Happily Married

[MourningLosses]

When I asked him flat out if he was attracted to me and told him the elephant in the room was that we clearly were attracted I knew he was happily married and he told me so too. I was unhappily married and I told him that too. He said he would never hurt his wife so it was an impossible situation from the start. I saw them together and they looked so happy, so close. I hated it. I deserved that.

 

His saying he was happily married just made me want him more. If GE could make her happy I wanted that.

 

He later said, after months in the relationship, that he'd been miserable for a long time. I think he maybe had just been in denial.

[veryhappy]

There's a theread on the marriage forum about how hard is a marriage supposed to be. It could be that for some there's a sense of accomplishment if they tough it out, and survive through a 10, 20 year bump. If what they're looking for is the sense of doing things right, and keeping the marriage at all costs because marriage is supposed to be hard, the quality of th marriage is ultimately irrelevant.

[MissBee]

When my stomach is full, I don't order dessert however attractive they look, because I'm satisfied. If a M was meeting a MM's needs, he would have no desire to engage in an A.

 

 

 

So who does "get the real picture" of the M - the BS who insists that everything is fine and ignores the MM's stated needs over years until he looks to have them met elsewhere?

 

Can we unpack needs versus wants please.

 

What is a need versus a want? (this is a good exercise in life in general...as lots of things people term needs are in fact wants and excess )

 

How many people cheat for wants versus needs?

 

I am not saying no MM has unmet "needs"...yet I think it would be irresponsible to speak as if cheating men have so many more needs than everybody else, including their BS, when the truth is many of them are self-indulgent and they don't have a "need" but a want. Entitlement complexes and needs also work together...as people who feel entitled almost ALWAYS describe wants as needs and act like every whim they have MUST be fulfilled, like spoiled children.

 

I think the need/want distinction should be made and I also think that within a marriage it is not just about the needs and wants of one party...but both. I doubt in most marriages touched by infidelity that the MM is doing everything right, is meeting all his spouse's needs and wants and she is just the despicable, oblivious, shrew who can't appreciate him...I mean come on...if that isn't a caricature IDK what is. Most often cheating men and women are complicit in the degradation of their own marriage and are just as guilty of neglecting the needs and wants of their spouse as well. But of course...if one is the OW, then one has no interest or simply no knowledge of the inner working of the M and has every incentive to believe the MM is some great prince who is doing all he can and his "needs" just are being ignored....one has no lens to see otherwise and he sure won't admit how he hasn't been meeting his spouse's needs either.

 

IDK....but even as an OW I was pretty realistic and knew that that can't be life. I might have been in an A but I didn't suffer a complete loss of judgment. I still was able to see that there are 2 sides to a story and that not because I love him means he is faultless....he still had to own up to his mess and his choice and I wasn't going to paint him as some poor martyr. People argue time and again about the differences in As...fine...can we agree that in SOME (or few) As there might be some innocent WS who has a legitimate unmet need at the hands of some horrible or oblivious BS and then in other As (or many), these aren't needs but wants, they are just as guilty of neglecting their spouse and marriage as they say the BS is, and being human, finding some person to dote on and feel badly for them (and defend them to LS ) feels mighty comforting and they don't have to actually address their issues....as they have some champion OW who believes the sun rises and sets around their "needs".

Edited October 14, 2012 by MissBee

[Furious]

Miss Bee

 

You are so smart, that was a brilliant post!

[AnotherRound]

Can we unpack needs versus wants please.

 

What is a need versus a want? (this is a good exercise in life in general...as lots of things people term needs are in fact wants and excess )

 

How many people cheat for wants versus needs?

 

I am not saying no MM has unmet "needs"...yet I think it would be irresponsible to speak as if cheating men have so many more needs than everybody else, including their BS, when the truth is many of them are self-indulgent and they don't have a "need" but a want. Entitlement complexes and needs also work together...as people who feel entitled almost ALWAYS describe wants as needs and act like every whim they have MUST be fulfilled, like spoiled children.

 

I think the need/want distinction should be made and I also think that within a marriage it is not just about the needs and wants of one party...but both. I doubt in most marriages touched by infidelity that the MM is doing everything right, is meeting all his spouse's needs and wants and she is just the despicable, oblivious, shrew who can't appreciate him...I mean come on...if that isn't a caricature IDK what is. Most often cheating men and women are complicit in the degradation of their own marriage and are just as guilty of neglecting the needs and wants of their spouse as well. But of course...if one is the OW, then one has no interest or simply no knowledge of the inner working of the M and has every incentive to believe the MM is some great prince who is doing all he can and his "needs" just are being ignored....one has no lens to see otherwise and he sure won't admit how he hasn't been meeting his spouse's needs either.

 

IDK....but even as an OW I was pretty realistic and knew that that can't be life. I might have been in an A but I didn't suffer a complete loss of judgment. I still was able to see that there are 2 sides to a story and that not because I love him means he is faultless....he still had to own up to his mess and his choice and I wasn't going to paint him as some poor martyr. People argue time and again about the differences in As...fine...can we agree that in SOME (or few) As there might be some innocent WS who has a legitimate unmet need at the hands of some horrible or oblivious BS and then in other As (or many), these aren't needs but wants, they are just as guilty of neglecting their spouse and marriage as they say the BS is, and being human, finding some person to dote on and feel badly for them (and defend them to LS ) feels mighty comforting and they don't have to actually address their issues....as they have some champion OW who believes the sun rises and sets around their "needs".

 

I agree. But - I think a lot of people want to believe that intimacy is a want and not a need - and that just isn't true psychologically. There was a study done with orphan children in Russia, years ago, and it proved that without intimate touch, babies suffer from failure to thrive - I believe that some actually even died.

 

And honestly, I haven't seen anyone say that their MM was "perfect" or was doing everything right. In my case, my exMM was perfectly aware of what he did wrong - and that was his main motivation for trying to reconcile - bc he didn't feel as if he had done everything in his power to make the marriage work, in hindsight.

 

I don't expect anyone to meet ALL of my needs - that would be WAY too much for any one person with anyone in any relationship. I do, however, expect my SO to meet most of my needs and ALL of my sexual intimacy needs, as monogamy is expected and agreed on. So, depends on which needs you are discussing I guess... some needs can be met outside of the marriage without damaging the marriage. Others are part and parcel of the marriage and without them, the marriage will inevitably die.

 

What would you consider "needs"? Simply food, water, and air? It goes WAY beyond that to have a healthy human - that could be the distinction???? That some people think that certain needs are really wants - bc they don't keep the organism alive I guess? But, a living organism is the base of being human - it goes far beyond that to be healthy. You can't just eat - you have to have nutritious food. You can't drink dirty or contaminated water, you need good air. To be the healthiest human that you can be - there are a LOT of needs that are often overlooked bc you can stay alive without them. That, imo, is not living - it's simply surviving. I would never accept that level of "living" - there is so much more to life than just simply surviving and having a body that is alive.

