Happily Married

[MissBee]

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.

 

This is a good point!

 

It relates to some of what I was discussing earlier, in terms of how a person views "happiness" and their expectations of their partner as it relates to their happiness. Happiness is an emotion that is transient. For me, being content is a more stable feeling. I can be satisfied and content in my relationship and be happy/unhappy/angry/annoyed at any given point therein as well, the latter are transient feelings that we all go through, and the former is more reflective of the sum total of how we feel about our situation/relationship outside of stressors.

 

I'm recalling insecurities I've had in relationships that were entirely in my own head and that I did not share but acted on...it wasn't because I was unhappy with the relationship or the person I was with---I was dealing with my own inner drama that no doubt became reflected in the relationship.

 

I definitely think the idea of happiness within self and one's relationship needs to be complicated and nuanced. I find it deceptive for people to assume that another person/"wrong relationship" is what results in cheating, but if they just swap partners, all will be well. That is ridiculous. In some cases yea maybe they are just with the "wrong person". In many more, it seems like it has nothing to do with who they are with, but a choice they made, that was dependent on their own feelings and agency.

 

I also like this point because it was what I was getting at in terms of needs versus wants and self-indulgence and instant gratification. I feel like people who believe in 24/7 happiness, those who like instant gratification, those who believe their partner needs to save them from themselves and make them happy and entertain them and be everything are probably more likely to complain about unmet needs (because naturally what they need, no human can possibly provide, as it's too much. If your need is for someone to be your all and everything and be incharge of your happiness, u nfortunately most people will come up short, at one point or another) than people who are more in tune with the ups and downs of life and relationships and who take control of their happiness and put in equal work.

Edited October 15, 2012 by MissBee

[beenburned]

I have not read this long thread but I will answer the question AR posted.

 

H will tell anybody that he has always had a happy marriage and loved his wife.

Since all of his infidelity occurred when he was in his 20's, his state of mind at that time was similar to immature high school boys, who score then brag about their conquests.(his co-workers also)

 

To all of them it was all still a game to be played, even though they all were now married.(we were the only ones that had children) It wasn't that they weren't getting frequent sex at home, they just wanted the variety and the thrill of a conquest to boost their low self-esteem/egos.

 

In other words, they ALL needed to grow up and act like the married men they were!

 

All of the co-workers wives caught them first and immediately filed for divorce. I was a SAHM that was busy with 2 young children so I was the last to find out what all was going on.

 

The only reason I eventually gave him a second chance was I needed to get a job to support myself and the kids before I divorced him.(He was told this)

 

I immediately got a job and started college at night. By the time I had finished and made enough money to feel comfortable leaving, he was still being a totally changed man.(3 yrs after d-day) So we had a talk, and I reconsidered my position.

 

He has never made me sorry I gave him that chance to prove himself!

 

And our marriage is better than ever simply because he is not the greedy, selfish, self centered, immature person he was in the early years of our marriage!

 

By the way, most of his old buddies have now been married 2/3/4 times, I guess they chose to not grow up. Because if they simply didn't believe in fidelity in marriage, they all would not have ever remarried.

[beenburned]

DM,

 

I agree!

 

See the last sentence of my post, it tells how all of his co-workers turned out more than 20 years after their original d-days!

[cocorico]

This is a valid point, but I have a question:

 

There will come a day when you may not make your H happy or a day when your H will not make you happy. It is impossible to make someone else happy on a constant 24/7.

 

What will you do if your guy fails you?

 

If he "fails" me? Or if my needs change over time, or his do. Or if circumstances intervene... Or anything else disturbs the balance?

 

I'll do what I usually do, discuss it with him. We can look at what the issues are, what needs on both sides are going unmet, and how, or whether, we can resolve this.

 

I'm not one to stick my fingers in my ears or my head in the sand. If there is an issue I like to confront it and resolve it, one way or another.

[Owl]

I think Pierre has several good points that need to be summed up in a single post so that it all comes together.

 

The "source of information" for most OW/OM on the current status of the marriage is the MW/MM. They're the ones who will tell the OP whether or not their in a "happy marriage".

