Timeline

[66Charger]

Only a couple of men proffered an opinion, denying their own gender bias, justifying its usefulness to pump up a deflated WH, even claiming objectivity in their observations of its non-existence on LS.

 

I said something then but only poor zinger responded with a bewildered (and misplaced) apology.

 

Why is our opinion gender biased, because we dont agree with you? I dont think anyone wrote it was nonexistent, just not prevalent.. Nor was it said to pump up the BH.

 

There are just as many "men are pigs" and misandry as there is misogynistic statements. (I dont recall the outrage for that)

 

Whats worse is the hypocrisy.

 

Yes, sometimes words are said that maybe should not and more than zinger apologized. But to say that misogyny is prevelant here is clearly not true. In my humble, gender biased opinion

Edited December 1, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
redacted personal attack ~6

[merrmeade]

Only a couple of men proffered an opinion, denying their own gender bias, justifying its usefulness to pump up a deflated WH, even claiming objectivity in their observations of its non-existence on LS.

 

I said something then but only poor zinger responded with a bewildered (and misplaced) apology.

 

Why is our opinion gender biased, because we dont agree with you? I dont think anyone wrote it was nonexistent, just not prevalent.. Nor was it said to pump up the BH.

 

There are just as many "men are pigs" and misandry as there is misogynistic statements. (I dont recall the outrage for that)

 

Whats worse is the hypocrisy.

 

Yes, sometimes words are said that maybe should not and more than zinger apologized. But to say that misogyny is prevelant here is clearly not true. In my humble, gender biased opinion

 

Pfffft. Well, and I certainly never thought I'd align myself there either!

 

66, this is not to say I'm not grateful for the quick, moving humanity that you've shown me and countless other posters or appreciate the readiness with which you apologize if you discover you've inadvertently offended someone. I hope I would do the same. But - whether it's you or someone else - sometimes the language in an impassioned moment of solidarity with a fellow BH is strong and unifying because it uses a gender-biased expletive.

 

This reminds me a little of my father. He was the most noble, kind champion of decency and generosity I've ever known. He voted liberal with pride and championed the causes of minorities. He would never have called himself a racist or sexist - but he used racist and sexist language all the time and it was offensive to women and people of color! For example, his caretakers all concurred about this after he died. HBut h didn't realize it and everybody overlooked it because he was such a funny, lovable old man. That's what you do in small towns where everybody knows each other.

 

And that's what we tend to do in this forum when we know and appreciate the strengths and forgive the slips because of the overall humanity and insight we share.

 

So, yes, I need to show examples, and I will.

 

You're right, I haven't noticed the misandry, but I can and will give you examples from pages and pages of good ol' boy exclusivity, if not misogyny.

Edited December 1, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
edited quote ~6

[Krashi]

So I've been sitting on this comment for a day, but fellini's bold assertions are important and timely and deserve more attention—at least a salute and a thank you for even tackling the misogynistic undertones in some of the threads. The responses were disappointing, but anyway it’s out there. Maybe his treatment was too heady. Maybe too threatening. Only a couple of men proffered an opinion, denying their own gender bias, justifying its usefulness to pump up a deflated WH, even claiming objectivity in their observations of its non-existence on LS.

 

This post was only marginally relevant to Krashi’s thread, so I suspect f’s been waiting for the right moment to say it. Regardless, I agree the problem is too important to ignore as it ultimately marginalizes me as well as all women, not just the individual ‘c-nts’ targeted. By ignoring or avoiding it, we’re allowing it to perpetuate.

 

This issue has been bothering me since the awful female-bashing that peppered the zinger, BigDaddy and Hero threads. I said something then but only poor zinger responded with a bewildered (and misplaced) apology. It wasn't zinger. I simply left the thread unable to relate to the impassioned diatribe. More recently, I posted -

- which was "liked" by 15 people. That's not a non-issue.

 

At such times, even betrayed wives can feel marginalized. And I don’t think I’m the only XX-chromosome person that feels it. It’s important to me and to other members of my sex who come here for support and shared experience. We should not feel excluded or disrespected.

 

You will finď a fair bit of misandry on some betrayed women's threads, I expect. Men will be called dicks and accused of thinking with them etc. It cuts oth ways.

[understand50]

Pfffft. Well, and I certainly never thought I'd align myself there either!

 

66, this is not to say I'm not grateful for the quick, moving humanity that you've shown me and countless other posters or appreciate the readiness with which you apologize if you discover you've inadvertently offended someone. I hope I would do the same. But - whether it's you or someone else - sometimes the language in an impassioned moment of solidarity with a fellow BH is strong and unifying because it uses a gender-biased expletive.

 

This reminds me a little of my father. He was the most noble, kind champion of decency and generosity I've ever known. He voted liberal with pride and championed the causes of minorities. He would never have called himself a racist or sexist - but he used racist and sexist language all the time and it was offensive to women and people of color! For example, his caretakers all concurred about this after he died. HBut h didn't realize it and everybody overlooked it because he was such a funny, lovable old man. That's what you do in small towns where everybody knows each other.

 

And that's what we tend to do in this forum when we know and appreciate the strengths and forgive the slips because of the overall humanity and insight we share.

 

So, yes, I need to show examples, and I will.

 

You're right, I haven't noticed the misandry, but I can and will give you examples from pages and pages of good ol' boy exclusivity, if not misogyny.

