HermioneG Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 No one said there was zero attachment in an affair either . .. Your post asked why couldn't a BS just find someone else then like people tell OW to and I responded saying everyone in any relationship can find someone else; however, the nature and history and kinds of attachment in an affair or ordinary dating vs. marriage are different hence one is easier to leave than another. If you don't see that as a reasonable response... Mmkay! Yes. This. If someone is sitting in my car (my marriage), it seems illogical to me that a serious first answer would be to tell me to go find a new car because someone else is in my current one. That may be how it works in the end, if there is no reconciliation, but at the beginning? Really? ( I understand the MM is primarily at fault, but I find it profoundly irritating when the betrayed spouse is viewed as the one who needs to find a new partner. The other person is the interloper. Invited in, for sure, by the married partner, but still). 3 Link to post Share on other sites
William Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Folks, here's the gist of the discussion topic, which was moved here because the thread starter was not in an affair nor suspecting/aware of their spouse (they're divorced) being in an affair. It's a general discussion topic about this: Being the OW really leaves you on the outside of what is really going on in the married person's life and home. It's a huge leap of misguided faith to assume you are not being lied to repeatedly and often as being the OW. It's also very hard to check up on them when you are not allowed into their base of operations. Noting other moderators have deleted a substantial amount of postings due to being off-topic or inflammatory, I'm issuing this statement to explain that and direct members back to the topic at hand. Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Being the OW really leaves you on the outside of what is really going on in the married person's life and home. It's a huge leap of misguided faith to assume you are not being lied to repeatedly and often as being the OW. It's also very hard to check up on them when you are not allowed into their base of operations. . I think this is a dangerous assumption - that access to their "base of operations" is what gives you insight or knowledge. If that was the case, no BS would ever be caught unawares by their spouse's infidelity, and no OW would ever have any security in the A. Many people who experience MLC report feeling trapped and alienated in roles that bore little resemblance to their true selves, and that they felt heir spouse did not know *them*, only assumptions or projections. In cases where an A is co-morbid with a MLC it's probably equally true that the WS feels the BS "doesn't know them at all" even the the BS may feel (period to learning of the A) that they know everything here is to know about their WS. Access to the "base of operations" is no guarantor of access to knowledge. The only one/s who would know would be the WS and whomever the WS chose to share the info with. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted September 28, 2014 Share Posted September 28, 2014 Yes. This. If someone is sitting in my car (my marriage), An OW isn't sitting in *your* car, she's sitting in her BF's car. The fact that he also happens to be your H is incidental. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 An OW isn't sitting in *your* car, she's sitting in her BF's car. The fact that he also happens to be your H is incidental. ...by *his* invitation. Link to post Share on other sites
ComingInHot Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 An OW isn't sitting in *your* car, she's sitting in her BF's car. The fact that he also happens to be your H is incidental. and, "...by *his* invitation." I am asking this sincerely so no panty slinging please (even though the 'yours and his' should be an 'our' in a marriage I believe but that's my belief and matters not here right now* Is the above in quotes then the justification for the A being 'okay' in the minds of OW's? Seriously, I am just trying to understand. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
cocorico Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 and, "...by *his* invitation." I am asking this sincerely so no panty slinging please (even though the 'yours and his' should be an 'our' in a marriage I believe but that's my belief and matters not here right now* Is the above in quotes then the justification for the A being 'okay' in the minds of OW's? Seriously, I am just trying to understand. Perhaps. IDK, I have access only to my own mind, not to the minds of anyone else, and I don't think it was really an issue for me. To me, available is as available does, and if someone makes themselves available, then they're available IMO. But I can't speak for anyone else. Link to post Share on other sites
ComingInHot Posted September 29, 2014 Share Posted September 29, 2014 Thank you for your explanation. We will amicably disagree then?* Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts