arguments, argue from the particular to the general and vice versa and employ the fallacy of the excluded middle. You can Google these and other techniques and see that many are not useful in a discussion environment more for debates. These can detract from discussion as people waste time addressing what are essentially irrelevant side issues

 

Please note I'm not telling you how to post just making a suggestion which you are free to ignore.

 

Just to get back to your original post, if the assumption or premise is that a spouse has the right to know then clearly as the spouse has the right to know then they must be told everything. It is not possible to answer "no" or discuss without negating the underlying assumption.

 

Great post!

 

I shared similar sentiments.

[carrie999]

Does a spouse have a right to know his/her spouse is performing poorly at work? They may end up losing their job, being passed up for promotion, or being passed for a pay raise. All of which could have a negative impact on the spouse, the M and the family.

 

If I see my neighbor excessively speeding, should I tell his wife? He may get a speeding ticket which could cost them a significant amount of money. Even worse, he may get into an accident, possibly kill someone else, and maybe himself. Should I tell his wife about his speeding because she has a right to know the kind of man she is married to?

 

Based on my examples, it may seem I am being facetious in asking this, but, I am not. It is a question of - If the spouse has a "right to know" what type of person they are married to, and if others have a responsibility to provide information to them in that regard, in what situation(s) do others have this responsibility? Does it only apply to affairs? If so, why?

 

The examples you use may sound less important to people on this board, but they're not. Poor performance at work may allude to a lot more that will affect the marriage, whether it's a character flaw that will lead to financial and other problems, or an early sign of major depression. Speeding...well, that's something the spouse probably already knows if they spend time in a car together, or there were prior tickets. It would be petty to bring it up unless you're close enough to mention it.

 

But there's definitely an argument for full disclosure in a marriage, and friends pointing out things other than possible EM affairs. I've had friends and relatives who were blind to things that became evident only after the problem was out of control. One found out her husband was tens of thousands of dollars in debt only after they started coming after her. They're in their fifties and completely financially independent from one another (not even a mortgage to pay off), and she had no idea how screwed up he was. Another had an alcoholic wife. She never drank at home, and always appeared perfectly sober. She might have a glass of wine with dinner, but never more than that. He found up when she ended up in the hospital with cirrhosis of the liver. Her colleagues and close friends had always known she drank, but she never compromised her job, so nobody spoke up.

 

There are a million things other than cheating that can destroy a marriage. There are a million warning signs about somebody's fundamental character that are never pointed out in a way that the spouse becomes aware before it's already destroyed the marriage. It could range from poor performance at work to cheating on exams in college to speeding to just about anything.

 

My dad may or may not have cheated. He was an alcoholic, it wasn't obvious until just before the divorce (he traveled internationally as a journalist and hid it well early on), he ended up half a million dollars in debt when his business venture collapsed, and when my mom kicked him out, he skipped the country and left her to deal with the IRS. Forget about child support.

 

Yes, I would tell those close to me if I had any real concerns about their spouse. Cheating is huge, but it's by no means the only thing, and not necessarily the worst thing.

[SoMovinOn]

I think the ability to know when to mind one's own business and when to be a good citizen, friend, relative is crucial.

 

Agreed, although, I would further add the right answer may not always be clear (depending on the situation).

 

Likewise, it could be argued, what if you don't tell and your friend ends up with HIV, how would you feel?

 

Good point. Potential negatives either way.

 

I am sure one is not legally complicit because you told your friend their husband is cheating and he killed her...sorry, that is laughable and I'd like to see the court that would try to say that.

 

Laughable? Perhaps just a bad choice of words there. Nothing laughable about it, and, certainly, courts have addressed all manner of things which may not seem "right". It is in no way a stretch that telling someone their W is having an A, and them then killing her, could lead to potential legal issues for you.

 

 

Simply arguing that never telling is best or always telling is best don't make sense...

 

Agreed. It really has to be decided for the given situation.

 

 

How is it a risk if you're ignored?

 

No risk if you are simply ignored. Definite risk if you are made to be the bad guy.

[SoMovinOn]

How are we supposed to know that between the title and the first post, the little triangle of acronyms has left the equation?

 

Perhaps, by reading the first post?

Were you just responding to the title without reading the post?

 

I'm not just bugging you - sincerely, if you want people to respond "correctly" to your threads, it would benefit you to be completely clear rather than completely contradictory to begin with.

 

I want people to respond however they want to respond. If the discussion heads off in some other direction, that's fine. It's the way discussions tend to go IRL. As for being clear... I don't see how you expect me to fit everything into the title. I use the first post to make my point.

 

I asked about whether you have control issues because I have noticed that you try to influence how people post in various ways to a larger extent than I have seen from any LS member. So, I asked.

 

Interesting. I appreciate you sharing your observation. It may inspire me to start a new thread.

