Do you think OW / MM are character damaged?

[HisGraceisSufficient]

“Self is the root, the tree, and the branches of all the evils of our fallen state.” Andrew Murray

 

Cheaters are motivated by selfishness, rooted in past wounds, and character is compromised and submitted to pride (ego).

 

It would seem our character is best seen in our accumulation of self-denials and resisting the temptations the world presents to us.

[eleanorrigby]

Well, tell me this.

He is in constant communication with me while he's at work(emails, texts, messenger) and talks to me, really talks to me via phone for a minimum of 2 hours (travel time plus lunch hour), not to mention the standard 1½-2 hours of solid messaging (not a message every 12 minutes but steady back and forth conversational messaging) every morning and 2+ hours of it every night, with the exceptions of Sundays when he plays cards with his sibling. Every mornign he wakes her up, because she won't get up to an alarm clock, the 1 hour of dinner that where she insists tv be on and then the hour that they spend together before she goes to bed, during which they again watch television.*

We go on vacation together. She has always taken the kids to her mothers instead of wanting to go anywhere. She refused the last 3 vacations he tried to take with her because her mom thought they shoudl come there. (Her mom lives 14 miles away)

Which is the primary relationship?

 

*disclaimer*

I am aware of this by her own admissions, she posts about it on facebook where she jokes about how she doesn't talk listen to her husband because it's boring.

 

I'm not debating which one is getting the best relationship, or the most attention. Clearly in your situation it appears that you get the lions share and his wife gets your seconds. But still in my eyes, the primary relationship is going to be the wife, especially if he is still living with her.

 

I knew a woman years ago that had a son with a man and was living with him but he was still married to a woman in Mexico that refused to divorce because of religion. In a case like that, I'd not consider the wife the primary relationship anymore.

[eleanorrigby]

If LFH has made it clear to him that she does not want him to leave his wife, then he would be foolish to disregard her wishes if she is his primary partner. That way he would land up with neither.

 

In my own case, my affair was very much my primary relationship, even though I remained married to my ex-wife for the period it took both of us to resolve various outstanding issues so that we could achieve our aim of being together. My marital status during that time would have been a very poor indicator of where my priorities lay, or what my intentions were, as subsequently shown by my choices and the outcome of my affair, however tempting it may have appeared to an outsider to assume.

 

Again, I'm just going by appearances. The wife a man is married to and living with, is the woman he "wifed" and I'm going to consider that the primary relationship, until he officially changes things.

[stillafool]

It's that cut and dried, is it? ANYONE involved in an affair has a flawed character? No exceptions? No extenuating circumstances? They are Just As Bad as a spouse who begins cheating from when they are first married, with several people, lying straight to their spouse's face?

 

At least I warned my husband that I did NOT any longer assure him of fidelity, and that I reserved the right to HAVE AN AFFAIR when I chose to. And, I actually told him I had an affair, and with whom, during the first few months - he chose not to take me seriously, so I didn't force him to.

 

Am I STILL full of deception and weakness? At least I gave my husband a heads up. And disclosed. And screw him, he didn't deserve my fidelity.

 

What do you think? Am I 'just as bad' as my H? Do you ONLY look at the behavior/action, or do you look at the whole case, do you take other factors into consideration? Is everyone just as bad? Do you think I have a true 'character flaw'? What if I had chosen to divorce instead of have an affair, would my character STILL be golden? Or would you say you can only judge at the end of a person's lifetime?

 

What would have been better would be to divorce him because of his infidelity and then go on to meet a single man and start your life over. That would be good character. Not to cheat on your husband as payback and then date a MM and ruin other peoples lives.

[eleanorrigby]

If LFH has made it clear to him that she does not want him to leave his wife, then he would be foolish to disregard her wishes if she is his primary partner. That way he would land up with neither.

 

I totally missed this.

 

How in the world would LFH's MM leaving his wife make him automatically end up without LFH?

 

ETA: wow and the implication that LFH's wishes could possibly keep the BW in an unhappy marriage is disturbing.

 

ETA (again) and why would the MM even care if he ends up with neither, from LFH's description of the marriage from the facebook page it does not appear that it's worth saving.

Edited August 14, 2012 by eleanorrigby

[Radagast]

It's not my place to explain LFH's situation, and I'm sure she'll correct me if I'm wrong, but from what she's spelled out and from simple logic, I'd hazard:

 

I totally missed this.

 

How in the world would LFH's MM leaving his wife make him automatically end up without LFH?

 

If she has told him she does not wish him to leave, and he then leaves, he is disregarding her wishes. I can't speak for LFH since I do not know her beyond what she has written here, but I can say that if I were to have disregarded my wife's wishes on an important matter like that then she would dumped me instantly, as it would have been an indicator to her that what we wanted was not aligned, and that I placed a lower priority on her wishes than she would have liked.

 

ETA: wow and the implication that LFH's wishes could possibly keep the BW in an unhappy marriage is disturbing.

 

No one is keeping the BW there. The BW is choosing to stay. That is entirely up to her. I'm sure she could leave at any time if she wished. To blame LFH for the BW's unwillingness to leave an "unhappy" marriage (the description of which appears to suit her very nicely) seems misplaced.

 

ETA (again) and why would the MM even care if he ends up with neither, from LFH's description of the marriage from the facebook page it does not appear that it's worth saving.

 

Presumably for the standard reasons: losing 24 hour access to the children, the disruption of divorce, financial losses, moving home, etc. Many people put up with a less than optimal marriage unless they have a better option. If LFH has stated that she does not want him to leave, then his "better option" would be restricted to living alone, with neither woman, in reduced comfort, with less money, and only part-time access to children. Unless his marriage is unbearable, that may not seem like a "better" option to him.

[MourningLosses]

I'm confused now. So are you saying if a woman says she doesn't want him to leave his wife and he does it anyway she would dump him too? I don't get that. That means te wife could leave and the relationship would continue with the other woman but if the husband ends it then it won't? So the other woman gives more power to the wife than her married man? It makes no sense at all. I can't imagine a woman only wanting him if he's married to and living with someone else unless she is being "kept" and his finances are going to suffer dramatically.

 

Then again I can't imagine not wanting him full time.

 

But none of this is about primary relationship in my view. I sometimes felt I had tiny crumbs, other times I felt he was fully with me and she didn't exist. It depends.

[MissBee]

I'm not debating which one is getting the best relationship, or the most attention. Clearly in your situation it appears that you get the lions share and his wife gets your seconds. But still in my eyes, the primary relationship is going to be the wife, especially if he is still living with her.

 

I knew a woman years ago that had a son with a man and was living with him but he was still married to a woman in Mexico that refused to divorce because of religion. In a case like that, I'd not consider the wife the primary relationship anymore.

 

I have to agree with this as well.

 

I don't think it's about who he talks to more and so forth, but rather by definition for it to be an affair, there has to be a pre-existing primary relationship. The primary relationship in my eyes, is that which is public, that which he is known to be attached to, that which he protects etc.

 

Example: My dad has cheated several times. On two of the occasions when it was discovered, these women had no idea he was actually still married and believed they were his primary relationship. I have no idea of the ins and outs, but he'd be at their houses sometimes, I imagined he called and texted often etc and who knows the logistics but clearly it was enough for them to believe all was well. These women believed he was "their man"....however, truth is, my sister and I, my mother, his family, my family, his friends etc had no idea they existed. As much as my dad isn't a great husband, I do know he loves my sister and I and we're important to him, and if we don't know you, then it's safe to say you aren't primary. If my grandma doesn't know you, if no one has ever heard about you or know the nature of the relationship and if he's gonna throw you under the bus when any of us find out...I'm not sure how "primary" you are. He may spend his romantic affections on these women more so than my mom, but at the end of the day, the relationship still exists in a bubble removed from other important people and aspects of his life. I don't think you can be considered primary if the relationship is insular and it's built just on private conversations between only you two but doesn't include other important people in the person's life. For single people it's the same...if you have a boyfriend/gf who hasn't introduced you to their friends or family, who if you ask their friends and family if they have a significant other the family an friends say no they don't or call someone else's name...not sure how much of a primary relationship you'd have then.It would be assumed that the person is not serious about you and the relationship only exists behind close doors.