[MissBee]

I agree. But - I think a lot of people want to believe that intimacy is a want and not a need - and that just isn't true psychologically. There was a study done with orphan children in Russia, years ago, and it proved that without intimate touch, babies suffer from failure to thrive - I believe that some actually even died.

 

And honestly, I haven't seen anyone say that their MM was "perfect" or was doing everything right. In my case, my exMM was perfectly aware of what he did wrong - and that was his main motivation for trying to reconcile - bc he didn't feel as if he had done everything in his power to make the marriage work, in hindsight.

 

I don't expect anyone to meet ALL of my needs - that would be WAY too much for any one person with anyone in any relationship. I do, however, expect my SO to meet most of my needs and ALL of my sexual intimacy needs, as monogamy is expected and agreed on. So, depends on which needs you are discussing I guess... some needs can be met outside of the marriage without damaging the marriage. Others are part and parcel of the marriage and without them, the marriage will inevitably die.

 

What would you consider "needs"? Simply food, water, and air? It goes WAY beyond that to have a healthy human - that could be the distinction???? That some people think that certain needs are really wants - bc they don't keep the organism alive I guess? But, a living organism is the base of being human - it goes far beyond that to be healthy. You can't just eat - you have to have nutritious food. You can't drink dirty or contaminated water, you need good air. To be the healthiest human that you can be - there are a LOT of needs that are often overlooked bc you can stay alive without them. That, imo, is not living - it's simply surviving. I would never accept that level of "living" - there is so much more to life than just simply surviving and having a body that is alive.

 

 

Human beings obviously need things besides food, water and shelter for a healthy and abundant life and I definitely wasn't implying that only such things are needs.

 

Needs have to be broken down into a context....in relationships of course the needs are of a different class than the needs of just life in general or survival needs. Intimacy (emotional and physical) is a need in a relationship for me. Relationship needs are also couple dependent and person dependent. Every couple won't require the same things.

 

 

The problem with an A is that the OW/OM was not there when the needs where being discussed between BS and MP during dating and during their vows and during the M. They weren't around to hear the two sides and the promises and to witness, first hand (not via hearsay) what each promised the other and when and who didn't keep up their end of it. That said...it becomes tricky and biased to lay blame at the feet of the BS and to make it seem like poor MM/MW has all these unmet needs. Do you know the BS's unmet needs? No...I mean...do you know them, as in did you talk to the BS about them? Not to the MM, not to your second cousin, Sue's stylist whose milkman is a friend of the BS...but did you actually hear how the other party in your MM's marriage feels and what needs they have that have gone unmet as well? (you plural btw) If not...it would be wise to just simply be suspicious and critical about the idea of needs and wants and also wary of arguing that ONE party is all to blame for the other's unfulfilled needs.

 

I love what you said about no person meeting all your needs. That is so true! Yet too many times some of what OW report about MM seems like they feel like the OW, their wife, their OOW and everyone should just be there meeting all their "needs"....yet my question would be: "We've heard all about your unmet needs from your OW, who of course would have every reason to know about them (as it no doubts help the A project)...but tell me how many of your spouse's needs are you meeting?":confused: What were the M needs on BOTH your parts....how do you think you match up? Let's see...

 

I think some MM (like some people in general) are misguided about happiness and what that means, what it looks like and who is responsible for it. If you are a person who believes a relationship solves all your problems, your partner is supposed to be your 24/7 entertainment, you will never have an unhappy day etc...then you're probably also someone who conflates needs and wants and also makes other people responsible for it besides yourself or you put a disproportionate amount of expectations and blame on others versus yourself. For some folks, what they need is to be happy within themselves (and a slap upside the head for others lol) and until then, NO person can fulfill their "needs" as what they need is very much internal.

 

It's the icing on the cake thing too...if you expect a relationship to be the cake itself and not simply the icing...chances are your "need bank" will be a lot greater. There are legitimate needs specific to each relationship, agreed upon (or sometimes never discussed..and whose fault is that?? BOTH people's) by the people in it....my argument is: how many people truly communicate their needs? How many people simply expect their partner to mind read? How many people only expect other people to make them happy and meet their needs, ignoring the two way process? How fair is it for your spouse to meet a "need" you've not expressed? Did you switch "needs" and expect your spouse to mind read? How much of a role does instant gratification and indulgence play in the talk of needs?

 

Just thinking critically...I think any sensible OW should simply be suspicious about the needs argument and just simply try to be objective and ask these questions instead of buying into the concept that poor MM has so many "unmet needs". Ladies please...let's just be critical. If upon investigation you find out that this man is at the end of unmet needs abuse...fine...but let's not simply buy this argument hook, line and sinker without saying wait...and what is your role in this? Is this a need? A want? An extra? A one-way expectation that you yourself aren't fulfilling?

Edited October 14, 2012 by MissBee

[AnotherRound]

Human beings obviously need things besides food, water and shelter for a healthy and abundant life and I definitely wasn't implying that only such things are needs.

 

Needs have to be broken down into a context....in relationships of course the needs are of a different class than the needs of just life in general or survival needs. Intimacy (emotional and physical) is a need in a relationship for me. Relationship needs are also couple dependent and person dependent. Every couple won't require the same things.

 

 

The problem with an A is that the OW/OM was not there when the needs where being discussed between BS and MP during dating and during their vows and during the M. They weren't around to hear the two sides and the promises and to witness, first hand (not via hearsay) what each promised the other and when and who didn't keep up their end of it. That said...it becomes tricky and biased to lay blame at the feet of the BS and to make it seem like poor MM/MW has all these unmet needs. Do you know the BS's unmet needs? No...I mean...do you know them, as in did you talk to the BS about them? Not to the MM, not to your second cousin, Sue's stylist whose milkman is a friend of the BS...but did you actually hear how the other party in your MM's marriage feels and what needs they have that have gone unmet as well? (you plural btw) If not...it would be wise to just simply be suspicious and critical about the idea of needs and wants and also wary of arguing that ONE party is all to blame for the other's unfulfilled needs.

 

I love what you said about no person meeting all your needs. That is so true! Yet too many times some of what OW report about MM seems like they feel like the OW, their wife, their OOW and everyone should just be there meeting all their "needs"....yet my question would be: "We've heard all about your unmet needs from your OW, who of course would have every reason to know about them (as it no doubts help the A project)...but tell me how many of your spouse's needs are you meeting?":confused: What were the M needs on BOTH your parts....how do you think you match up? Let's see...

 

I think some MM (like some people in general) are misguided about happiness and what that means, what it looks like and who is responsible for it. If you are a person who believes a relationship solves all your problems, your partner is supposed to be your 24/7 entertainment, you will never have an unhappy day etc...then you're probably also someone who conflates needs and wants and also makes other people responsible for it besides yourself or you put a disproportionate amount of expectations and blame on others versus yourself. For some folks, what they need is to be happy within themselves (and a slap upside the head for others lol) and until then, NO person can fulfill their "needs" as what they need is very much internal.

