When good people have affairs

[SoMovinOn]

But let's think about the possibility that if an A is never discovered, none of the victims would definitively be able to say that at any given time, they were suffering the consequences of the alienation, gas lighting, etc. Instead the BS and kids (if any) will be at a loss as to what was actually going on. If the A ends and the WS again becomes the loving and attentive spouse, the BS will remember that at a certain point the M was not doing very well and will think the WS was stressed about work, or something else. Is it ok for a WS to cause such angst? It isn't. But you can't feel betrayed unless you discover you have been betrayed. You'll feel all sorts of other things but betrayal is specific to having knowledge of the act.

 

Assuming everything happens that way.

 

What if... MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. He does this for many years. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Somewhere along the line, he gets involved with a woman at work. During that time, MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Then the A ends, after which MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Where's the harm? How does the W feel harmed or hurt in any way?

 

To answer my own question, the harm could be with in the H. He could feel guilt over what he did. The guilt could eat at him. It could change him in ways the W does, eventually, notice. Maybe... if he feels the guilt, if it's enough to change him in some ways.

 

A's are a big deal to those who choose to make them a big deal. In other societies and cultures, they are/were openly accepted, or, discrete and no big deal.

 

Many of us can look at our parents and grandparents, from a time when D was not so accepted, and see how they were M and madly in love for 50 years or more. Do you think none of them ever had sex outside their M? If so, think again.

[2sunny]

I don't know if any of those things were harmful. Would he have spent the time he spent with OW on intimacy and family time, or would he have avoided them some other way?

 

Spending money... I don't know what your incomes or budget were. Some people spend tens of thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands on hobbies. Is that harmful? Yes... if they can't afford to do so. Was it $5,000 he could afford to spend? Or did he spend grocery money on his GF?

 

Doesn't make any difference. Justifying it doesn't make any of it right. It was "our money" and he spent it without my permission or knowledge.

 

He also slept with her without my permission or knowledge.

 

A violation of our vows - to love, honor and cherish didn't include this unacceptable betrayal.

 

And he was taking intimacy away from the family... Yep, he was away and even "preoccupied and absent" when home.

 

That was what made me suspect something was "off".

[findingnemo]

- Arranged marriages are not based on love, and still exist.

 

- Some people marry for money or some other convenience (and sometimes they convince themselves they are in love in order to do so)

 

- Some people marry because they think they are in love, but they have no clue.

 

- Some people think they are in love when they decide to get married, but by the time the wedding comes around, they are at least beginning to realize they are not. With tens of thousands of dollars invested, they go through with the wedding anyway.

 

Arranged Ms are a whole other ball game. Societies with arranged Ms tend to also overlook As generally. The betrayal a spouse feels would be the result of their partner wanting to end the M. Love comes with time and shared experiences. I would also add that their concept of love and ours is very different. There are very few places left in the world where Ms are totally arranged and the parties meet for the first time at the wedding. Instead families pick a number of approved suitors but expect their son/daughter to choose the one they feel some kind of a connection with.

 

In the other examples you give, at least one party walks down that aisle in love with their future spouse and believing that they are loved in return. That's why I think it is dishonest for one person to marry another without putting the truth on the table. How many people would still get married if they knew for sure that their future partner doesn't love them? I'd bet the majority would cancel the wedding.

 

You responded to 2sunny earlier that most Ms are not based on love. But they are even if one party is not being truthful, the other party thinks that love is the basis of the M. This is of course in references to why people get M. If what you meant to say is that most people do not stay M because of love, then that's possibly a different thing.

[findingnemo]

Assuming everything happens that way.

 

What if... MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. He does this for many years. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Somewhere along the line, he gets involved with a woman at work. During that time, MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Then the A ends, after which MM leaves for work at 8:00 am every weekday morning and returns home at 6:00 pm. When he comes home in the evening, he is a loving, attentive H.

 

Where's the harm? How does the W feel harmed or hurt in any way?

 

To answer my own question, the harm could be with in the H. He could feel guilt over what he did. The guilt could eat at him. It could change him in ways the W does, eventually, notice. Maybe... if he feels the guilt, if it's enough to change him in some ways.