 

Realize from the beginning that if there's attraction or desire, the likelihood of an HONEST ASSESSMENT of the state of the marriage is much more unlikely. They're far more likely to say what they think the OM/OW want to hear, rather than what they may feel is the truth of the situation.

 

As the attraction to the affair partner/potential affair partner deepens, MW/MM tend to mentally rewrite/revision their own marital history in their own minds, making it less and less attractive (and less and less accurate) in their own minds. So they begin to feel like the marriage has been less and less a "happy marriage". Reality could be far different from what they remember at this point.

 

AnotherRound's comment about a "bump" in the marriage vs. years of unhappiness is another point to consider. The difficulty here lies in the re-writing of history...what was a "bump" may now be viewed as "years of unhappiness" by the MM/MW, fogging their ability to distinguish between the two.

 

In my case...my wife and I had years of "happy marriage" as a foundation. But, the last 6-8 months prior to the affair had been a pretty hard bump for us. All do to my wife's decisions and changes. She'd broken an ankle, started to get heavily into online gaming, lost her job, and started to suffer from some pretty strong depression which she refused to seek treatment for. "Bump"...a pretty severe one...but mostly of her own making.

 

When she met OM online, initially we were a "happy marriage" according to both her and I. We gamed together, frequently with him in the 'group' as well. As the affair progressed, her description of our marriage and her own happiness in it began to deteriorate. I believe this to be a combination of both a need to tell OM that in order to maintain the EA, and her own revision of our history in her own mind.

 

At this point she couldn't distinguish between "bump" and "years of unhappy marriage".

 

Once the affair ended, and as we went to counseling over the next year, her view of our marital history slowly changed and "went back to normal", more closely matching what the rest of us had percieved prior to these events.

 

So, that's my answer to the OP's first post.

 

OM was initially told she was in a happy marriage...and then the story changed as the affair progressed and she both viewed things differently and as she felt she needed to demonstrate less happiness to the OM. Post affair...views on it changed again.

[cocorico]

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.

 

I'd go even further and say there are no "wants" in an R, only "needs", and if your partner or some outsider looking in deems those "wants" rather than needs then they are obviously not the partner for you. If your partner agreed at the outset of the R to undertake to provide those needs / "wants" then you have every right to expect them to be fulfilled within that R. That has nothing to do with a sense of entitlement and everything to do with sticking to an agreement. If your partner promises you love, intimacy, respect, sex, fun, pleasure, enjoyment or whatever else and then fails to deliver on that, they have broken the contract and nullified the basis of the M and cannot then take it amiss if you act on the broken agreement by seeking those things elsewhere, or if you in turn fail to deliver on your undertaking to provide them with their "want" / "need" for sexual exclusivity.

 

But I do think it is incumbent on whosever needs are not being met to (attempt to) tell the other party. Of course some people can't or won't hear that their spouse is not happy if they're of the "that's a want, not a need" mentality, and decides that their spouse's view is not valid, that they "ought" to be happy with the subset of needs provided to them because those have been decided by the spouse as the ones they ought to value more, and so their unmet needs get dismissed, their opinion devalued, their voice ignored. You see a lot of that dynamic played out here, with people deciding for others what they should and should not value, what they should and should not "reasonably" need or want, what they ought to be thinking or feeling, and actually ignoring or dismissing the views, values or experiences of those others they brusquely silence. One can only imagine how that plays out in their personal Rs.

 

And if the unhappy partner has tried to communicate their unmet needs and attendant unhappiness, especially if they have done so in the face of repeated brush-offs or small adjustments that never last ( thinking here of spouses in near-sexless Ms whose spouse will make a slight effort but not sustain it) then yes I can certainly see how that can leave the unhappy spouse vulnerable to the attractions of an A.

[Summer Breeze]

Our marriage was happy. My husband wasn't happy with himself, therefore was seeking an ego fix, but our MARRIAGE was happy.

 

Yes, it's possible to have a happy marriage and a cheating spouse. However, the state of the marriage really isn't a good excuse for intruding, plus the happiness or lack of in said marriage really isn't for the OW to decide, regardless of what the MM has told her.