 

It's the icing on the cake thing too...if you expect a relationship to be the cake itself and not simply the icing...chances are your "need bank" will be a lot greater. There are legitimate needs specific to each relationship, agreed upon (or sometimes never discussed..and whose fault is that?? BOTH people's) by the people in it....my argument is: how many people truly communicate their needs? How many people simply expect their partner to mind read? How many people only expect other people to make them happy and meet their needs, ignoring the two way process? How fair is it for your spouse to meet a "need" you've not expressed? Did you switch "needs" and expect your spouse to mind read? How much of a role does instant gratification and indulgence play in the talk of needs?

 

Just thinking critically...I think any sensible OW should simply be suspicious about the needs argument and just simply try to be objective and ask these questions instead of buying into the concept that poor MM has so many "unmet needs". Ladies please...let's just be critical. If upon investigation you find out that this man is at the end of unmet needs abuse...fine...but let's not simply buy this argument hook, line and sinker without saying wait...and what is your role in this? Is this a need? A want? An extra? A one-way expectation that you yourself aren't fulfilling?

 

Well put! And the mind reading thing is exactly what exMMs stbxw expected! I would also be very suspicious of anyone who thought that they never did anything "wrong" in a relationship and that it was all the spouses fault. If exMM had ever done that, I would have known he wasn't being honest with me. Thankfully, he was honest with me - and knew exactly what he could/should have done differently. Great post!

[Radagast]

Can we unpack needs versus wants please.

 

What is a need versus a want? (this is a good exercise in life in general...as lots of things people term needs are in fact wants and excess )

 

How many people cheat for wants versus needs?

 

 

This is an interesting notion, predicated on the assumption that there is a universal, culturally independent, context-free set of "needs"" which exists somehow separately from a similar set of "wants". This of course has absolutely no basis in social science, from which I am excluding "pop psychology". Maslow's famous "hierarchy of needs"for example differentiates between more basic needs (like food and sex) from "higher order" needs (like creativity and respect) but does not draw a line at any point and describe "needs" beyond that point as "wants".

 

Distinguishing "wants" from "needs" is a normative distinction, articulating a value position which finds some acceptable ("needs") and others not ("wants"). Which presumably is why it has no place in social science, since science is about describing what is rather than arguing what "ought to be".

 

I'd be very interested in what the "wants-vs-needs" supporters would categorise as "needs", and what they'd describe as "wants". Social science is pretty clear that needs are needs, and that many or most of the motivations that unfaithful spouses describe for their infidelity are "needs", such as intimacy, sex, respect, even spontaneity and creativity. These are human needs. This suggests, in my view, that it is perfectly reasonable to seek these in a relationship, even to expect them in a marriage if the contractual basis of that marriage is "forsaking all others", thus ceding all other avenues of seeking these in an intimate context.

 

I'd be very interested in how those who support the "needs vs wants" distinction support the notion that intimacy, respect or sex are somehow "wants" rather than needs, contrary to the findings of social science, and that those who are denied these in their marriages are somehow "greedy" for wanting things that excessive or above and beyond what is reasonable to expect in an intimate relationship.

[Summer Breeze]

Marriage is hard work, I agree.

 

But being lonely and alone is much harder.

 

And that's probably why many WS don't leave the sure thing the M is rather than take the chances on the unknown. And why many BS do just the same.

 

I personally found it more difficult to be in my M and lonely than being alone and lonely.

[AnotherRound]

This is an interesting notion, predicated on the assumption that there is a universal, culturally independent, context-free set of "needs"" which exists somehow separately from a similar set of "wants". This of course has absolutely no basis in social science, from which I am excluding "pop psychology". Maslow's famous "hierarchy of needs"for example differentiates between more basic needs (like food and sex) from "higher order" needs (like creativity and respect) but does not draw a line at any point and describe "needs" beyond that point as "wants".

 

Distinguishing "wants" from "needs" is a normative distinction, articulating a value position which finds some acceptable ("needs") and others not ("wants"). Which presumably is why it has no place in social science, since science is about describing what is rather than arguing what "ought to be".

 

I'd be very interested in what the "wants-vs-needs" supporters would categorise as "needs", and what they'd describe as "wants". Social science is pretty clear that needs are needs, and that many or most of the motivations that unfaithful spouses describe for their infidelity are "needs", such as intimacy, sex, respect, even spontaneity and creativity. These are human needs. This suggests, in my view, that it is perfectly reasonable to seek these in a relationship, even to expect them in a marriage if the contractual basis of that marriage is "forsaking all others", thus ceding all other avenues of seeking these in an intimate context.

 

I'd be very interested in how those who support the "needs vs wants" distinction support the notion that intimacy, respect or sex are somehow "wants" rather than needs, contrary to the findings of social science, and that those who are denied these in their marriages are somehow "greedy" for wanting things that excessive or above and beyond what is reasonable to expect in an intimate relationship.

 

You said this much better than I could! Maslow is exactly who I refer to when defining wants and needs. It is basic survival (the human body is alive) vs thriving (the human body is alive and healthy and well). I know that we don't "need" sex or human touch to "live" - but basic survival of the human body shouldn't be anyone's goal, imo. That is just animalistic surviving - nothing more. And, as humans, with much more than just a physical body, we have the potential to live at a much higher level than say - an amoeba.

 

I would LOVE a discussion on Maslow - with a little Freud libido talk thrown in, of course. To me, the hierarchy of needs by Maslow is where we find that some things we have been taught are wants aren't - but actually important to thriving.

 

Thanks for sharing this post - it is spot on!

[Decorative]

I think abnormal psychology is quite an appropriate discussion when dealing with the deceit, duplicity, and selfishness involved in affairs.

 

 

Maslow is fascinating and entry level psychology- my high school psych teacher did a bang up job explaining it.

 

But I think trying to extrapolate and use Maslow with an affair discussion is akin to pulling out lipstick and telling a pig to hold still while you apply it.

[MissBee]

Well put! And the mind reading thing is exactly what exMMs stbxw expected! I would also be very suspicious of anyone who thought that they never did anything "wrong" in a relationship and that it was all the spouses fault. If exMM had ever done that, I would have known he wasn't being honest with me. Thankfully, he was honest with me - and knew exactly what he could/should have done differently. Great post!

 

How do you know though?

 

I can safely say with my exAP, I have NO idea what the inner workings of his relationship were, I can guess at some of it, but I don't know. Neither did I know how his BS felt about things. It was never discussed. I appreciated that a lot and that's how I'd know I could have trusted him, in that regard, should we have been together, as he did not discuss his relationship or her with me and told me exactly why he wouldn't. I then can be more confident that, well he didn't discuss it with me, as close as we were, because he felt (yes odd as it was) that that would have been disrespectful. He felt the two situations were separate and he wasn't going to discuss another woman with me and the private things that went on between them and he wouldn't do that to me either.

 

 

I dunno I guess based on my situation...since I knew NOTHING about their relationship, there was no occasion for me to bring up her flaws...as I didn't know what they were. So my entire relationship with him, basis for judging him etc. rested squarely ON HIM. I had no comparison to make, I could never say his BS is such and such a person and so on. I think he's a pretty wise guy....because that helped to make the drama level non-existent. Don't kiss and tell, don't marry and tell, don't carry tales to women you're sleeping with about other women....that way they won't have any ammunition against each other and won't spend time comparing or pointing out the other's flaws. I thank him for that...among other things.