 

A's are a big deal to those who choose to make them a big deal. In other societies and cultures, they are/were openly accepted, or, discrete and no big deal.

 

Many of us can look at our parents and grandparents, from a time when D was not so accepted, and see how they were M and madly in love for 50 years or more. Do you think none of them ever had sex outside their M? If so, think again.

 

SMO, in the example you've given, you show that a WS can continue to act normal during an A. What is normal? If the M was in trouble and there's minimal communication between spouses, this scenario could fit. I just don't see though how a normally loving and affectionate spouse can remain this way during an A? Many people have reported noticing a withdrawal of affection that was unexplained. I've always thought that even when someone professes to love two people at the same time, one of those gets less in terms of affection, etc. Isn't that what the A fog refers to? Unless someone is having sex with a paid party or a FWB and there's no emotion attached, I can't see the WS being able to successfully juggle dishing out the same amount of affection at home. We may all be capable of showing x amount of affection but are we all able to say make love to one person in the afternoon and then repeat this at home with the spouse with gusto all the time?

 

It could very well be the guilt and conflict within the WS that causes problems or which makes the WS act strange.

 

With regards to other cultures such as my own where As are quite common, the issue for the BS is still betrayal. However, it is less a betrayal of the heart and more a betrayal of the family and the institution of M. Here, saying you're leaving your M because you're in love with another person is seen quite negatively. In the Western world, there is a bigger focus on the love between H and W. In Africa, the M is a pact between two families and whether you love each other or not in the romantic sense is a non-issue. However...As are still a big deal. They present a clear danger to the welfare of the BS in terms of assets, the kids welfare, etc. Women fight tooth and nail to get rid of an AP who shows any ambition towards getting WS for themselves. Please note that all this is with regards to a WH having an A. That's acceptable. When it's a WW, all hell breaks loose and D is usually automatic.

 

Unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you see things, madly in love is not a requirement for those in Ms here and it's a given that romantic love fades. That's why most women here don't make the same kind of big deal about As.

[SoMovinOn]

Doesn't make any difference. Justifying it doesn't make any of it right. It was "our money" and he spent it without my permission or knowledge.

 

He also slept with her without my permission or knowledge.

 

A violation of our vows - to love, honor and cherish didn't include this unacceptable betrayal.

 

And he was taking intimacy away from the family... Yep, he was away and even "preoccupied and absent" when home.

 

That was what made me suspect something was "off".

 

Then in your case, I will concede you were hurt before you knew. My original thought, that ignorance is bliss, clearly was not true in your case. Although I can imagine other cases where it may be true, I wonder if it ever actually plays out in RL.

[SoMovinOn]

If what you meant to say is that most people do not stay M because of love, then that's possibly a different thing.

 

You make some good points Nemo. Part of why I made my original statement is I think a lot of people who get M for love, don't really know what love is, and don't really love the person they are marrying. In that case though, I would conceded they *are* still getting married for love.

 

I think a huge part of the problem is the emphasis our society places on getting married. Getting M is the goal. There isn't a big push for staying single and waiting until you've found the right one. It seems, in my experience, many younger women are already planning their "perfect wedding" long before they met anyone they'd really like to marry. Then they pick the first guy who seems suitable, often with ideas on how he will change once they are married. Likely a large contributor to the high divorce rate.

 

I doubt anyone in their 20's (when it seems most people get M for the first time) has enough relationship experience to be able to make a good choice/decision.

 

Interestingly though, if what I just said is true, I'd think second M's would do better, but they don't. Statistically, second M's have a higher D rate.

[SoMovinOn]

SMO, in the example you've given, you show that a WS can continue to act normal during an A. What is normal? If the M was in trouble and there's minimal communication between spouses, this scenario could fit.

 

Well, that's the key question, right? What is normal? If the wayward spouse can continue to act in the same manner, A or no A, the BS has nothing to notice. I don't think it's possible to paint with a broad brush and say no one can do this in a given situation. Some people can.