 

With all due respect I would note that the only reason the OW was allowed to 'intrude' was because MM saw fit to bring her into it at whatever level he did. An AP can only 'enter' the M if allowed by the WS. Of course the happiness in the M is for the OW to decide if a MM has made it part of their R. If someone is offering the state of their M up as a reason why they're having an A and possibly planning on leaving--whether or not they do notwithstanding as this point so please, no one jump in with 'they never leave' because that is not the issue of my comments--then the OW has every right to have an opinion and thoughts on what she observes and hears. Again if the WS didn't share anything they would have nothing to base it on and I would agree with you.

[Decorative]

THIS^^^^

 

The "He's/She's not meeting my needs" camp think life is like a romance novel or movie. Warped thinking.

 

It's not my responsibility to make my husband (or any man) happy and he can show himself to the door if he doesn't like it.

 

I already have two children and don't want or need a third.

 

I agree. When I first found about the affair- I leaned on the Harley camp of unmet needs to try and repair my marriage. Big fat mess resulted, and it ignores the point that you cannot change or control another human being.

 

( that being said- I do agree with Harley's plan B and exposure of an affair . I find Harley to be great in a crisis situation, but just not great long term).

[Decorative]

I fully agree with this! Not long ago it was said elsewhere that most MM, if they had an ejector seat button, would just "launch the BS" if they could and place their AP in their lives and all would be fine. Um... no. Not when the problem lies within the cheater, and we all know that's the situation a good percentage of the time.

 

Is it Buckaroo Banzai who says " wherever you go, there you'll be"?

 

You cannot escape your problems if you're the problem.

[Owl]

Is it Buckaroo Banzai who says " wherever you go, there you'll be"?

 

You cannot escape your problems if you're the problem.

 

Yes it is.

 

And your last line is very, very interesting, as it's exactly a concept my wife and I discussed briefly this past weekend. I told her the same thing when she was all set to go live with OM...and later, she'd agreed that she'd have taken her problems with her.

 

We're now seeing our daughter suffer through things for the same reasons...because our daughter keeps running away from problems that she brings with her.

[Owl]

I agree. When I first found about the affair- I leaned on the Harley camp of unmet needs to try and repair my marriage. Big fat mess resulted, and it ignores the point that you cannot change or control another human being.

 

( that being said- I do agree with Harley's plan B and exposure of an affair . I find Harley to be great in a crisis situation, but just not great long term).

 

I basically used a lot of Harley's concepts, such as the love bank, exposure, etc... and combined them with some other good thoughts too, such as the ideas listed in the Five Love Languages by Chapman.

 

When you start to look at HOW others "feel loved" and "show love"...and then consider whether or not what you're doing is "contributing the the bank" or not based on whether or not it makes them feel loved, it can help considerably.

 

My wife and I found that what makes us "feel loved" isn't always how we should "show love".

 

Useful to know that.

 

But I'd agree...Harley's principles aren't sustainable (by themselves) long term.

[cocorico]

I also like this point because it was what I was getting at in terms of needs versus wants and self-indulgence and instant gratification. I feel like people who believe in 24/7 happiness, those who like instant gratification, those who believe their partner needs to save them from themselves and make them happy and entertain them and be everything are probably more likely to complain about unmet needs (because naturally what they need, no human can possibly provide, as it's too much. If your need is for someone to be your all and everything and be incharge of your happiness, u nfortunately most people will come up short, at one point or another) than people who are more in tune with the ups and downs of life and relationships and who take control of their happiness and put in equal work.

 

Wow! Do people like that really exist, or is this another LS straw man?

 

I can't speak for those who live on the planet / in the countries where you find people like this, but amongst "normal" people, one doesn't expect anyone else to magic your life into some fantasy park. But you do expect those who promised you love, respect, intimacy, sex, concern, interest, etc to keep their promise. And if they can't, or won't, they should be honest and say, my feelings have changed, I no longer love / respect / desire / etc you and I can no longer authentically deliver on the promise I made to you. Would you be happy for me to continue going through the motions inauthentically, providing an intact home for our children until they leave, or would you prefer to find someone else who can actually give you what you need and what should reasonably be provided in a loving R?

