"Homewrecker" - lazy terminology?

[Quiet Storm]

Perhaps the difference is that I grew up in a highly diverse, multi-cultural society where it was arrogant to assume that others valued what you valued and naive to expect others to treat you according to your priorities rather than their own.

 

Or perhaps it's a function of my profession and those I choose to surround myself with, that people are mindful of cultural, ethical and moral differences between groups and individuals, and don't automatically assume that others are, or ought to be, like they are.

 

Either way, I'm cool with it. I certainly would not hold a random stranger responsible should any weakness in my M lead to infidelity. It's our M, and our responsibility to nurture and defend it - not everyone else's.

 

I think respect for marriage is a value that is pretty universal, but what do I know? I live in a diverse state, with many cultures and religions. I am atheist...and no one I know thinks infidelity is an OK thing to do. The people I know that have cheated, look back on it in a negative light, as a "mistake".

 

It's not that I expect ALL people to respect marriage, but that is the standard that I set for myself and others. Of course I can't control what others think or do, but I would judge the people that have no respect for marriage in a negative manner. That judgement- that is the reason for terrms like "homewrecker".

 

Take racism for instance. Discriminating against someone because of their race is wrong, similar to the feelings most people have about infidelity. Personally, I hate racism, and it goes against my value system. My children are biracial, and I believe that racism is wrong. I know there are racists and people with prejudices. I am not naive enough to believe that everyone will think like me. However, my expecations for human behavior are that people should not be racist. That is my own personal standard. So although I cannot prevent racist people from inhabiting the earth, I can and do personally judge them for their behavior. I may think to myself "what a bigot", and choose not to associate with those people.

 

When it comes to infidelity, I am not naive enough to assume that all people will respect my marriage. OW is under no obligation to behave according to my, or society's values. But if my husband tells me that a woman hits on him and she knows that he's married, then that person has acted in ways that are beneath my standards, and I will judge her for that.

 

I think many OW would not care one bit that I judged her, and that is completely OK.

 

But if an OW does care about being judged, or called things like "homewrecker", then she may want to consider how her behavior is affecting others. The same way I would suggest a racist to consider their behavior.

 

So it's not an automatic assumption that all people will respect my marriage, or not judge my kids for their race. But if they behave in ways that are beneath my standards and expectations (which are reasonable according to most of society), then I have every right to judge that person. And the cheater/ or the racist, has every right not to care one iota about my personal judgement about them.

 

But, since most of society today shares similar expecations, negative terms like homewrecker or bigot may be used to describe that person. I think that just comes with the territory if you act in ways that go against the standards shared by MOST of society.

Edited April 3, 2013 by Quiet Storm

[KathyM]

Perhaps the difference is that I grew up in a highly diverse, multi-cultural society where it was arrogant to assume that others valued what you valued and naive to expect others to treat you according to your priorities rather than their own.

 

Or perhaps it's a function of my profession and those I choose to surround myself with, that people are mindful of cultural, ethical and moral differences between groups and individuals, and don't automatically assume that others are, or ought to be, like they are.

 

Either way, I'm cool with it. I certainly would not hold a random stranger responsible should any weakness in my M lead to infidelity. It's our M, and our responsibility to nurture and defend it - not everyone else's.

Well, I live in one of the most culturally diverse largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., Los Angeles. The vast majority of people in this country still do get married, expect monogamy from their spouse, and societal norms here provide that infidelity is wrong, and going after someone else's spouse is wrong. I can't imagine any country where people would get married, promise monogamy, but yet the culture has no respect for marital boundaries at all. Makes no sense. I've never heard of such a country where people get married, but society has no respect for it. All I can say is, I'm glad I'm living in a country where most people still do have respect for marital boundaries and are not inclined to treat those boundaries so callously. Respecting marital boundaries is still the cultural norm here, although, unfortunately, violating it is becoming more common than in the past.

[Got it]

Actually, it probably has to do with memes and FOO. When I was a teenager and in my early 20s I never pursued women that were dating others. If a woman was seeing someone that was enough for me to walk away and pay no attention. That is how I grew up.