 

Certainly, in cases where the A is just sex, a fling, getting some on the side... it's not hard to come home and be the same as always.

 

Another scenario, but very different, would be where the purpose of the A is to provide something the WS is not getting at home. In that case, the BS might even feel some relief in that he/she is not be "bothered" with it.

 

 

I just don't see though how a normally loving and affectionate spouse can remain this way during an A? Many people have reported noticing a withdrawal of affection that was unexplained.

 

Some people are not all that affectionate or physical. There may not be much of anything to notice as missing, as it is typically not there to begin with.

 

 

 

I've always thought that even when someone professes to love two people at the same time, one of those gets less in terms of affection, etc. Isn't that what the A fog refers to?

 

I think "Fog" is nothing more than a way to shift blame or responsibility. I don't think it exists.

 

 

It could very well be the guilt and conflict within the WS that causes problems or which makes the WS act strange.

 

I definitely agree with this. I mentioned it in an earlier response. Almost certainly, ones ability to act the same would require them feel no guilt or conflict, or, at the very least, for those feelings to not affect them in a visible manner.

[whichwayisup]

deleted.......

Edited November 26, 2011 by whichwayisup

[2sunny]

Then in your case, I will concede you were hurt before you knew. My original thought, that ignorance is bliss, clearly was not true in your case. Although I can imagine other cases where it may be true, I wonder if it ever actually plays out in RL.

 

Ignorance isn't bliss - because the right to make a choice isn't presented - and there's no basis of trust.

 

That could never be a good thing.

 

Keeping someone in the dark about what is real - always causes harm.

 

Giving a partner truth and the right to make choices for themself is always the right thing - its called respect.

 

Cheating - its what some do - but if your going to cheat at least allow your spouse the dignity of making a choice to stay or leave.

[Untouchable_Fire]

Originally Posted by SoMovinOn

I'm honestly perplexed and even amazed that you evidently believe this.

I do not mean to goad you - but this makes me think that your concept of "relationship" is very one dimensional.

One of the very most destructive things about an affair (or other dishonesty that becomes an inherent part of a relationship - like when my former husband returned to using drugs, "secretly," after a decade) is that the lied-to person KNOWS that there is something terribly amiss. Their intimacy with their partner is cut off. Or maybe that had already happened, pre-affair. Still, they "know" something, but they will not be allowed to "really" know.

This is a terrible way to live, and it can make the betrayed person very sick.

Plus, it is a very amoral stance, and IMO the majority of people who marry do so with trust and belief that their chosen spouse shares similar morals.

How far do you take this kind of thinking, anyway? Is child porn - the kind that is taken on playgrounds without the kids' knowledge and spread over the Internet - OK because the children involved were not aware of being victimized or used in any way at all?

If there is a peeping tom in my neighborhood who watches me undress every night, takes pictures and jerks off to them every evening, is this OK as long as I don't find out?

If I am the trustee for a bunch of money and I "borrow" a sum of it for a while without the knowledge of the beneficiaries, is this just fine as long as I put it back with interest?

 

Amazing Post!!!!

[donnamaybe]

Ignorance isn't bliss - because the right to make a choice isn't presented - and there's no basis of trust.

 

That could never be a good thing.

 

Keeping someone in the dark about what is real - always causes harm.

 

Giving a partner truth and the right to make choices for themself is always the right thing - its called respect.

 

Cheating - its what some do - but if your going to cheat at least allow your spouse the dignity of making a choice to stay or leave.

Would you say the most basic level of concern for the feelings of others needs to be present for someone to adopt this philosophy?

[SoMovinOn]

Would you say the most basic level of concern for the feelings of others needs to be present for someone to adopt this philosophy?

 

I think having feelings for others, being compassionate and caring, isn't an across the board thing. Some people are compassionate with everyone - even feeling for someone like a serial killer or child molester, but, most of us do some picking and choosing, having more compassion for some, less for others, and maybe none at all for others.

[donnamaybe]

I think having feelings for others, being compassionate and caring, isn't an across the board thing. Some people are compassionate with everyone - even feeling for someone like a serial killer or child molester, but, most of us do some picking and choosing, having more compassion for some, less for others, and maybe none at all for others.