[woinlove]

It's clear from the posts here that one person's primary is another person's secondary. Personally, I don't think these type of competitions with the BS are important (particularly when the BS doesn't even know they are competing with you) except in so far as it leads to new insights for the AP on the role of competition in their desire/infatuation/addiction/love for the WS. At the time, I didn't think competition played any role in my feelings and I would likely have ended it sooner if I had recognized the role of competition.

 

If one feels a ranking of the two relationships into primary and secondary, some insight into how one actually wants a BS involved, despite thinking that one doesn't, might follow.

[MissBee]

The logistics of my A made it such that I got a significant amount of time with my exAP, where truthfully in many ways there wasn't much difference in time spent in the A than a single relationship. Like LFH he called me first thing in the morning, we emailed, texted throughout the day, he called me during his lunch break, we skyped in the evening often, we talked every single night, usually he was the last person I spoke to at night and the first in the morning.

 

I would really wonder when does he have time to maintain his other relationship. I have no idea how he did it...but I think because I got soooo much time and I had access 24/7, day and night...it helped me to assume that our relationship was closer, more intimate etc. Is this true? I'll never know. I have never spoken to her and only she knows the reality of how she felt and her take on how close they were.

 

With all that though, I wasn't confused as to what was primary. As much as he tried to go out of his way to not make me feel secondary, and as much as I often didn't...the larger truth was still there. Ironically, the primary partner is the one kept in the dark. The one who the truth is hidden from. The one who doesn't choose to compromise and bend but all such has to be done against their will, because the OW who knows the deal chooses to deal with knowing about the BS and chooses to accommodation "the situation". The BS is living life as they've known it with who they consider their man and who everyone else considers as such, and the OW comes along and fits into that schema somewhere. I knew he cared about me and valued me...but I was keenly aware that the primary person was the one who existed before and who he had more ties to and a history with. I'm sure his relationship with each of us was different. I wasn't in her relationship with him so I don't know how it was...but as eleanor said, the issue wasn't who he liked best, who got more etc...but primary is who is public, who was before, what relationship is he trying to maintain, who is he gonna throw under the bus and which situation can he afford to let go of. It's like your primary address....that's the stable address that you've had, that's sure, that chances are this is where people will find you.

[veryhappy]

It depends how one looks at it. Emotionally, an AP can easily be a primary relationship. Logistically, the W/H keeps that spot.

[MissBee]

It depends how one looks at it. Emotionally, an AP can easily be a primary relationship. Logistically, the W/H keeps that spot.

 

Nice and succinct.

 

Pretty much!

[Spark1111]

I think the primary relationship is the one he fears losing the most. Men, am I wrong here?

 

If it isn't the spouse, why does he lie and deceive her regarding his affair?

 

I loved my H enough to let him go. In fact, I did. He never had to lie to me.

 

Months later, when I decided I would attempt reconciliation, I asked him.

 

His response: I could never have lost you!

 

Be careful in making assumptions here. Men are pretty territorial when it comes to protecting what they value and fear the most to lose.

 

To me, that's the primary relationship. I do not care how many texts, phone calls, conversations, etc. you throw into the mix.

[Silly_Girl]

It's hard for me to see the OW as the primary relationship when the MM is still married to his wife. *shrugs*

 

Yes, some people would find that difficult to understand.

[eleanorrigby]

 

 

If she has told him she does not wish him to leave, and he then leaves, he is disregarding her wishes. I can't speak for LFH since I do not know her beyond what she has written here, but I can say that if I were to have disregarded my wife's wishes on an important matter like that then she would dumped me instantly, as it would have been an indicator to her that what we wanted was not aligned, and that I placed a lower priority on her wishes than she would have liked.

 

So the OW pretty much gets to decide that these two shall be wedded together until she is fine with them divorcing. Damn.