[SoMovinOn]

I don't actually agree that most of the responses support telling the BS based on some version of the BS has a right to know; my perception is that most BS on loveshack, anyway, tend to say that they themselves would rather know, and that they don't want to be protected for their own good from the truth.

 

I have a perception, based on the threads I have read, but not a number, so perhaps saying many, maybe most, was innacurate. Certainly, there are some, and it is those responses which sparked my question.

 

But, I understand you don't want further discussion of that point on this thread, so I'll bow out of it at this point.

 

I don't mind discussing anything. Bringing something else into the discussion is fine. I do like, however, to get responses to the original question as well. The only thing I oppose is when a response goes off on something I didn't say, or didn't ask, and then the responder attempts to take me to task for it. That makes no sense to me as the argument they are making is between something they created and their opposition to it.

[SoMovinOn]

You actually expected your wife to be truthful after having lied and cheated and having an affair with your bf for a period of time?

 

Most assuredly. That was her responsibility to me, our M, the vows we took and the promises we made. It was her responsibility to be truthful to me from the very beginning. That she failed to do so, repeatedly, did not absolve her of that responsibility going forward.

 

Don't be confused by that though. I also expected her to lie, because she had established herself as a liar. ... and she did. When I confronted her verbally, she denied everything, lied through her teeth. Then I handed her printed copies of several of her emails, and I asked her if she'd like to start over.

 

People often tend to live up to your expectations of them. It took time, but, eventually I got the truth from her.

 

Also we read over and over about how disbelieving the BS is in that the person they "thought" they knew is having an affair, because it is something that is out of character for them...

 

That would never have been me. I always expected her to have an affair. I hoped she wouldn't. I expected she'd have an affair around the time she hit mid-life and started to no longer look like she was in her 20's. I knew the guys she'd target. At one point, I considered warning my friend with something like "She's on the prowl, don't get involved."

 

I let her know I knew, when I knew, everything I knew, and gave her every opportunity to decide to do something different, even after D-Day.

 

 

so it's difficult to see how you are supposed to "know" her well enough to be able to discern what is truth or lies.

 

I can't imagine being married to someone and *not* knowing them that well. I would go further to say, if you don't know the person you are married to that well, you're marriage is already in trouble.

 

As for depending upon the om for telling you the truth, few would "expect" it although it can happen.

 

My friend would tell me anything I asked. I didn't ask because it was *her* responsibility, to me, to own up to what she did.

[fooled once]

I was once a BS and OW. When I found out about my ex husband's cheating I did ask the woman (hardly an OW. She was one of many flings) questions. She said "he loves you so much. He always talks about you." At the time I thought, "What? Then why are you having sex with him?"

 

Anyway, as an under aware OW, when I found out the guy I was dating was still married I confronted him first. He lied and then backtracked and claim his wife refused to give him a divorce. At that point, because I had her email address, I thought I would ask her up front. I was careful not to be accusatory, demeaning or nasty. I knew nothing about her accept her job. At that point because I had caught him in a lied I was skeptical about everything he said. I did not provide details. I didn't forward emails of him stating his love for me, etc. It thought that could be cruel. I gave her a little back ground and stated that I don't go after married men. I simply stated that this is what he is telling me. And that I don't know what the truth it. I ccd him to let him know that this was not some ploy and that I wasn't ashamed of my position, as a woman in a relationship seeking the truth.

 

I wanted everything out in the open.

 

He called immediately. He said he was in Florida preparing for his brother's funeral. I knew his brother had been very ill, but didn't know he had died. The wife was with him. (I felt bad about that. But it showed me that he didn't reveal something as intimate as his brother dying with me.) He said he wished I didn't feel a need to do that. He wasn't angry with me, but wanted me to call him back.

 

I never heard from her. Two weeks later he was calling, wanting to see me again. That was in July 2008. We picked up things within months and were right back to seeing each other regularly until I ended things in December 2008. A went NC for more than a year. Then in March 2010 he contacted me, saying he missed me. He had moved back home and was living with his wife for the first time in five years. We saw each other a couple of times in 2010 before I ended it again. One time I spent a whole week with him. He continued to email, begging me to meet him on the road (he travels for work). He would email his hotel reservations. He offered to fly me into one city he was working, just days before his wife would celebrate her 60th birthday. He kept bringing that up "she's turning 60". He is seven years younger than her and I'm eight years younger than him.

 

To this day she has never contacted me. He said he's surprised by that. "Maybe she doesn't care" he said.

 

If you do tell the BS please be aware that you can't believe anything the WS tells you about them. You have to approach it like a criminal investigation and stick with facts and what you know to be true. Not what you hope to be true.

 

Sorry to t/j, but wanted to say to mzdolphin, are you 100% positive the MM didn't go into the wife's email and delete it before she could read it, since you cc'd him on it? For all you know - she NEVER saw the email! Think about it....