"Homewrecker" - lazy terminology?

[Decorative]

When you discuss infidelity with others, do they call the other woman "OW"? What type of terminology have you heard?

 

In real life- I have never heard anyone use the term other woman- unless they have specifically been through infidelity and have been on forums such as these. It's actually kind of a tell for me. When I hear someone say that - I usually know I will find out they have personal experience.

 

Most of the terminology I have heard has been less polite than homewrecker, and the language towards the married man has been quite strong, as well.

[Henni]

If this situation was acceptable in society, then people wouldn't be afraid to discuss their love with others. Usually only one or two close friends are told. There is a reason that affairs are hidden, my best guess is because those that hide it know it is wrong.

 

You mean, like people who are gay were afraid to talk about their love with more than close friends in the past? Or in homophobic societies? Is that evidence that being gay is wrong too?

 

Relationships that challenge a current norm have always been hidden, because those in them fear abuse and ostracisation, throughout history. The norms change. Many people now feel that it's perfectly normal for many marriages to end and it's also normal that often there isn't a gap between that marriage ending and a new relationship starting. I'm happy not to know many people who would consider an OW a 'homewrecker' and instead consider it far better that people find new love than stay in an unhealthy marriage, or even if the marriage isn't awful but just isn't great, and a better love comes along, take it! life is too short! Marriages which last for a lifetime *and are healthy* are in fact far more abnormal than normal. I don't think the statistics can say anything else. Whether this 'should' or 'should not' be the case is a result of cultural or religious convention, which changes with time and place.

 

So, for me, 'homewrecker' as applied to a woman or man having and affair with someone who is still married is ridiculous. If the marriage is unhappy, then it's already wrecked and the H or W is simply confirming that by having an affair. If the marriage is happy and the H or W is having an affair, then the H or W is the home wrecker, they are the ones lying to their partner. The AP is not.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Henni

[Mrs.Dee]

Being gay is not the same as an OW.

 

Furthermore, gay people hurt no one. OWs help philandering men in wrecking the marriage. The man needs the OW vagina to be unfaithful. The OW shares the blame. This is not rocket science.

yes and he also needs to make the decision he wants to engage in extramarital Activity.

[Decorative]

Being gay is not the same as an OW.

 

Furthermore, gay people hurt no one. OWs help philandering men in wrecking the marriage. The man needs the OW vagina to be unfaithful. The OW shares the blame. This is not rocket science.

 

Thank you for saying this.

 

I am astounded it needed to be said.

 

Hurting and lying to other people is never going to become an accepted societal norm. It's not a good thing.

 

Homosexuality isn't even in the same field as adultery, and I am blown away, and not in the good way, that it was even suggested as a comparison.

 

Holy canoli.

[eleanorrigby]

I really can't stand it when OW/OM are compared to other groups that had and continue to have to fight for their civil rights.

 

Seriously, just stop. Your OW status does not put you on the same level as Rosa Parks or Harvey Milk.

[Silly_Girl]

I don't think that's unusual. The only time I've ever heard the term used in real life was from the OW in my situations mother. She was trying to assure me that I was mistaken and that her daughter was not a home wrecker, because she (the mom) was a minister and very involved in their church.

 

Oh. How nice of her to put you straight. Being involved in church work generally absolves one of any/everything it seems!

[eleanorrigby]

Oh. How nice of her to put you straight. Being involved in church work generally absolves one of any/everything it seems!

 

It was herself that was put straight. She assumed because she had raised her daughter in the church that she could not possibly be a homewrecker.

Rude awakening for the mom.

[awkward]

You mean, like people who are gay were afraid to talk about their love with more than close friends in the past? Or in homophobic societies? Is that evidence that being gay is wrong too?

 

No I don't mean like people who are gay were afraid to talk about their love with more than close friends. That is not evidence that being gay is wrong because it is ridiculous to think that someone who is gay is wrong. Like oh ok, I think I will choose to be gay today and try to destroy another. And even if people did choose to be gay, how exactly are they hurting someone else? Of course they are not. But choosing to participate in affair is wrong, and most people know it.

 

I understand that there are some people who are not accepting of people who are gay, so some choose not to tell others of their sexual orientation. But I don't think it is the same thing at all. Nor do I believe it is evidence that being gay is wrong. I think it is evidence of ignorance.

 

Relationships that challenge a current norm have always been hidden, because those in them fear abuse and ostracisation, throughout history. The norms change. Many people now feel that it's perfectly normal for many marriages to end and it's also normal that often there isn't a gap between that marriage ending and a new relationship starting.