 

Pick and choose? Based on...? Personal convenience? And I didn't say "have feelings for," I said "the most basic level of concern" which, to me, is slightly above indifference.

Edited November 28, 2011 by donnamaybe

[Mme. Chaucer]

I think having feelings for others, being compassionate and caring, isn't an across the board thing. Some people are compassionate with everyone - even feeling for someone like a serial killer or child molester, but, most of us do some picking and choosing, having more compassion for some, less for others, and maybe none at all for others.

 

I think the issue being discussed is whether a person needs to possess the "most basic level of concern for the feelings of others" in order to follow this philosophy:

 

Ignorance isn't bliss - because the right to make a choice isn't presented - and there's no basis of trust.

 

Keeping someone in the dark about what is real - always causes harm.

 

Giving a partner truth and the right to make choices for themself is always the right thing - its called respect.

 

Cheating - its what some do - but if your going to cheat at least allow your spouse the dignity of making a choice to stay or leave.

 

I believe that a person would. Conversely, I believe that someone who can justify doing whatever they want despite having made a bond that precluded that does not have a basic level of concern, or respect for other peoples' feelings, in general.

 

As I've said many times, I people make bad choices, succumb to temptations, look for comfort when they are feeling neglected, act cowardly, greedy, selfish, etc., all the time. It's part of the human condition. But to justify any of those things by deflecting blame, "ignorance is bliss" philosophy, extreme need for control of all relationships, etc. does show a profound lack of humanity, to me.

[SoMovinOn]

Pick and choose? Based on...? Personal convenience? And I didn't say "have feelings for," I said "the most basic level of concern" which, to me, is slightly above indifference.

 

Yes, pick and choose. Would you have the same level of compassion for a child molester as you would for his victim?

 

Based on what? On whatever you think makes a person more or less deserving of your compassion and caring.

 

Basic level of concern... there are clearly some people whom, to me, don't even deserve that. But, like I said, people make their own choices on that, and some people choose to have some level of caring for everyone.

[donnamaybe]

Yes, pick and choose. Would you have the same level of compassion for a child molester as you would for his victim?

 

Based on what? On whatever you think makes a person more or less deserving of your compassion and caring.

 

Basic level of concern... there are clearly some people whom, to me, don't even deserve that. But, like I said, people make their own choices on that, and some people choose to have some level of caring for everyone.

So is your W a child molester? I doubt it, and if not, what could she possibly have done to not deserve at least the "basic level of concern" that any human should be able to expect?

 

Or perhaps it's just easier on you to not display this basic level of concern in this particular case.

[silktricks]

Then in your case, I will concede you were hurt before you knew. My original thought, that ignorance is bliss, clearly was not true in your case. Although I can imagine other cases where it may be true, I wonder if it ever actually plays out in RL.

 

Do you mean you wonder if ignorance ever is bliss? If that is what you mean, my vote would be an unequivocal and resounding "NO". It is not blissful to remain ignorant of a truth, no matter how inconvenient or unpalatable that truth may be. And in the case of marriage, being ignorant of your partner's deceptions can even endanger your life. Ignorance isn't "bliss", it's painful and terrible and even dangerous.

[Spark1111]

Do you mean you wonder if ignorance ever is bliss? If that is what you mean, my vote would be an unequivocal and resounding "NO". It is not blissful to remain ignorant of a truth, no matter how inconvenient or unpalatable that truth may be. And in the case of marriage, being ignorant of your partner's deceptions can even endanger your life. Ignorance isn't "bliss", it's painful and terrible and even dangerous.

 

I so agree, and I do not know how to drive this point home other than to imagine SMO, that your MOW has another, or several, OM besides you that you are unaware of.

 

Would ignorance be blissful for you? I mean, your needs are being met, you are happy with the arrangement as it is; you believe you are no different to your stbxW, so all is well for you.

 

If you knew that she had OM, that she lays with and speaks the same sayings to, would you prefer to not know about it?