 

To this day if i was single again I would never consider a woman that is multi dating. OTOH, others see nothing wrong with that. Many newbies post in the forum about their relationship with a married person and they somehow think they are having a normal relationship. The need must be so high that it over rides common sense.

 

Pierre, correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you say you have had more than one EA?

 

And I will beg to differ on your opinion on having had a EA/PA affair. It was pretty much like any "normal" relationship from my experience. I also understand that experiences vary like most things with humans and life.

 

I so detest absolutes, don't you?

[Spark1111]

I responded to the faulty assumption that all M people expect everyone else to be looking out for their Ms, rather than accepting that responsibility themselves.

 

So could it be home wrecker is reserved for those who live where marriage is assumed to respected?

 

Could be.

[Mme. Chaucer]

So could it be home wrecker is reserved for those who live where marriage is assumed to respected?

 

From time to time, people post about how monogamous marriage is not a big deal where they live.

 

I am pretty well traveled and educated, and I can't imagine where these realms might be. I realize that in many latin countries the concept of having a "mistress" or a "lover" is not outlandish, but still, the bond of matrimony is super entrenched in the cultures. And in some scandinavian countries the morality is not necessarily rigid - but that promotes openness, not cheating.

 

Can anybody explain where these cultures that traditionally have monogamous marriages but where they're not respected are?

[Spark1111]

From time to time, people post about how monogamous marriage is not a big deal where they live.

 

I am pretty well traveled and educated, and I can't imagine where these realms might be. I realize that in many latin countries the concept of having a "mistress" or a "lover" is not outlandish, but still, the bond of matrimony is super entrenched in the cultures. And in some scandinavian countries the morality is not necessarily rigid - but that promotes openness, not cheating.

 

Can anybody explain where these cultures that traditionally have monogamous marriages but where they're not respected are?

 

I live 50 miles from the most culturally and ethnically diverse city in the world, and as far as I know and based on all the papers I read daily, yes, marriage and monogamy is to be respected, and often heinous violence and reputation-destroying scandal erupts when it is not.

 

So, idk either.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Regarding "homewrecker": I have a pretty good friend who I think qualifies. She is fairly recently divorced, and from my perspective has a whole lot of rage and hurt about her own awful marriage and how it ended.

 

Since her divorce, the ONLY men she's been interested in have been married ones, including husbands of friends. She says, "I'm a magnet," but she's actually more of a predator. She is super into the idea that "his wife doesn't understand him" and that she is "helping" him.

 

She is not super sexy or a femme fatale, not at all. She's more like a sporty soccer mom type. She is not universally attractive, though she's cute. She seems unconscious of what she is doing to get herself into these situations, but I think I can see from an outside perspective. She has a competitive need to assuage her hurt self esteem by "winning" a man who's not free. She feels better if she believes she can offer him something superior to what he's getting from his wife. She does only hone in on guys who are in some marital difficulties. She gets herself into situations with these men that NONE of the other women in our group of friends would - because we have big boundaries about this matter, especially among friends.

 

Once she gets involved, she inserts a whole other dynamic into the troubled marriage and really makes it impossible for the couple to either work through their stuff or decide consciously to say goodbye.

 

Of course, the husband is culpable, but she has her motives … and she's acting upon them.

 

It's getting to the point where I'm considering stopping our friendship, especially when I see her moving in on a married member of our mutual social circle.

 

I don't think it's intentional, but I do think she is a homewrecker.

 

So far, once the wreckage has occurred, she's not ended up with the men.

 

P.S. She lives in Idaho. Is this one of those spots where marriage is not traditionally respected?

[Decorative]

Regarding "homewrecker": I have a pretty good friend who I think qualifies. She is fairly recently divorced, and from my perspective has a whole lot of rage and hurt about her own awful marriage and how it ended.

 

Since her divorce, the ONLY men she's been interested in have been married ones, including husbands of friends. She says, "I'm a magnet," but she's actually more of a predator. She is super into the idea that "his wife doesn't understand him" and that she is "helping" him.