[AnotherRound]

How do you know though?

 

I can safely say with my exAP, I have NO idea what the inner workings of his relationship were, I can guess at some of it, but I don't know. Neither did I know how his BS felt about things. It was never discussed. I appreciated that a lot and that's how I'd know I could have trusted him, in that regard, should we have been together, as he did not discuss his relationship or her with me and told me exactly why he wouldn't. I then can be more confident that, well he didn't discuss it with me, as close as we were, because he felt (yes odd as it was) that that would have been disrespectful. He felt the two situations were separate and he wasn't going to discuss another woman with me and the private things that went on between them and he wouldn't do that to me either.

 

 

I dunno I guess based on my situation...since I knew NOTHING about their relationship, there was no occasion for me to bring up her flaws...as I didn't know what they were. So my entire relationship with him, basis for judging him etc. rested squarely ON HIM. I had no comparison to make, I could never say his BS is such and such a person and so on. I think he's a pretty wise guy....because that helped to make the drama level non-existent. Don't kiss and tell, don't marry and tell, don't carry tales to women you're sleeping with about other women....that way they won't have any ammunition against each other and won't spend time comparing or pointing out the other's flaws. I thank him for that...among other things.

 

As I've said before, she and I have many mutual friends. As do he and I, and even the OW and I. It happens like that in such a small community, especially since he is so high profile and has lived here his entire life (along with his stbxw and the OW). They all went to school together, grew up together, etc. I hear a lot of things around socially - and even in my work sometimes they come up. It just happens.

 

I know that he and I are different - we share everything. We talked about his stbxw, the OW - and about guys that I had dated. Not really specifics (although sometimes) but just in general - what we liked, what we didn't like. For us, it was a way to become closer in that we were learning about one another by our interactions with other people. In hearing how he responded to things, what his feelings and thoughts were regarding his other intimate relationships - it was a window into who he was, what made him tick, how he is in relationships. To me, it was no different than hearing him talk about his relationships with his parents, his friends, his children - etc. It was an inside view of him, and I appreciated him sharing that with me - as I shared with him. We definitely have a level of openness and honesty that I am seeing is not the "norm" or what most people have with their SO. But for me, it's the only kind of relationship I want. I don't want secrets, or taboo subjects - to me, that isn't open nor honest.

 

I guess since I don't feel threatened by other people, that I am more open to these types of discussions? I don't know why I'm different, but I just don't have the jealousy thing, never have. I have had men comment on that, that I'm "less" jealous than "most women", so, I guess I am different that way. But honestly, I've never felt jealousy of another woman due to her relationship. Now, I've been envious of other women - their success, if they have great skin, and such - but not jealous, in that it doesn't affect the way that I see myself - it doesn't lower my self worth in my mind just because they also have good things to offer. I just accept that we are all different, have different things to offer - and don't see it as a competition so much as just finding the right fit for a SO.

 

And, exMM and I NEVER had any drama - until the OW came into the picture. We went along very smoothly for 7 years - and his stbxw has even commented that had he and I stayed together, that she wouldn't have "had" to divorce him bc there was zero drama - zero affect on her life - and she enjoyed the set up that we had. Then, OW came, lol... and that kind of forced stbxw to divorce. I don't think she even wants a divorce, even now - she just feels that she has to- maybe to save face with the community and her friends and family? That's my best guess from what I know and have seen.

 

So, I know that not everyone shares intimate details with their SO about things in an effort not to hurt their SO. But that just doesn't apply to me - I'm not hurt by honesty from my SO, no matter the topic. I prefer it to someone hiding things from me just so I won't be hurt. I want to know the truth - and if I ask a question, I want the answer... the real answer, not the "I'm trying to sugar coat it so it doesn't hurt you" answer. That would make me feel lied to - bc eventually, the real truth would come out I think.

 

It's interesting how different people are sometimes. I enjoy your posts and your insight.

[truthbetold]

As I've said before, she and I have many mutual friends. As do he and I, and even the OW and I. It happens like that in such a small community, especially since he is so high profile and has lived here his entire life (along with his stbxw and the OW). They all went to school together, grew up together, etc. I hear a lot of things around socially - and even in my work sometimes they come up. It just happens.

 

I know that he and I are different - we share everything. We talked about his stbxw, the OW - and about guys that I had dated. Not really specifics (although sometimes) but just in general - what we liked, what we didn't like. For us, it was a way to become closer in that we were learning about one another by our interactions with other people. In hearing how he responded to things, what his feelings and thoughts were regarding his other intimate relationships - it was a window into who he was, what made him tick, how he is in relationships. To me, it was no different than hearing him talk about his relationships with his parents, his friends, his children - etc. It was an inside view of him, and I appreciated him sharing that with me - as I shared with him. We definitely have a level of openness and honesty that I am seeing is not the "norm" or what most people have with their SO. But for me, it's the only kind of relationship I want. I don't want secrets, or taboo subjects - to me, that isn't open nor honest.

 

I guess since I don't feel threatened by other people, that I am more open to these types of discussions? I don't know why I'm different, but I just don't have the jealousy thing, never have. I have had men comment on that, that I'm "less" jealous than "most women", so, I guess I am different that way. But honestly, I've never felt jealousy of another woman due to her relationship. Now, I've been envious of other women - their success, if they have great skin, and such - but not jealous, in that it doesn't affect the way that I see myself - it doesn't lower my self worth in my mind just because they also have good things to offer. I just accept that we are all different, have different things to offer - and don't see it as a competition so much as just finding the right fit for a SO.

 

And, exMM and I NEVER had any drama - until the OW came into the picture. We went along very smoothly for 7 years - and his stbxw has even commented that had he and I stayed together, that she wouldn't have "had" to divorce him bc there was zero drama - zero affect on her life - and she enjoyed the set up that we had. Then, OW came, lol... and that kind of forced stbxw to divorce. I don't think she even wants a divorce, even now - she just feels that she has to- maybe to save face with the community and her friends and family? That's my best guess from what I know and have seen.

 

So, I know that not everyone shares intimate details with their SO about things in an effort not to hurt their SO. But that just doesn't apply to me - I'm not hurt by honesty from my SO, no matter the topic. I prefer it to someone hiding things from me just so I won't be hurt. I want to know the truth - and if I ask a question, I want the answer... the real answer, not the "I'm trying to sugar coat it so it doesn't hurt you" answer. That would make me feel lied to - bc eventually, the real truth would come out I think.

 

It's interesting how different people are sometimes. I enjoy your posts and your insight.

 

Wow, amazing indeed how some things can be interpreted or mis interpreted. I totally get what Miss Bee was saying.

 

FTR I have complete and total openness with my H. No subject is taboo but bc we have a bond and a commitment, we can share that with one another.