 

Well I agree that it is normal for marriages to end but disagree that it is normal or acceptable to start a new relationship before the marriage ends.

 

 

 

I'm happy not to know many people who would consider an OW a 'homewrecker' and instead consider it far better that people find new love than stay in an unhealthy marriage, or even if the marriage isn't awful but just isn't great, and a better love comes along, take it! life is too short! Marriages which last for a lifetime *and are healthy* are in fact far more abnormal than normal. I don't think the statistics can say anything else. Whether this 'should' or 'should not' be the case is a result of cultural or religious convention, which changes with time and place.

 

I am going to respond to this part in a bit. My husband just called and he is off working so I need to come back to this.

[Henni]

Being gay is not the same as an OW.

 

Furthermore, gay people hurt no one. OWs help philandering men in wrecking the marriage. The man needs the OW vagina to be unfaithful. The OW shares the blame. This is not rocket science.

 

Pierre, I didn't say being Gay was the same as an OW. I used the case of being Gay as a way to argue that people not telling others about their relationship is NOT evidence that it's 'wrong'. It is evidence that it challenges social norms.

 

My point was also that most marriages are ALREADY WRECKED before the OW comes into the picture, hence the affair. If the marriage is a happy one and a H or W chooses to have an affair, then that H or W is the homewrecker. It's not rocket science either, but thanks for your unwavering arrogance.

[Henni]

I could have come up with many other situations where people don't or haven't talked about their relationship openly that are NOT because their relationship is wrong, but rather because it breaks some current norm. Could be that there is some kind of class system in place, or because they are of different race, or whatever. Awkward argued that not talking publicly about a relationship is evidence that it's wrong. I don't agree.

[Mme. Chaucer]

You mean, like people who are gay were afraid to talk about their love with more than close friends in the past? Or in homophobic societies? Is that evidence that being gay is wrong too?

 

That is a very ignorant and offensive analogy.

 

Whether you believe this to be true or not, gay people do not choose to be gay.

 

Furthermore, gay people are just as capable of being "homewreckers," cheaters, in open relationships or monogamous as heteros are.

 

It's a question of integrity and character, not of sexual orientation.

 

Relationships that challenge a current norm have always been hidden, because those in them fear abuse and ostracisation, throughout history.

 

Sorry, but people who choose betray and hide are not, and never have been "challenging a current norm" unless it's the "norm" of valuing honesty.

 

If folks who love to elevate and romanticize affair-having really wanted it to be "out of the closet," they would very simply engage in open relationships or polyamory - NOT have sex surreptitiously with somebody's husbands or wives. But that's not so sneakily fun, is it.

[2sure]

Infidelity certainly can wreck a home, so whoever takes part in one takes part in the other. But yeah, the old term "home wrecker" really can't apply to many OW ...even here we see how rarely she is there in the end , home wrecked or not. That's all on the WS.

[Henni]

Thank you for saying this.

 

I am astounded it needed to be said.

 

Hurting and lying to other people is never going to become an accepted societal norm. It's not a good thing.

 

Homosexuality isn't even in the same field as adultery, and I am blown away, and not in the good way, that it was even suggested as a comparison.

 

Holy canoli.

 

The H or W is the one lying, not the AP. I'm quite sure many people having relationships we would now consider perfectly fine were accused of 'hurting and lying' to others throughout history. Lets add many other situations where people might have cause to keep a relationship secret, my ONLY point was that keeping a relationship secret is not, de facto, evidence that it is 'wrong'. If people are calling women, specifically women, who have relationships with married men 'homewreckers', and not the married men who are the ones breaking promises afterall, then I believe there is some serious basket-case sexism at play which is discriminatory.

[Mme. Chaucer]

 

My point was also that most marriages are ALREADY WRECKED before the OW comes into the picture, hence the affair. If the marriage is a happy one and a H or W chooses to have an affair, then that H or W is the homewrecker

 

SO WHAT???

 

If a marriage is in trouble, what kind of person takes advantage of that unhappiness?

 

I posted upthread about my friend who seems to be in a pattern of circling vulture-like over men who are in rough patches in their marriages. She's had some success in "inserting" herself, too. She thinks she's "helping" them, because their wives don't understand them!

 

I think it's horrible, I'm appalled with my friend and if she's successful in her current homewrecking expedition I might have to unfriend her. Not on Facebook, but in real life.

 

Those men (or their wives, or both) would be so much stronger and more self-respecting if they addressed the difficulties or failure of their marriage head on and sorted things out in an honest and stand-up way. That includes going forward with dissolving the marriage, if necessary. But just looking for a "soft place to fall" is so much the cowardly way.