 

She is not super sexy or a femme fatale, not at all. She's more like a sporty soccer mom type. She is not universally attractive, though she's cute. She seems unconscious of what she is doing to get herself into these situations, but I think I can see from an outside perspective. She has a competitive need to assuage her hurt self esteem by "winning" a man who's not free. She feels better if she believes she can offer him something superior to what he's getting from his wife. She does only hone in on guys who are in some marital difficulties. She gets herself into situations with these men that NONE of the other women in our group of friends would - because we have big boundaries about this matter, especially among friends.

 

Once she gets involved, she inserts a whole other dynamic into the troubled marriage and really makes it impossible for the couple to either work through their stuff or decide consciously to say goodbye.

 

Of course, the husband is culpable, but she has her motives … and she's acting upon them.

 

It's getting to the point where I'm considering stopping our friendship, especially when I see her moving in on a married member of our mutual social circle.

 

I don't think it's intentional, but I do think she is a homewrecker.

 

So far, once the wreckage has occurred, she's not ended up with the men.

 

P.S. She lives in Idaho. Is this one of those spots where marriage is not traditionally respected?

 

I was actually going to ask where you live. The woman we outed a we months ago in my town? Same story, same situation. Well- except she had multiple affairs before her marriage ended. And we outed her on what we now know was her third married man post divorce.

 

We live in the Midwest, but not Idaho. LOL

Edited April 4, 2013 by Decorative

[Silly_Girl]

So could it be home wrecker is reserved for those who live where marriage is assumed to respected?

 

Could be.

 

So it should be 2 people being referred to by that term then, obviously. Not one. Hence, my OP.

[Spark1111]

So it should be 2 people being referred to by that term then, obviously. Not one. Hence, my OP.

 

I've heard the term used for both.

 

I've also heard other men say of a male philanderer, "He needs a good beating," and a whole slew of vile names.

 

Homewrecker, in comparison, seems tame to me.

 

I personally prefer Spider Women as in Black Spiders; poisonous, and they destroy and eat after mating.

 

Do you find that more or less offensive than Homewrecker?

[SidLyon]

We're staying with friends in the states at the moment and we had sort of an all day family/friends dinner for Easter.

 

One of our dinner companions was absolutely lovely and we'd been talking with her and her husband on and off for hours and she mentioned a colleague they refer to as 'the homewrecker'.

 

Naturally my ears prick up and I ask what the lady has done to merit such a title. She had a relationship with a committed person and wasn't remorseful. So I ask how that makes her a 'homewrecker'. Did she infiltrate the family home? Befriend the couple by stealth and then set them against one another? Did she tie up her target and drug-rape? What then?

 

I put it that maybe she was someone who was single and a committed person chose to step out on their other half, and that maybe the girls at work just didn't like this person and chose it as a stick to beat her with.

 

The husband nodded animatedly. Yes, they don't like her, he says. And yes, the affair is not her responsibility, but because they like the couple they never put the blame on the person cheating.

 

Two thoughts. Firstly, how very unfair! Secondly, I have never, ever heard the term 'homewrecker' used in the UK.

 

When a couple are married they generally share a family and a home. To me the term "homewrecker" seems to be quite an apt term for a person, outside the marriage/home who inserts themself into somebody else's marriage. It's irrelevant who invited who to do what, and whether or not the marriage breaks up. And yes I agree that it's an equally apt description for the WS too.

 

No doubt there may be exceptions but so far I haven't noticed any either IRL or here on LS, although I've seen a few that claim there is something special about their situation.

 

I have heard the term in the UK and Australia and I have lived in both places.

[Silly_Girl]

I've heard the term used for both.

 

I've also heard other men say of a male philanderer, "He needs a good beating," and a whole slew of vile names.

 

Homewrecker, in comparison, seems tame to me.

 

I personally prefer Spider Women as in Black Spiders; poisonous, and they destroy and eat after mating.

 

Do you find that more or less offensive than Homewrecker?

 

What I find offensive is that blame and labels are stuck to the only party who did not make vows to prioritise the relationship and promise to stay true to the betrayed spouse.