 

But they seldom do. They just expect that the unhappy spouse should "downsize" their expectations because the other spouse has determined that other things have a higher priority.

[Decorative]

Wow! Do people like that really exist, or is this another LS straw man?

 

I can't speak for those who live on the planet / in the countries where you find people like this, but amongst "normal" people, one doesn't expect anyone else to magic your life into some fantasy park. But you do expect those who promised you love, respect, intimacy, sex, concern, interest, etc to keep their promise. And if they can't, or won't, they should be honest and say, my feelings have changed, I no longer love / respect / desire / etc you and I can no longer authentically deliver on the promise I made to you. Would you be happy for me to continue going through the motions inauthentically, providing an intact home for our children until they leave, or would you prefer to find someone else who can actually give you what you need and what should reasonably be provided in a loving R?

 

But they seldom do. They just expect that the unhappy spouse should "downsize" their expectations because the other spouse has determined that other things have a higher priority.

 

 

Visit any infidelity forum, or heck, stroll through my neighborhood, and you will meet example after example of people who do think just like that.

[cocorico]

Not long ago it was said elsewhere that most MM, if they had an ejector seat button, would just "launch the BS" if they could and place their AP in their lives and all would be fine.

 

I'm assuming this is a deliberate misquote, which is why there is no link to the original post and context where this was said.

 

What was, in fact, said, had nothing to do with the MM swapping out women and it all "being fine". What was said was that the reason many MM do not leave the M is that they like other aspects of the "M" just fine - the house, the kids, the extended family, etc, and that since they cannot simply push the ejector seat button and replace the BS with the OW, they stay. That was the context, and the point that was made, and as,everyone can see it has absolutely nothing to do with "it all being fine" or with the premise of this thread, or the point it was being twisted to make in the quoted post.

 

I have never claimed that "most MM" would be fine if they simply replaced the BS with the OW, for the simple reason that I have yet to read a proper, reliable scientific study regarding the underlying issues which lead to "most MM" (or MW) engaging in infidelity, and would not assume to know so without the evidence.

[cocorico]

I am glad to hear you would not consider having an affair.

 

Do you realize that at some point you will be unhappy with your guy? The honey moon does not last forever in 99% of cases.

 

In any event I congratulate you for not using the affair option when you hit the bump.

 

When we got together at the outset we discussed the dynamics we'd base our R on. Honesty was one, and we've followed through with that throughout. We both know we stand to lose a great deal more through not being dishonest than through verbalising what might be difficult or unpopular ideas.

 

I've never expected a "honeymoon phase" and we've never had one in the sense that it gets bandied about. We've both been completely reality-focused from the beginning, seeing each other's strengths and limitations as well as our own, so there has been no massive dawning disappointment. Of course he will ate and change, as will I. Our needs may well not change in synch. We're realistic about that, and about how we'd go about addressing that if / when it happened. The advantage of meeting up when you're "older" is that you've made many of your fundamental life choices, you've nailed your values to the mast, and you've wasted enough time with the "wrong" people to know what works for you and what doesn't.

 

Does that mean either, or both, of us won't be vulnerable to an A in the future? Of course not - I'm not arrogant enough to claim to see the future. But we've lived through our A, and the emotional toll of dealing with the BS, the fallout she radiated to his extended family and his kids. Neither of us would ever want to see people we love so dearly being subjected to that again. Even if I came to hate him, I could never break his mother's heart, or slap his sister in the face like that, or disappoint his kids. My debt of loyalty to all of them runs far too deep.

[waterwoman]

In an ideal world any relationship should be open to negotiation and discussion. One partner isn't happy? They should speak up and try and improve things in an honest and open way. If that doesn't work they can then choose to leave the relationship. That is how it would happen in Shiny Perfect World. However unfortunately real people aren't like that. They tend to ignore problems, hope they'll go away, snipe and sulk and act like children some of the time, rub along happily enough the rest of the time. And enjoy moments of really happiness as they arise. Because, inspite of what some people on LS beleive, to most of the population a romantic relationship isn't the be all and end all of life - there are other things that matter as much. As long as an individual isn't actively unhappy they put up with the minor deficiencies in their primary relationship because the overall picture is a happy one.