 

 

No one is keeping the BW there. The BW is choosing to stay. That is entirely up to her. I'm sure she could leave at any time if she wished. To blame LFH for the BW's unwillingness to leave an "unhappy" marriage (the description of which appears to suit her very nicely) seems misplaced.

 

The MM is keeping the BW there by not telling her that he's unhappy, leaving, and wants a divorce. Yes the BW can leave whenever she chooses, but her decision to do so (and a million other things) is being affected by info she does not have. The BW might be under the impression that the two of them are toughing their boring marriage out together. Either way, the idea that two people that have an unhappy marriage will continue in this unhappy marriage because someone of someone else sticking their oar in bothers me.

 

Presumably for the standard reasons: losing 24 hour access to the children, the disruption of divorce, financial losses, moving home, etc. Many people put up with a less than optimal marriage unless they have a better option. If LFH has stated that she does not want him to leave, then his "better option" would be restricted to living alone, with neither woman, in reduced comfort, with less money, and only part-time access to children. Unless his marriage is unbearable, that may not seem like a "better" option to him.

 

Yeah I know it's tough to sacrifice some comfort, but sometimes people just need to grow up and realize that all their needs are not going to be met all the time.

[jwi71]

It depends how one looks at it. Emotionally, an AP can easily be a primary relationship. Logistically, the W/H keeps that spot.

 

Hmmmmm.

 

My first read was "Yup, she(?) nailed it"

 

Then I went, no, that's not right.

 

In either case, the MM protects what he values most as is shown in his ACTIONS.

 

IF he/she leaves, he protects what he "gets" from the A and CHOOSES that life. Simply put, he values what he gets from the A more than "logistics" or the life in the M.

 

IF he/she stays, then he/she values whatever needs of his are being met in the M OVER that which the OW/OM provides.

 

In both cases, no matter how one slices it, the WS protects what he values most - and THATS an EMOTIONAL decision, not a "logistical" one. This includes choosing money/assets over the AP - its not a direct comparison but the money provides MORE than the AP. So much so, he/she will remain in a "bad M" simply to keep the money. A value choice if ever there was one.

 

Ultimately, he values HIMSELF most. Witness the above...I do not see him/her putting the interests of others above his/her own.

[Silly_Girl]

Again, I'm just going by appearances. The wife a man is married to and living with, is the woman he "wifed" and I'm going to consider that the primary relationship, until he officially changes things.

 

'Appearances'... are deceptive. We all know that.

[Furious]

Hmmmmm.

 

My first read was "Yup, she(?) nailed it"

 

Then I went, no, that's not right.

 

In either case, the MM protects what he values most as is shown in his ACTIONS.

 

IF he/she leaves, he protects what he "gets" from the A and CHOOSES that life. Simply put, he values what he gets from the A more than "logistics" or the life in the M.

 

IF he/she stays, then he/she values whatever needs of his are being met in the M OVER that which the OW/OM provides.

 

 

In both cases, no matter how one slices it, the WS protects what he values most - and THATS an EMOTIONAL decision, not a "logistical" one. This includes choosing money/assets over the AP - its not a direct comparison but

the money provides MORE than the AP. So much so, he/she will remain in a "bad M" simply to keep the money. A value choice if ever there was one.

 

Ultimately, he values HIMSELF most. Witness the above...I do not see him/her putting the interests of others above his/her own.

 

 

 

I agree the WS's primary relationship is with himself, it's obvious and quite funny to have this debate as to who is more important the other woman or the spouse as it is neither. To achieve this there must be deception and it's to the WS's advantage to control the triangle dynamic.

[Furious]

'Appearances'... are deceptive. We all know that.

 

DECEPTION being the operative word, the key ingredient of an affair.

[cocorico]

primary is who is public, who was before, what relationship is he trying to maintain, who is he gonna throw under the bus and which situation can he afford to let go of.

 

Which will differ from situation to situation, and depend on timing and readiness, etc. in my case, I was the public partner, the R he tried to maintain, and she was the one thrown under the bus, that he could afford to let go. Even though she was the one "who was before". For some others it will be thus, and for others different. There isn't a single rule that fits all, no matter whose name is on the piece of paper.