 

I think what Miss Bee means (to me) is that MM didn't have that level of commitment to you. Obviously to you he did, but to those of us not invested he didn't, not really when he was going home to a wife and yet took up with an OOW. That's what we mean when we say he sets women up to compete by him talking so intimately about them with you.

 

If I weren't married and another guy at work or a male friend stared giving such graphic intimate details of another woman, yeah I'd find that extremely distasteful and would go to his character. It has nothing to do with jealousy, I'm not either, found out it's a useless emotion. When I got my head together and learned to love me first, I learned I didn't need to be jealous that comes from insecurity.

 

Sorry but the fact that he shares so much sounds like false intimacy to me, as he has no true commitment to you. That's how I see it anyway.

 

So to me it has nothing to do with loving you so much more, it has everything to do with RESPECT in general and he displays he doesn't have any where it matters.

Edited October 14, 2012 by truthbetold

[eleanorrigby]

So to me it has nothing to do with loving you so much more, it has everything to do with RESPECT in general and he displays he doesn't have any where it matters.

 

^^^ That's what I'm feeling. It does not sound like intimate sharing. It sounds like a guy that is just constantly running off at the mouth.

[MissBee]

This is an interesting notion, predicated on the assumption that there is a universal, culturally independent, context-free set of "needs"" which exists somehow separately from a similar set of "wants". This of course has absolutely no basis in social science, from which I am excluding "pop psychology". Maslow's famous "hierarchy of needs"for example differentiates between more basic needs (like food and sex) from "higher order" needs (like creativity and respect) but does not draw a line at any point and describe "needs" beyond that point as "wants".

 

Not sure if you're using my post as a springboard for your own thoughts or your response is directly in opposition to what I said. However, if it is the latter, the rest of the unquoted aspects of my post did say that needs, in terms of relationships, are of course different from that of human survival. I was not equating needs to simply the basic, primal needs of the body, but noted that higher order needs belong to relationships. I also said that relationship needs had to be contextualized and were person and relationship dependent. I never asserted that there was a universal, context-free set of needs, quite the opposite actually...which the rest of my posts goes on to talk about the needs of a specific relationship and how it becomes problematic when OW/OM who weren't in that relationship claim to know so much about the needs being unmet, but it's only a one-sided business.

 

We can argue this in different ways right? Using Maslow's hierarchy of needs is but one position one can come from. Your stance that it has no basis in social science is an interesting one, since social science is an umbrella term for different fields. Economics is a social science and they argue needs versus wants in a different way than psychology, which is also a social science and different from sociologists (my area) right. We also know that within the social sciences, and academia by and large, there are competing theories. If there weren't, there would be no need for new scholars, but there are, since people expand upon older theories or dismantle them altogether. But that's besides the point...

Distinguishing "wants" from "needs" is a normative distinction, articulating a value position which finds some acceptable ("needs") and others not ("wants"). Which presumably is why it has no place in social science, since science is about describing what is rather than arguing what "ought to be".

 

In any case, of course it is a normative distinction, like so many other things here. What I would argue, for example, in a research paper about needs and wants would not be the same things I am going to be talking about on LS. It's two different forums that require different things. So let's be clear that nowhere was I arguing a comprehensive analysis of needs versus wants from a social science lens. What I did do was ask about the idea of needs and wants as it relates to a specific discussion of a MP's "unmet need". It's not supposed to be a theory of needs and wants across the board, but calling OW to be critical about these "unmet needs" and what that really means....hence the rest of my post went on to discuss how an OW/OM by nature of the situation wasn't privy to certain discussions so has to be suspicious. We have to keep it in context of the discussion and of what is relevant to relationships and As. What is relevant to me is what the rest of my post talks about: happiness, what people believe about that, who they expect is in charge of it, the place of excess and self-indulgence, etc.

 

Also, the notion that it has no place is social science is not true. In fact, there are several academic tensions and discussions around the concept of needs. It's a contested area for sure and different fields say different things about it. Scholars are making these distinctions and exploring the dialectical relationship between the two.

 

 

 

I'd be very interested in what the "wants-vs-needs" supporters would categorise as "needs", and what they'd describe as "wants". Social science is pretty clear that needs are needs, and that many or most of the motivations that unfaithful spouses describe for their infidelity are "needs", such as intimacy, sex, respect, even spontaneity and creativity. These are human needs. This suggests, in my view, that it is perfectly reasonable to seek these in a relationship, even to expect them in a marriage if the contractual basis of that marriage is "forsaking all others", thus ceding all other avenues of seeking these in an intimate context.

 

Again social science has to be broken down...as I am not sure you could possibly be talking all at the same time about sociology, political science, psychology, economics etc. altogether, as they all have their own theories and theorists and position about this topic, which are specific to their areas of concern. Maslow's theory isn't without criticism though (not by me personally but by those coming after him), and one such is that it is very Western and ethnocentric and the ordering of the hierarchy doesn't apply across the board to all societies, but rather as a social scientist, located in a specific context (America), his theories are more relevant to American society, and societies like it, and not that translatable or cannot just be superimposed on to other cultures. And that's the large project of academia now...moving away from the ethnocentrism that governed it in the days of old.

 

I'd be very interested in how those who support the "needs vs wants" distinction support the notion that intimacy, respect or sex are somehow "wants" rather than needs, contrary to the findings of social science, and that those who are denied these in their marriages are somehow "greedy" for wanting things that excessive or above and beyond what is reasonable to expect in an intimate relationship.

 

I didn't argue this, so someone else would have to explain that to you. My first point of clarification with AR was precisely this one. But I do think in another section, we could have this conversation. It would be an interesting one I think there has to be parameters on any discussion, and I think a more academic discussion of the theories of needs and wants and what different social science fields say about it and then how that fits into our purview would have to have its own discussion. But for the purposes of this topic, my intention was not to state what needs and wants were for people. Never did that, but rather, put it on the table that the needs/wants issue should be unpacked and not simply taken for granted...but an OW really should ask what the heck does this mean and what does it say about the person I'm with.

 

Responses bolded.

Edited October 14, 2012 by MissBee

[AnotherRound]

Wow, amazing indeed how some things can be interpreted or mis interpreted. I totally get what Miss Bee was saying.

 

FTR I have complete and total openness with my H. No subject is taboo but bc we have a bond and a commitment, we can share that with one another.

 

I think what Miss Bee means (to me) is that MM didn't have that level of commitment to you. Obviously to you he did, but to those of us not invested he didn't, not really when he was going home to a wife and yet took up with an OOW. That's what we mean when we say he sets women up to compete by him talking so intimately about them with you.

 

If I weren't married and another guy at work or a male friend stared giving such graphic intimate details of another woman, yeah I'd find that extremely distasteful and would go to his character. It has nothing to do with jealousy, I'm not either, found out it's a useless emotion. When I got my head together and learned to love me first, I learned I didn't need to be jealous that comes from insecurity.

 

Sorry but the fact that he shares so much sounds like false intimacy to me, as he has no true commitment to you. That's how I see it anyway.

 

So to me it has nothing to do with loving you so much more, it has everything to do with RESPECT in general and he displays he doesn't have any where it matters.