 

So a marriage can be less than ecstatic, it can be contented most of the time, unhappy a little of the time, it can be banal and ordinary a lot of the time, very happy and fulfilling some of the time. That is normal life. And that is what most of the people I know experience as a marriage. Would that count as a happy marriage, or an unhappy one? One partner unilaterally deciding that actually they are deeply unhappy (without actually having voiced that feeling to their spouse) and embarking on an affair with someone they meet by chance who is in fact their 'soul mate' is so much bullsh*t. The truth might be nearer to 'this marriage lark is a bit dull really isn't it? Kids and bills and cooking just bore me to tears! Why aren't we having sex 10 times a week and why doesn't he/she treat me like a the goddess/god I know I truly am? Why doesn't she worship the ground I walk on like xxxx in accounts? Now that's someone who appreciates my finer qualities'

 

I can completely understand someone not wanting marriage or a LTR but if you've signed up for it it's unfair to suddenly decide that you want something different/more without telling your spouse of your decision.

[Summer Breeze]

I could be "invited" into all sorts of unsavory things, but that doesn't mean I'll actually do it. What happens in a marriage is NONE OF THE OW'S BUSINESS, and anyone with a lick of integrity would tell the cheater to shut the heck up.

 

And, no, the OW does not have a right to have thoughts on what she THINKS is happening because it's probably usually completely off base.

 

We disagree and I'm fine with that. If the WS makes it their business and the more they lean on the 'I'm unhappy' issue and make that be, or the illusion of being, the basis for a R to grow into something more then of course it becomes their business.

 

If it's off base it's because they were lied to and that speaks more of the WS than the OW.

 

I'll bow out of this now because we will not find common ground on this issue. That does not mean I don't stand by what I said. As in all things related to an A the WS is the person who has the capability of controlling everything between all parties. If the WS did not enter the A there would be no A and no one else even close to the edges of the M.

[cocorico]

 

And, no, the OW does not have a right to have thoughts on what she THINKS is happening because it's probably usually completely off base.

 

Actually, it's only in Orwellian novels where what you are and are not allowed to think about, and have views and opinions about, is prescribed. Elsewhere, everyone else is perfectly entitled to think about whatever they like, and to hold whatever views they like about it, whether or not someone else approves.

 

In most places, you're even allowed to express those views freely, provided they observe the laws of the country (no hate speech, incitement, etc) and I'd guess that a good proportion of the freely expressed views are "completely off base". Fox News, for example, has turned that into a commercially successful enterprise, fully within the laws of its country.

[AnotherRound]

Thanks all for the responses. I would like to try to bring it back on topic if possible. I wasn't discussing what is the right of the OW/OM or isn't - that's an entirely different thread! I was curious as to how many people have been in an affair with someone who said that they had a "happy" marriage. If anyone wants to add more to that, great - but I feel it's gone OT in that it has become a question of what the OW/OM have a right to think, feel, and or do. I think that could be a different thread if someone wants to start it - thanks!

 

How many APs have been involved in an affair with a MP that claimed to have a "happy" marriage?

[beenburned]

AR,

 

I answered your question on page 5 post #73.

[Spark1111]

back on topic....who in their right mind would even engage with someone who claimed to be very happily married?

 

That's FWB scenario, or just plain sex.

 

If you want someone at your beck and call, who doesn't charge a per hour fee, isn't better to say you are unhappily married?

 

I think it would be, as it would invoke sympathy, and often if we feel sorry for someone's romantic plight, it could make you more open to the friendship, attraction, eventual affair.

[Decorative]

My spouse orginally told the AP he was not married. But then ( about six months in) he told her he was. And her parents hired a PI to track him, and showed pics of us together, with our children, holding hands, and being very much together, because she was telling them that he was unhappily married, on paper only.

 

They were still together for quite awhile after that. I saw correspondence near the end of their relationship where he told her he loved me, I was a wonderful wife, and I had never deserved anything he did to me.

 

I admit- I don't understand the dynamic that went on between the two of them at all. But that's probably why I am me, and they are who they are. The OW is a serial OW, so I am not sure what the other MM have told her about their wives.