[Silly_Girl]

When a couple are married they generally share a family and a home. To me the term "homewrecker" seems to be quite an apt term for a person, outside the marriage/home who inserts themself into somebody else's marriage. It's irrelevant who invited who to do what, and whether or not the marriage breaks up. And yes I agree that it's an equally apt description for the WS too.

 

No doubt there may be exceptions but so far I haven't noticed any either IRL or here on LS, although I've seen a few that claim there is something special about their situation.

 

I have heard the term in the UK and Australia and I have lived in both places.

 

I could try and insert myself in to anyone of a number of marriages. If I get a short shrift every time there can be zero homewrecking going on.

 

Seems to me, reading this thread, there's a lot of desire to blame someone other than the person who really should be bearing the brunt. Maybe we see it how we want to see it, but I'll always put the blame on the person who was cheating. I did it when I was cheated on, and I did it when I was the one someone was cheating with.

[Silly_Girl]

Tons of EAs, but I should probably call them intimate friendships. More, importantly, I never lost my mind or consider them important. As a young man I loved to flirt and many women were receptive. I had a knack about getting them to tell me about their intimacy. I don't fall in love very easily and I never, not in a million years would consider them relationship material.

 

If you read the forum you will find that most of the EMR relationships differ from open relationships.

 

For someone who's had countless affairs you're extremely judgemental. In my book that makes you a hypocrite and as a result I just can't take your posts seriously any more.

[whichwayisup]

There's a fine line between strong opinion and judgement. Depends on one's frame of mind and how they interpret it.

 

People change and not all want to remember their time as an MM, MW, OW or OM. They may not look back at it with fond memories and are ashamed, so just because Pierre or anybody else is out of affairs doesn't mean they aren't entitled to their opinion, even if some agree.

[Silly_Girl]

Are you using the judgmental card?

 

Why do you fear to be judged?

 

Yes, I am for from perfect. I worked in an industry where women out numbered men. I was immature and had dated very little before marriage. So I had inappropriate friendships with married female co-workers all the time. In retrospect, I know why I am this way. It feels good, but it is nothing more than looking for validation. Luckily, there was no need from my part to go any further. I am a not very good at telling lies or being deceitful.

 

What is your problem with judgment? I don't understand that.

 

I know how much you enjoy twisting others' words

 

In respect of my post, it's simple: Taking the moral high ground isn't terribly attractive at the best of times though sometimes you have to take it on the chin, but as there is no basis for you to do so it's merely laughable. It becomes jester-like.

[Silly_Girl]

There's a fine line between strong opinion and judgement. Depends on one's frame of mind and how they interpret it.

 

People change and not all want to remember their time as an MM, MW, OW or OM. They may not look back at it with fond memories and are ashamed, so just because Pierre or anybody else is out of affairs doesn't mean they aren't entitled to their opinion, even if some agree.

 

Some people offer an opinion, others are disdainful, critical and sit in judgement.

[Spark1111]

What I find offensive is that blame and labels are stuck to the only party who did not make vows to prioritise the relationship and promise to stay true to the betrayed spouse.

 

 

I know. but many people do not feel as you do. They see devastated wives and destroyed children and they do judge those they perceive as not having strong enough boundaries, whether for love or sex, to not intrude and wreck the home.

 

When applied to a woman, is it sexist? Yes, it is. but men are often perceived as hound dogs who need to be brought to heel, waaay too easy to snare by flirting, seduction, ego validation,little boys, etc., and the woman who does not respect the wife and family IS often judged more harshly.

 

I believe many do hold women to a higher moral standard, a sisterhood of women that will not engage a married man and destroy his wife and family because the assumption is women do not think as often with their little heads as men are want to do and are therefore better able to resist temptation, say no, and walk away.

 

is it fair? of course not. but who said life is fair?

[Silly_Girl]

I may judge a point of view. I judge the words on the computer screen. I look at the differences in philosophy and points of view and take a position.

 

I don't know who writes the words. It could be anyone, that is not important. The only thing we can do is read the sentences.