 

That's a good point. I can see how you would see it as false intimacy when you present it here. I, obviously, don't see it that way, but it makes sense the way you explain it. And I agree, jealousy is a useless emotion - and I'm thankful I don't experience it much as it's also an uncomfortable one, ime!

 

I don't believe that he loves me "more" than anyone else. I believe that he loves me differently. I think that the level of openness that he and I share is something he cherishes, in that he can say what's on his mind and in his heart without me taking it personally and becoming hurt/angry. I can do the same with him. I don't think that being hurt or angry by the truth = true intimacy (not sure you do either, just a thought) or the opposite = false intimacy.

 

For me, I want to be able to talk about everything, no holds barred. I enjoy that type of openness and sharing - both ways. And, he doesn't have to tell me some things (like sexual details) bc I can pretty much guess those since he and I have been pretty intimate with each other. But, I do love to hear him express his feelings and thoughts, as it lets me get to know him on a much deeper level. Sometimes, those are thoughts and feelings about other people - bc we don't live in a world of just he and I, so those things come up. And, he may discuss what he felt and thought about me with others - but that doesn't bother me at all - bc I'm already aware. They aren't hearing anything he hasn't already said to me bc he has been very honest with me about those things - hurtful or not (like when we have discussed my faults, lol).

 

I can see that we see it differently, and that's fine with me. I don't assume that others who don't share like he and I do are not intimate - it just isn't what makes me feel as if I know someone intimately. We all have different needs, as is apparent by many of the posts on these forums. Thank you for sharing, as how you said it really made sense to me - even if it isn't what I think or feel.

[MissBee]

As I've said before, she and I have many mutual friends. As do he and I, and even the OW and I. It happens like that in such a small community, especially since he is so high profile and has lived here his entire life (along with his stbxw and the OW). They all went to school together, grew up together, etc. I hear a lot of things around socially - and even in my work sometimes they come up. It just happens.

 

I understand this...but I feel like knowing of someone and knowing them personally and especially knowing their needs in their marriage are different things. My brother's fiance is someone I know, because she is with my brother, but I don't know her needs in her relationship with him. I cannot speak to their intimate dynamics just because I know her. I know her, but I am not in a relationship with her. The two are very different. My friends know me...but the relationship I have with my man is not something they are in with us, so their knowing only goes so far. Worse...people who don't know me, but simply know me through mutual networks can't make statements about my needs or what I expect from my man.

 

I know that he and I are different - we share everything. We talked about his stbxw, the OW - and about guys that I had dated. Not really specifics (although sometimes) but just in general - what we liked, what we didn't like. For us, it was a way to become closer in that we were learning about one another by our interactions with other people. In hearing how he responded to things, what his feelings and thoughts were regarding his other intimate relationships - it was a window into who he was, what made him tick, how he is in relationships. To me, it was no different than hearing him talk about his relationships with his parents, his friends, his children - etc. It was an inside view of him, and I appreciated him sharing that with me - as I shared with him. We definitely have a level of openness and honesty that I am seeing is not the "norm" or what most people have with their SO. But for me, it's the only kind of relationship I want. I don't want secrets, or taboo subjects - to me, that isn't open nor honest.

 

I don't think I'd consider it an "openness and hoensty" that's not the norm...for me it reads as though he simply has no boundaries. I'm not being snarky here...but that's how it reads. I don't think aww how open and honest...I think wow, you kiss and tell, tacky! I get talking about exes...but your current wife...that is just a bit much IMO. I respect every person I date and interact with and not because I have a bestfriend or man means I cross certain boundaries. I'm respectful like that. I don't tell my bestfriend every private detail about my relationship with my man, some stuff I'm sure he'd just want between us. Likewise, some stuff friends share, I don't think they want me telling him. So that's how I view it. It is not a reflection of my openness and honesty with him, but it shows I have boundaries and that different relationships in my life have different parameters and he can respect that I won't share our business, when he witnesses it is my character, because I won't share my friends' business with him. You're also in a profession I gather where confidentiality is paramount....would you consider yourself as not being honest and open with your guy because you don't dish on your clients? No you wouldn't...or I hope not. It's the same for me. My love and openness is there...but I am not just "his". I have relationships with others that are governed by their own intimacies and while I share everything with him, there is a line, where I'm not going to disrespect this other person, like a friend for example who told me something in confidence, and blab to him. For me, I respect my exAP more because I realized this was his view. He was with this woman, they were intimate, she did trust him...telling tales to me about her would not have "bonded us", but set up a very weird dynamic that I see with your situation and others, and that is you know way too much about the BS, so like it or not, you always end up speaking about this person and comparing, whether consciously or not. I was safe guarded from that and her privacy and mine were respected, because he didn't do that.

 

 

I guess since I don't feel threatened by other people, that I am more open to these types of discussions? I don't know why I'm different, but I just don't have the jealousy thing, never have. I have had men comment on that, that I'm "less" jealous than "most women", so, I guess I am different that way. But honestly, I've never felt jealousy of another woman due to her relationship. Now, I've been envious of other women - their success, if they have great skin, and such - but not jealous, in that it doesn't affect the way that I see myself - it doesn't lower my self worth in my mind just because they also have good things to offer. I just accept that we are all different, have different things to offer - and don't see it as a competition so much as just finding the right fit for a SO.

 

It's not a jealousy thing...not sure how jealousy factors in. It's a respect thing and boundary thing IMO. Intimacy for me is something sacred and something that has its own space. Do I ever dish on exes? Yes. Do I dish all? No. Just because I respect that we had something at the time and telling this to my new partner serves what purpose? I also assume they will think I will do the same to them. I want someone to feel safe that even if we are no longer together or have problems...I'm not going to go blabbing to everyone. I also think IF I was cheating, it's even worse...why do I need to bond with my AP over my sordid tales of my current spouse. It's just very strange and makes me queasy...like I STILL am with this person, go home to them every night, but am dishing on them on the sly. Doesn't sit well with me and had my exAP done that, I'd have felt him to be very slimy. He was in an A yes, but he was not going to further disrespect her or drag her name through the mud and use me as a confessional about her. He shared everything else with me though...but their relationship and what it entailed and her, no. And again I am glad for it, as I never ever ever ever had any reason to talk about her, compare etc as I knew nothing personal. You value that your MM didn't tell his OOW about you right? Same thing...except for me, he gave that treatment to everyone, so I could trust it was his character.

 

And, exMM and I NEVER had any drama - until the OW came into the picture. We went along very smoothly for 7 years - and his stbxw has even commented that had he and I stayed together, that she wouldn't have "had" to divorce him bc there was zero drama - zero affect on her life - and she enjoyed the set up that we had. Then, OW came, lol... and that kind of forced stbxw to divorce. I don't think she even wants a divorce, even now - she just feels that she has to- maybe to save face with the community and her friends and family? That's my best guess from what I know and have seen.

 

LOL wellll.....everyday the bucket goes to the well, one day the bottom will fall out right? She should divorce and leave MM to his own devise/demise. She's put up with enough. Let someone else who has the patience for him and his crazy OOW takeover. I don't blame her.