 

 

 

It's not rocket science either, but thanks for your unwavering arrogance.

 

Really? I find it jaw-droppingly arrogant to encounter people who feel like they're doing nothing at all destructive by engaging in affairs, and who equate the struggles they experience in having their affairs with those of gay people in society.

 

I can't even believe it.

[Henni]

That is a very ignorant and offensive analogy.

 

Whether you believe this to be true or not, gay people do not choose to be gay.

 

Furthermore, gay people are just as capable of being "homewreckers," cheaters, in open relationships or monogamous as heteros are.

 

It's a question of integrity and character, not of sexual orientation.

 

 

 

Sorry, but people who choose betray and hide are not, and never have been "challenging a current norm" unless it's the "norm" of valuing honesty.

 

If folks who love to elevate and romanticize affair-having really wanted it to be "out of the closet," they would very simply engage in open relationships or polyamory - NOT have sex surreptitiously with somebody's husbands or wives. But that's not so sneakily fun, is it.

 

I don't think people chose to be gay, either. I don't think being gay is the same as being in an affair. I also know that gay people can be adulterers etc. This is all totally besides my point - which was - that hiding a relationship is not evidence of that relationship being 'wrong'. Perhaps it's hidden temporarily until the children get used to the idea of divorce, for example. Mud slinging 'homewrecker' terminology is no better than any other mud slinging terminology grown out of social norms and prejeudices, in my opinion. And that goes for whether the married people are straight, gay, bi, polygamous or whatever.

[Mme. Chaucer]

The H or W is the one lying, not the AP. I'm quite sure many people having relationships we would now consider perfectly fine were accused of 'hurting and lying' to others throughout history. Lets add many other situations where people might have cause to keep a relationship secret, my ONLY point was that keeping a relationship secret is not, de facto, evidence that it is 'wrong'.

 

Who said it is? Betraying and lying are usually considered "wrong." I'm getting the picture that some on this thread either don't believe this, or have retreated so deeply into a world of rationalization and denial that they've lost touch with the reasons honesty and accountability are normally elevated and valued.

 

I'm pretty countercultural, myself, and I am completely in favor of alternative relationships and families. That doesn't put a dent in the value I place on honesty and accountability. I don't even get your analogies. At all.

 

 

If people are calling women, specifically women, who have relationships with married men 'homewreckers', and not the married men who are the ones breaking promises afterall, then I believe there is some serious basket-case sexism at play which is discriminatory.

 

Has anyone at all absolved the cheating man of responsiblity in this whole thread? Well, maybe the OW here who are so staunchly defending their relationships. Because the husbands are so unhappy, what were the poor fellows to do, right?

[Henni]

SO WHAT???

 

If a marriage is in trouble, what kind of person takes advantage of that unhappiness?

 

'Takes advantage of'? really? Do you think OW are all running around looking for 'weak' men to take advantage of??????

 

I posted upthread about my friend who seems to be in a pattern of circling vulture-like over men who are in rough patches in their marriages. She's had some success in "inserting" herself, too. She thinks she's "helping" them, because their wives don't understand them!

 

I think it's horrible, I'm appalled with my friend and if she's successful in her current homewrecking expedition I might have to unfriend her. Not on Facebook, but in real life.

 

Your friend sounds like a horrible person and nothing at all like most OW.

 

Those men (or their wives, or both) would be so much stronger and more self-respecting if they addressed the difficulties or failure of their marriage head on and sorted things out in an honest and stand-up way. That includes going forward with dissolving the marriage, if necessary. But just looking for a "soft place to fall" is so much the cowardly way.

 

What about when the man or woman in a bad marriage falls in love with someone else, and begins dissolving their marriage? I think this is by far the most common scenario. Then keeping the new relationship secret until the previous marriage is over and done with, especially where kids are involved, is in order to NOT hurt others. Having the affair / leaving the marriage is often so as not to hurt themselves.

 

 

 

Really? I find it jaw-droppingly arrogant to encounter people who feel like they're doing nothing at all destructive by engaging in affairs, and who equate the struggles they experience in having their affairs with those of gay people in society.

 

I can't even believe it.

[Decorative]

If more people involved in affairs would truly understand affairs and the psychological implications of them- they would understand that the CHEATING SPOUSE is the problem, and the OW, if she knows of the marriage, is complicit in it.

 

I am so tired of hearing OW announce that the marriage was broken prior to the affair.

 

The only thing I can think of- is that- perhaps someday- they can be in a marriage with a spouse that cheats on them ( and for real, not in some of the not quite believable stories we hear sometimes)- and then maybe, finally they can drop this " the marriage was already wrecked" line of bullcrappery.

 

It is very rare in affair land that a "wrecked" marriage is what the problem is.

 

So yes. Play in someone's marriage- and perhaps you're not technically a Homewrecker. But you're an assistant foreman to the head of demolition.

[Henni]

Who said it is?

Awkward said that not going public with a relationship was evidence that the relationship was wrong. That's the post I was replying to.

 

Betraying and lying are usually considered "wrong." I'm getting the picture that some on this thread either don't believe this, or have retreated so deeply into a world of rationalization and denial that they've lost touch with the reasons honesty and accountability are normally elevated and valued.

 

I'm pretty countercultural, myself, and I am completely in favor of alternative relationships and families. That doesn't put a dent in the value I place on honesty and accountability. I don't even get your analogies. At all.

Yes I can see that you don't get my analogies, at all. I've tried to find better ones in other posts.

 

 

 

Has anyone at all absolved the cheating man of responsiblity in this whole thread? Well, maybe the OW here who are so staunchly defending their relationships. Because the husbands are so unhappy, what were the poor fellows to do, right?

 

No, not right. Wrong. The term 'homewrecker' applied to the OW DOES absolve the cheating H of responsibility - it literally puts the wrecking of the home on the OW, not the H. That's what this thread is about, right?

[Henni]

If more people involved in affairs would truly understand affairs and the psychological implications of them- they would understand that the CHEATING SPOUSE is the problem, and the OW, if she knows of the marriage, is complicit in it.

 

I am so tired of hearing OW announce that the marriage was broken prior to the affair.

 

The only thing I can think of- is that- perhaps someday- they can be in a marriage with a spouse that cheats on them ( and for real, not in some of the not quite believable stories we hear sometimes)- and then maybe, finally they can drop this " the marriage was already wrecked" line of bullcrappery.

 

It is very rare in affair land that a "wrecked" marriage is what the problem is.

 

So yes. Play in someone's marriage- and perhaps you're not technically a Homewrecker. But you're an assistant foreman to the head of demolition.

 

I've been on both sides of the fence. The one cheating on me did so because our relationship was over. I didn't know it was over before that happened, but I saw it was soon after, and that the cheating was just a catalyst for what might otherwise have been a prolongation of a relationship that should end.

[eleanorrigby]

No, not right. Wrong. The term 'homewrecker' applied to the OW DOES absolve the cheating H of responsibility - it literally puts the wrecking of the home on the OW, not the H. That's what this thread is about, right?

 

Not the way I see it, I said earlier in the thread when i think of the term homewrecker I think of a wrecking ball or battering ram being used by the MM to destroy the marriage.

 

(and I know that OW are real people and not inanimate objects)

[Mrs.Dee]

Who said it is? Betraying and lying are usually considered "wrong." I'm getting the picture that some on this thread either don't believe this, or have retreated so deeply into a world of rationalization and denial that they've lost touch with the reasons honesty and accountability are normally elevated and valued.

 

I'm pretty countercultural, myself, and I am completely in favor of alternative relationships and families. That doesn't put a dent in the value I place on honesty and accountability. I don't even get your analogies. At all.

 

 

 

 

Has anyone at all absolved the cheating man of responsiblity in this whole thread? Well, maybe the OW here who are so staunchly defending their relationships. Because the husbands are so unhappy, what were the poor fellows to do, right?

I see you stress the importance about beeing honest and accountable.

But in most affairs it is the married party that does not want the affair to get out in the open, is it not?

And it is also the married party that the spouse should be able to trust.

[Henni]

Not the way I see it, I said earlier in the thread when i think of the term homewrecker I think of a wrecking ball or battering ram being used by the MM to destroy the marriage.

 

(and I know that OW are real people and not inanimate objects)

 

The way you see it implies that the MM is just using the OW as a way to wreck his marriage. Often they actually have feelings for that OW and often they leave their marriages for the preferred new relationship. What you describe is just a lump of nothing getting knocked around.

[eleanorrigby]

The way you see it implies that the MM is just using the OW as a way to wreck his marriage. Often they actually have feelings for that OW and often they leave their marriages for the preferred new relationship. What you describe is just a lump of nothing getting knocked around.

 

It's a metaphor.

[Mrs.Dee]

I don't see many AP advocating letting the BS in on the existence of an A.

But isn't that more out of the concern for the married party?

Like the married party would get in trouble if anyone knew.