 

Spouses who cheat lie. Period. To both parties- actually, all three. Themselves, their spouses, and absolutely their affair partner.

[Radagast]

In an ideal world any relationship should be open to negotiation and discussion. One partner isn't happy? They should speak up and try and improve things in an honest and open way. If that doesn't work they can then choose to leave the relationship.

 

They can choose to leave the relationship if their speaking up and other attempts to improve things fail, indeed. But those of us who were raised to put others before ourselves weren't brought up to leave our children and break up their home simply because things are not going our way. We try to improve things, we get rebuffed. We speak up, we get ignored. We see the devastating impact a separation has on our children and we just have to swallow our misery and put up with it because we want what's best for our kids. That doesn't make our needs go away. We try, but eventually we have to get those needs met somewhere.

 

Of course that's not how things would work in an ideal world. In an ideal world, we would be listened to when we expressed unhappiness. Our spouse would be willing to work with us to improve the marriage. Our children would be robust enough, from good parenting, to withstand the trauma of a parental separation. But most of us don't live in an ideal world, we live in the real world, and we have to deal with the cards we're dealt, not those we wish we had been dealt.

[woinlove]

They can choose to leave the relationship if their speaking up and other attempts to improve things fail, indeed. But those of us who were raised to put others before ourselves weren't brought up to leave our children and break up their home simply because things are not going our way. We try to improve things, we get rebuffed. We speak up, we get ignored. We see the devastating impact a separation has on our children and we just have to swallow our misery and put up with it because we want what's best for our kids. That doesn't make our needs go away. We try, but eventually we have to get those needs met somewhere.

 

Of course that's not how things would work in an ideal world. In an ideal world, we would be listened to when we expressed unhappiness. Our spouse would be willing to work with us to improve the marriage. Our children would be robust enough, from good parenting, to withstand the trauma of a parental separation. But most of us don't live in an ideal world, we live in the real world, and we have to deal with the cards we're dealt, not those we wish we had been dealt.

 

Re the bolded, this discussion is on affairs in happy or unhappy M. Most weren't brought up to have affairs and deceive their spouses either - so does this really matter? In the end, isn't it simply the choice of the individual as an adult?

 

Personally, I think I would find it easier to leave my M than to have an A and deceive my spouse, since I think I could divorce and still maintain my core values and set a good example for our children. Of course, those who feel differently about honesty and treating others with respect may not find it difficult to have an affair. But, I do think everyone should take responsibility for whatever choices they make as an adult.

[AnotherRound]

They can choose to leave the relationship if their speaking up and other attempts to improve things fail, indeed. But those of us who were raised to put others before ourselves weren't brought up to leave our children and break up their home simply because things are not going our way. We try to improve things, we get rebuffed. We speak up, we get ignored. We see the devastating impact a separation has on our children and we just have to swallow our misery and put up with it because we want what's best for our kids. That doesn't make our needs go away. We try, but eventually we have to get those needs met somewhere.

 

Of course that's not how things would work in an ideal world. In an ideal world, we would be listened to when we expressed unhappiness. Our spouse would be willing to work with us to improve the marriage. Our children would be robust enough, from good parenting, to withstand the trauma of a parental separation. But most of us don't live in an ideal world, we live in the real world, and we have to deal with the cards we're dealt, not those we wish we had been dealt.

 

Exactly. And attempting to see the world in ideal terms is hardly ever realistic (never even maybe?). People aren't perfect, situations aren't always cut and dry, and life is MESSY. Realizing that, accepting that, is imo, the only way to find happiness. Accepting that we sometimes make mistakes, we sometimes make bad decisions, we sometimes are trapped in a situation (whether by emotional bonds or whatever) - and accepting that we did the best we could with what we had at the time - and moving on.

 

Oh how I wish life played out like a sitcom. With everything all wrapped up nicely and neatly for everyone in less than 30 minutes - all problems solved, and everyone happy and content. Oh but how I know life just doesn't work that way - ever... lol. I choose to be in the real world - the messy one - because believing anything other than that seems like it would be a continual disappointment when reality rears it's ugly and messy head - as it inevitably will.

 

Good post Radagast!