 

So, I know that not everyone shares intimate details with their SO about I'm not hurt by honesty from my SO, no matter the topic. I prefer it to things in an effort not to hurt their SO. But that just doesn't apply to me - someone hiding things from me just so I won't be hurt. I want to know the truth - and if I ask a question, I want the answer... the real answer, not the "I'm trying to sugar coat it so it doesn't hurt you" answer. That would make me feel lied to - bc eventually, the real truth would come out I think.

 

AR you keep saying tha maybe people don't share intimate details with their SO...this isn't the argument and isn't true. Come on . Most people aren't dating people who have another significant other at the time...therefore the politics and etiquette of whether or not to discuss their significant other's spouse and other SO doesn't become an issue. In the case of an A...you can decide would you rather your MP discuss his M with you or not? I choose not...because that's just very weird and then it ends up being you are this person's counselor. Which is a role you've fallen into with him and realized it's kind of a very strange positionality. Other OW have come here to also talk about how their MM cries on their shoulders about the M and even discuss the sex they are actually having with the spouse ...now you can read that as them being so open and honest and it's such an open relationship...or it's very frickin problematic. Like for me, had he been one to do that, I just personally couldn't have dealt with it.We know there is a BS but for this person to be actively discussed, dissected, complained about etc. just adds insult to injury in my view.

 

It's interesting how different people are sometimes. I enjoy your posts and your insight.

 

Thank you, I do appreciate your perspective as well

 

Responses in bold

Edited October 14, 2012 by MissBee

[MissBee]

Wow, amazing indeed how some things can be interpreted or mis interpreted. I totally get what Miss Bee was saying.

 

FTR I have complete and total openness with my H. No subject is taboo but bc we have a bond and a commitment, we can share that with one another.

 

I think what Miss Bee means (to me) is that MM didn't have that level of commitment to you. Obviously to you he did, but to those of us not invested he didn't, not really when he was going home to a wife and yet took up with an OOW. That's what we mean when we say he sets women up to compete by him talking so intimately about them with you.

 

If I weren't married and another guy at work or a male friend stared giving such graphic intimate details of another woman, yeah I'd find that extremely distasteful and would go to his character. It has nothing to do with jealousy, I'm not either, found out it's a useless emotion. When I got my head together and learned to love me first, I learned I didn't need to be jealous that comes from insecurity.

 

Sorry but the fact that he shares so much sounds like false intimacy to me, as he has no true commitment to you. That's how I see it anyway.

So to me it has nothing to do with loving you so much more, it has everything to do with RESPECT in general and he displays he doesn't have any where it matters.

 

False intimacy is such a good point!

 

I was thinking about that....like people who bond over gossip and a common enemy. They become closer by setting up an other that they can both discuss/hate/critique etc.

 

I was also reading about the dating culture where false intimacy occurs when people date within closed contexts. That is, they don't spend time with this person in the open, with their family, friends, etc...but their hanging out consists of them alone all the time, it's at night, they have deep conversations, sex is thrown in and a sense of intimacy and closeness is developed in this insular environment that doesn't often translate in the real world. It's like if you've gone to conferences/summer camp. You meet people for a short time and bond and feel very intimate in the few days/weeks of the conference...due to the nature of some of the activities you do....yet the reality is, you've known this person for 3 days or 3 weeks and let's see what the relationship is like outside of conference and camp. Can it be sustained? Sometimes not. Sometimes those people were your bestfriends for the 3 days or 3 weeks and you were "sooo close", sharing "this one time at band camp" stories and then you never speak again or you realize you aren't that close.

 

But I digress...false intimacy did come to my mind as well and it's like people who like to tell you their business in the supermarket line, on the subway etc. Some people simply have no filter and it's not because of intimacy, they just have zero boundaries so will share anything and everything, and give a doting eye and listening ear...why not.

 

There are different theories on intimacy as well and the idea of false intimacy where people share their pain/problems is an interesting one and with MM sharing and complaining about their M or BS it precisely resembles that model. Where it's what I wonder...how can anyone be attracted to someone who your relationship is built on and surrounded by how bad their "other situation" is. Like how is that wonderful? For me, our bond was not because we had a common BS who was horrible to pull closer together over...as he didn't bring their relationship up.

 

To accurately define intimacy, someone once said, "True intimacy is the ability to share who you really are with another person. This implies the other person is also able to share who they really are with you."

 

One cannot share something they don't have access to - the True-Self. Sharing from our woundedness, aka our False-Self, is more like identification than it is true intimacy.

 

In other words, I can identify with your pain and you with mine, but we don't really get to know each other until we heal our wounds and get to know our True-Self. Until that happens we can only experience this sort of "False Intimacy" which -- due to the intensity of it -- can be mistaken for true intimacy.

 

[eleanorrigby]

I was also reading about the dating culture where false intimacy occurs when people date within closed contexts. That is, they don't spend time with this person in the open, with their family, friends, etc...but their hanging out consists of them alone all the time, it's at night, they have deep conversations, sex is thrown in and a sense of intimacy and closeness is developed in this insular environment that doesn't often translate in the real world. It's like if you've gone to conferences/summer camp. You meet people for a short time and bond and feel very intimate in the few days/weeks of the conference...due to the nature of some of the activities you do....yet the reality is, you've known this person for 3 days or 3 weeks and let's see what the relationship is like outside of conference and camp. Can it be sustained? Sometimes not. Sometimes those people were your bestfriends for the 3 days or 3 weeks and you were "sooo close", sharing "this one time at band camp" stories and then you never speak again or you realize you aren't that close.

 

 

I have a "band camp" story. When I was a teen I went to a racism/tolerance boot camp sort of deal where we spent 2 weeks hashing out all our ideas of racism, sexism, anti-semitism, and every other 'ism you can think of.

 

I got to know this Sikh boy and we grew very close during those two weeks, towards the end he and I were having convos about how he could break it to his parents that he wanted to date outside his culture, race, and religion etc. and I was thinking the same.

We really bonded lol:D

 

When camp was over we saw each other a few times but it was so different and I think we both realized what the hell we had been thinking. We both really did like each other, but we realized we had just had "camp love" and that it wasn't anything either of us wanted to pursue in the real world.

[AnotherRound]

I think that the misunderstanding here is that he and I were bashing his stbxw - we weren't. In fact, the general conversations were discussing her strong points as a person and a mother and a wife. Discussing which of his needs weren't being met in their relationship was not bashing her, it was simply discussing his needs and how they had not been met. It wasn't he and I bonding over hating her - neither of us hates her, or ever has.

 

Also, the difference for us is that she was aware of our relationship. So, in all honesty, we all 3 accepted that their intimacy was never coming back and that they were staying married for other reasons (both of them). So, it was, for all intents and purposes, a former intimate relationship - she was like an ex wife already for him - and vice versa. I have always talked about former relationships with my partners - it isn't about learning about the ex of my SO - but learning about my SO and his wants/needs, reactions, coping skills, how he handles things, etc.