[MissBee]

DECEPTION being the operative word, the key ingredient of an affair.

 

I meant to add something similar, that is, add deception to the mix, and things become even hazier.

 

Every time we have to get into all these nuanced arguments about As, I'm just glad to not be in one...for the simple fact that I don't have the time or energy or care to constantly explain or argue about how things appear to be versus how they are, versus this that and the other...and with triangulated relationships, it's always a game of his side, her side and her side (in the case of a MM, BS and OW). The other person will always have to justify their legitimacy and there is always some aspect that you're not privy to, it's just too much....

Edited August 15, 2012 by MissBee

[cocorico]

I think the primary relationship is the one he fears losing the most. Men, am I wrong here?

 

If it isn't the spouse, why does he lie and deceive her regarding his affair?

 

 

Because he has no respect for her? Because he wants to get his ducks in a row before telling her? Because they don't have a R based on honesty and openness? Because they never talk? Because he knows it's pointless trying to explain to her?

 

There are any number of equally credible answers to that question. To assume its because he values the R seems like clutching at straws, IMO! If that's how a man shows he values a R, by lying and deceiving, I'd far rather be the one he didn't "value"!

[cocorico]

The other person will always have to justify their legitimacy and there is always some aspect that you're not privy to' date=' it's just too much....[/quote']

 

you're seriously suggesting the BW, who is actively deceived and kept in the dark, is in a better position than the OW who may have "some aspect she's not privy to"??

[MissBee]

Because he has no respect for her? Because he wants to get his ducks in a row before telling her? Because they don't have a R based on honesty and openness? Because they never talk? Because he knows it's pointless trying to explain to her?

 

There are any number of equally credible answers to that question. To assume its because he values the R seems like clutching at straws, IMO! If that's how a man shows he values a R, by lying and deceiving, I'd far rather be the one he didn't "value"!

 

People often hide things because they're afraid of the other person's reactions and usually in relationships, they hide and deceive because they fear the choice the person will make in light of the truth.

 

DDay will always show you the truth. Who gets immediately thrown under the bus tells a lot...and the actions thereafter tell a lot.

 

If you have zero respect for someone and don't value them, then you'd flaunt your A in their face. Why hide it? My dad, a serial cheater, who clearly has issues, he cheats but hides it from my mom. I wouldn't argue respect, so much as I'd argue that he has no interest in being with these other women full time. He gets into extramarital relations for the "extra" part...therefore he goes out of his way to hide it, so he can stay married.

 

The long and short of it is: if you're dating a man who made vows to another and then now he mysteriously realizes he doesn't respect her and the relationship is built on lies or whatever else and you watch him continue the charade...how can you respect him? I'm not asking you personally...but you in general.

 

I suppose it is a case of to each her own and arguing right and wrong and what's proper in an affair is always hazy, sometimes comical...but nevertheless, one reason I can say I respect...I can't even say respect...but one thing I deem some form of noble of my exAP was his effort to protect his primary relationship and not drag her name through the mud or paint her as the bane of his existence so that I'd feel sorry for him or so I would be with him. He was sure enough lying and all of that, but had he claimed he didn't respect her, she was horrible, their relationship isn't built on honesty, they never talk...then I'd look at him as a gigantic moron for attempting to hide and preserve something nonexistent. Because essentially that is a nonexistent relationship, so what's the big problem dissolving such a pointless and tiresome setup? I'd be very annoyed at such inaction in light of him saying that. If your relationship is that way...then why hide your A? What are you so afraid of? You don't like them, you never talk, you don't respect them blah blah so WHY hide it? It seems like there is more reason albeit still dysfunctional, to hide an A if you want to stay married because for whatever reason SOMETHING is there...than to hide to STAY married to someone you hate, don't ever talk to and don't respect

[losingmyground]

I think that you allowed your character to become flawed. Why not just divorce and start anew? Why an affair? Why hurt someone else?