[donnamaybe]

I so agree, and I do not know how to drive this point home other than to imagine SMO, that your MOW has another, or several, OM besides you that you are unaware of.

 

Would ignorance be blissful for you? I mean, your needs are being met, you are happy with the arrangement as it is; you believe you are no different to your stbxW, so all is well for you.

 

If you knew that she had OM, that she lays with and speaks the same sayings to, would you prefer to not know about it?

AND she might feel justified in deceiving him (i.e. not giving that basic level of concern) because, after all, he's lying to someone else so she might feel he doesn't deserve better.

[Silly_Girl]

AND she might feel justified in deceiving him (i.e. not giving that basic level of concern) because, after all, he's lying to someone else so she might feel he doesn't deserve better.

 

Do you think it works like that? 2 AP's are in love, planning to be together, and 1 thinks.... "I know, he's not being truthful with the woman he's separated from, so who cares if I lie to HIM?".

 

That's quite interesting that you'd hold that view.

[NoIDidn't]

Wasn't this thread about "good" people having affairs? I can't tell from the last couple of posts. LOL

 

I have a huge problem with defining people in affairs as "good", because then what do you call those that they are betraying?

 

Also, in the most recent posts, I would be wary if I was the OW of a man that was acting "normal" at home so as not to tip off his W to our A. Keeping our affair under the wraps is one thing, but making her think that things are just peachy can be dangerous in the end. But, then again, as previously said, it really depends on what "normal" looks like for that couple.

 

Good day, All.

[SoMovinOn]

So is your W a child molester? I doubt it, and if not, what could she possibly have done to not deserve at least the "basic level of concern" that any human should be able to expect?

 

Or perhaps it's just easier on you to not display this basic level of concern in this particular case.

 

You seem to have confused me with some other poster. My STBXW continues to get well beyond a "basic level of concern" from me - in spite of her multiple A's, in spite of her willful destruction of our M, in spite of her abusive behavior, in spite of the way she uses me, in spite of her extreme alcoholism... and those are just her good qualities.

 

Other than your attempt at a misguided and off topic personal attack, did you have something to contribute concerning choosing to whom one feels compassion? Would you agree that most people make choices on this? That some people are more deserving of our compassion than others?

Edited November 28, 2011 by SoMovinOn

[SoMovinOn]

I so agree, and I do not know how to drive this point home other than to imagine SMO, that your MOW has another, or several, OM besides you that you are unaware of.

 

Would ignorance be blissful for you? I mean, your needs are being met, you are happy with the arrangement as it is; you believe you are no different to your stbxW, so all is well for you.

 

If you knew that she had OM, that she lays with and speaks the same sayings to, would you prefer to not know about it?

 

If she were a fling, yes. I wouldn't ask. Wouldn't care.

 

She's not a fling, so, in this case, yes, I would care.

 

If my W had been able to be discrete, use a bit of better judgement, do her bit of shopping, be done with it and we continued on? I'd have been fine with the ignorance in that case.

 

So, my answer overall is - it depends.

[donnamaybe]

You seem to have confused me with some other poster. My STBXW continues to get well beyond a "basic level of concern" from me - in spite of her multiple A's, in spite of her willful destruction of our M, in spite of her abusive behavior, in spite of the way she uses me, in spite of her extreme alcoholism... and those are just her good qualities.

 

Other than your attempt at a misguided and off topic personal attack, did you have something to contribute concerning choosing to whom one feels compassion? Would you agree that most people make choices on this? That some people are more deserving of our compassion than others?

 

So she must not be a "good person" in your eyes then what with her A's and willful destruction of your M?

[SoMovinOn]

So she must not be a "good person" in your eyes then what with her A's and willful destruction of your M?

 

No. I've known her and we've been M for almost half our lives. I know she is a good person. I know she has demons she's fighting. I understand what she is going through. I know what my contributions to everything happening the way it did were. It could have been different, done better, but it wasn't. That doesn't make her bad. It doesn't make me not love her. It doesn't erase all the good she always was, and still is.

 

Like I've said before, when judging someone as good or bad, you need to look at the entirety of what they are, not a single action, not some period of time - all they are.