 

We have healthy boundaries - they are just different from other people's boundaries. We've talked about this before here - physically, I have very HARD boundaries, emotionally my boundaries are much more open. You may be opposite, and that's okay. We all have different levels of different boundaries - nobody is right or wrong, we are just different. I choose to be softer on my emotional boundaries bc that is what is healthiest and most fulfilling for me - you may choose the opposite - we all define our own boundaries, and there are many different variations and levels that are all healthy.

 

Our discussions were never an attempt to berate the stbxw or anything of that nature. She was his roommate, and his coparent and he got frustrated with her at times - as we all do with those we are around daily at some point or another. He also discussed his frustrations with his mother, his siblings, his child - if there were any - his friends, his colleagues, or just people in general - as it came up. I did the same. We talked about a LOT of things, but this is a forum for OW/OM, so those others aren't necessarily relevant here, despite the fact that we did discuss them. We discussed many topics, as people in relationships do - it wasn't like we just sat around and bashed the stbxw. Validating his frustration is not bashing, it is simply validating his feelings - as I'm sure the stbxw had her feelings validated by anyone she discussed her own frustrations with outside of the marriage too.

 

We didn't have a "common enemy" - we had a relationship that his stbxw was 100% aware of and in agreement to enough that she didn't end it, confront it, or express any opposition to. She knew ahead of time that he was going to start seeing me, she knew when we broke up. She knew when he began to see the OW. This is not the norm, I know - but it is the truth and exactly how the situation was. The stbxw would verify this if she was on this forum, guaranteed (except for the fact that her only stipulation was that it be discreet, so talking about it with anyone outside of us 3 might not be something she would do, and didn't do until forced to with the OW, so maybe not).

 

I value emotional honesty. I like to hear what's going on in other people's heads - about me, about us, about life, about politics, about issues. It is my nature, I'm always curious as to what others are thinking and feeling. ExMM and I are both alike in that - asking hypothetical questions at times, wondering how the other person ticks. And sharing our thoughts and feelings about situations we have dealt with in life. He has told me MANY stories, and his feelings and thoughts and reactions - from his childhood, his teen years - not just his marriage. That is one very small slice of his experiences as a son, a brother, a father, a friend, a lover, a boyfriend, a professional, etc. It helps me understand him and why he does what he does, or reacts the way he reacts etc. I want that in ANY relationship - I can't stand spending time with someone who holds everything they think or feel secretly - bc I can't read their minds, and I want to know what's going on in their heads and hearts.

 

I have actually given many presentations (created by me) on boundaries. Most boundary levels are healthy for the person enforcing them - they only become unhealthy when you are left feeling used, abused, or harmed in some way. If exMM and I both share the same type of emotional boundary, then neither of us is disrespecting the other's boundaries - so all is well and good. He may have broken a boundary with his stbxw by sharing things with me - but then again, that was always an issue in their marriage - the differences in their boundary levels for different areas. So, it was pretty much inevitable. You can respect someone's boundaries, and that is important, but when respecting that boundary takes away from your own mental health (ie, he couldn't share with me HIS experience of a situation that he and she shared), then it's not healthy for you.

 

I'm sure that the stbxw would not want to know all that he shared with me. She doesn't know, unless she assumes it. Unless I went to her and told her all about all I know, or was out telling others about her - then I'm not disrespecting her boundaries. What exMM and I shared in pillow talk, or private conversations, doesn't work its way out to anyone else. There's no reason for it to. However, if exMM and I do not end up together - I will share my experiences with him with my next SO - as it is an important indicator to a SO of who and what I am, how I handle relationships, etc. And obviously, I want to be with someone that has similar boundaries as me - as having such different ones will never work, imo.

 

Yes, he did live in the same house with stbxw - but he didn't "go home to her every night" - sometimes, he stayed here. And she was aware of where he was - she knew exactly where I lived, and could have shown up or called him (or me, she has my number) at any moment in time. He wasn't going "between" us as some think - he was living a life in which his needs were being met in two different relationships. I had the intimate relationship with him - she had the co-parenting and household sharing relationship with him. Not the standard set up, I know - but again, it worked for all 3 of us for 7 years - so, nobody was being disrespected, or deceived, or abused - we all were in agreement of the perimeters and all was smooth sailing for that time.

 

So, I wouldn't agree that he and I have "no boundaries" or that he was not committed to me (or vice versa) or that our sharing was somehow a disrespectful act towards his stbxw at the time or now. Just happens that he was closest with me emotionally in that time. He was, at one time, closer with his stbxw than he was with any other woman - but it didn't last and I was the "next" relationship in that manner. New OW was the next after me - as we all move on from relationships that end (or should!). While they were dating, he and I weren't nearly as close, nor sharing nearly as much as we had previously. He might have been sharing with her, and that would be normal since he and I had broken up and she and he were dating at that time.

 

Anyway, I see what you are saying - and I can see how it would seem that way to someone with very strict emotional boundaries. Just as someone standing too close to me in the supermarket is a boundary issue for me - others have emotional boundaries like that. I feel really comfortable with where all of my boundaries are - and to each his own, as we are all different and will feel comfortable with varying levels of this, obviously. Thanks again for the thoughtful post.. Interesting!

[justrandomchicks1]

I'm not homewrecker. I wouldn't try to ruin a happy marriage. I thought she was cruel and that he was stuck in aad ausive marriage which turned out to be lies...

[ThatJustHappened]

Any MM who turns to an OOW isn't invested in a real R with the OW, IMO.

 

Exactly. To a guy like that, a warm body is a warm body.

[AnotherRound]

I'm not homewrecker. I wouldn't try to ruin a happy marriage. I thought she was cruel and that he was stuck in aad ausive marriage which turned out to be lies...

 

I am sorry that you he turned out to be dishonest. That does happen with some guys (married or not), ugh. How did you find out he was lying to you? I'm not familiar with your story.

 

And that was kind of the point of the original post. That most affairs don't happen in a "happy marriage". One partner might be happy, but the other (the WS) obviously wasn't (or isn't usually, although there are the few that lie and step outside a happy relationship, which I've NEVER understood). I think you will find here that there aren't many (not sure I've heard any?) APs say that they started out with an intent to ruin a happy marriage, although I do know it does happen sometimes.

 

In my case, the marriage was NOT happy, for either partner. That doesn't make the affair a great situation, but it had come up in another thread that there are some that believe that "many" people in "happy" marriages cheat, and others who believe that there are "few" people in "happy" marriages that cheat. Thanks for joining the discussion...

[woinlove]

I am sorry that you he turned out to be dishonest. That does happen with some guys (married or not), ugh.

 

From LS, it is not uncommon for MM to lie about the state of their marriage (obviously single men don't) making it even more difficult to know what the the M is like.

 

Marriages are not static entities, just like the people in them. A happy person is not continually happy, depending on what they are going on in their life - some of which they may have no control over, such as deaths of loved ones. When an individual goes through a life stressor, that is felt in the marriage too, especially in happy marriages where the two people are so connected.