 

What is your issue with being judged?

 

I can only judge the words. I cannot judge you because I don't know you. You could be a man or a woman.

 

More importantly why personal attacks?

 

You call your opinion on many posters when you see fit. If I do the same that should be fine.

[Silly_Girl]

I know. but many people do not feel as you do. They see devastated wives and destroyed children and they do judge those they perceive as not having strong enough boundaries, whether for love or sex, to not intrude and wreck the home.

 

So that would be the WS, surely? This is what I cannot grasp. Why blame the secondary party more? What am I missing here?

 

When applied to a woman, is it sexist? Yes, it is. but men are often perceived as hound dogs who need to be brought to heel, waaay too easy to snare by flirting, seduction, ego validation,little boys, etc., and the woman who does not respect the wife and family IS often judged more harshly.

 

I believe many do hold women to a higher moral standard, a sisterhood of women that will not engage a married man and destroy his wife and family because the assumption is women do not think as often with their little heads as men are want to do and are therefore better able to resist temptation, say no, and walk away.

 

is it fair? of course not. but who said life is fair?

 

I don't buy in to gender bull where this is concerned. Or anything else for that matter. My question is not 'why blame the woman?'. My question is 'why not blame the person who cheated on you?'.

[underwater2010]

So that would be the WS, surely? This is what I cannot grasp. Why blame the secondary party more? What am I missing here?

 

 

 

I don't buy in to gender bull where this is concerned. Or anything else for that matter. My question is not 'why blame the woman?'. My question is 'why not blame the person who cheated on you?'.

Since you asked, and it seems to be on topic. WE DO BLAME THE WS. They are also part of the "homewrecker" terminology.

 

It belongs to both female and male.

 

And both bare the blame, as long as both people knew there was a marriage involved.

[Silly_Girl]

Since you asked, and it seems to be on topic. WE DO BLAME THE WS. They are also part of the "homewrecker" terminology.

 

It belongs to both female and male.

 

And both bare the blame, as long as both people knew there was a marriage involved.

 

You may, and I definitely do, but others seem happy to blame someone else first.

[underwater2010]

You may, and I definitely do, but others seem happy to blame someone else first.

That is just it. I don't think you realize how much blame is placed on the WS. I kindly recommend that you checkout the evil BS websites that are mentioned periodically throughout this board. You will find out just how blame and pain comes from the WS well before our eyes become focused on the OW/MOW/OM/MOM.

 

I personally raised a hand to my FWH (evil I know). Where I probably would have looked at his MOW with pity (which to me is worse than disgust).

[sweet_pea]

So that would be the WS, surely? This is what I cannot grasp. Why blame the secondary party more? What am I missing here?

 

 

 

I don't buy in to gender bull where this is concerned. Or anything else for that matter. My question is not 'why blame the woman?'. My question is 'why not blame the person who cheated on you?'.

 

Who has blamed the secondary person more? Just because the secondary person gets called out for their role in an affair does not mean they are blamed more.

[SidLyon]

I could try and insert myself in to anyone of a number of marriages. If I get a short shrift every time there can be zero homewrecking going on.

 

Seems to me, reading this thread, there's a lot of desire to blame someone other than the person who really should be bearing the brunt. Maybe we see it how we want to see it, but I'll always put the blame on the person who was cheating. I did it when I was cheated on, and I did it when I was the one someone was cheating with.

 

Well you did ask whether it was just lazy terminology. I happen to think it's a short-cut way of saying something, that happens to be quite appropriate in the circumstances. Although I agree the term "homewrecker" applies also to the WS.

 

In my case the blame for betraying me and our children, breaking his promises and failing to keep his commitments rests squarely with my fWH. On the other hand the OW gets all the blame for inserting herself into my marriage, without my knowledge and for coming into my home to screw my husband (irrespective that she may have felt "invited" - I certainly didn't invite her into my marriage and family home).

 

Sounds like you believe you had a blameless OW when your H cheated. That must have been so painful. I know it would have been very difficult for me had I felt she was blameless except perhaps if she was an unknowing OW.