 

All,

 

Again, posting on someone else issues can be a mine field. You bring your own pain and hurt, and along with your anger sometimes. I think my rules, on 1) Addressing the OP questions, 2) Placing Value on the other sides arguments 3) Respecting the OP chooses, and 4) Doing your best to not disrespect anyone. Now I am not a paragon, but beating down a WS, or BS is counter productive. In Very Broken Man's case, Anne, from what VBM was writing was doing everything she could to make amends. Attacking her did not help VBM, or move the conversation along. Look, at some point we must accept that some WS are doing the right thing, and it is up to the BS to decide if they can accept the remorse and good behavior is happening.

 

We have has WS here that have been brave enough to share their story, Mrs J Adams, Newerk, are and were badly treated. I do not hold with this. It is up to their spouses to decide if reconciliation is still worth it at this time. The one example, where the OP got beat up and some did not work on her questions, and I thought was the worst, was BrightStar, who came here right after her ONS, in terror, and pain trying to figure out how to tell her B/F what she had done, and after she fessed up, how to go about, it there was chance, to reconcile with him. Last we heard, she and her B/F were together and trying to work things out. Do not know if they will make it, but she needed help, and calling her and reminding her at all time that she was worthless for what she did was not productive.

 

Remorseful Tab's threads hit a nerve, as the idea that a affair in the past, gives another full rights to divorce at anytime, I think is wrong. The Law in England agrees, as they have to wait the two years to divorce. Many posters just stuck on her affair, and did not try and answer her question. "How can I keep my family, marriage and husband". She was reminded over and over again, that she should not be surprised, or in some case even try, as she was a cheater and deserved this. The idea that my Wife's, then G/F, ONS gives me a get out of jail card for life is ludicrous. At some point in reconciliation, forgiveness become absolute. Did not say you should forget what they did, just that once it has been dealt with, you should not use it to beat them up. I do not think you will stay together long if you do, and the fault will be on you.

 

Lastly, I have found that some poster do not read the whole post, or they inject information that never happened. In VBM case, there were several time where a "debate" would erupt on some comment, and not be factual from what VBM had written. We must stick to the facts as reported by the OP and not make up stuff.

 

Sometimes we need to stop, and think what the OP is asking for, and what they may need. Sometime there is nothing to offer except a "It not that bad, life will get better". We should never use a OP story to re fight are own life's choices.

 

My two cents

[drifter777]

All,

 

Again, posting on someone else issues can be a mine field. You bring your own pain and hurt, and along with your anger sometimes. I think my rules, on 1) Addressing the OP questions, 2) Placing Value on the other sides arguments 3) Respecting the OP chooses, and 4) Doing your best to not disrespect anyone.

 

Your rules work for you - great. Sharing them as rules of thumb is one thing but they might not fit how other poster's see their role on this forum.

Sometimes we need to stop, and think what the OP is asking for, and what they may need. Sometime there is nothing to offer except a "It not that bad, life will get better". We should never use a OP story to re fight are own life's choices.

 

My two cents

 

Admonishing & warning a BH about things like "she's still lying" comes from a place of personal experience and education for many of us. Telling him to prepare for more truths to come trickling out is important advice. When they are discovered they are devastating but BH can remember being told by others that they happen nearly all the time and maybe not feel so alone in his pain.

 

I wouldn't use VBM's story as a reference to other poster's behavior. Some thought his story was a fairy tale. Those people often posted radical things for effect & not for human consumption. Just sayin'

[fellini]

 

I wouldn't use VBM's story as a reference to other poster's behavior. Some thought his story was a fairy tale. Those people often posted radical things for effect & not for human consumption. Just sayin'

 

 

Actually almost every single story of betrayal in the last 6 months has had posters claim the OP to be a troll. Including Zinger, including Hero...

 

People say things they ought not to say, regardless of whether they believe the thread or not.

[sandylee1]

So many rejoinders, so little time. Let it stand in its pristine gentility. Can't come close to anything as funny as this.

 

I kind of understand your restraint: Affairs are so off-the-chart horrendous, might as well go the opposite direction of implied understatement? No offense, sl - couldn't resist.

 

No offence taken Mermeade.

 

It's the English in me saying that..... stiff upper lip and all that jazz.

[drifter777]

Remorseful Tab's threads hit a nerve, as the idea that a affair in the past, gives another full rights to divorce at anytime, I think is wrong. The Law in England agrees, as they have to wait the two years to divorce.

 

It looks like I'm picking on you but, really, I'm not.

 

To my way of thinking, either spouse is free to divorce at any time for any reason. If a wife is divorcing her husband and he asks why she might say "you won't pick up your socks" and that's that. So if she says "I can't pretend that I forgive you for your affair 10 years ago one more minute. Goodbye" - what's the difference. A spouses right to divorce because of a past affair is just that; their right.

 

The law in England doesn't make sense to my way of thinking, but then marriage is just a piece of paper to me. It's the commitment that makes a marriage. Anyway, I wonder if the mandatory two year separation period isn't just another kind of divorce. Since this is actually a legal separation and the couple cannot live (or have sex) during that time then I don't know how it is different from an American divorce.

[Krashi]

Oh dear. Her parents were hoping she'd changed, but TBH if you have such low morals to be an OW ..... cheating yourself would be no big deal. I like it when parents can be honest and not defend blindly.

 

You are indeed correct. .. people who cheat have no conscience...more so the long term affairs. I know some people after a few weeks just can't carry on with the affair or those who have ONS... they aren't comfortable with it.

 

The LTAs are a whole different ball game. It takes away another person's choice to be with a person who truly loves and respects them.....and can be faithful to them. It's more than selfish that you are deceived about their character and end up having a family with prolific cheaters. I often wonder how they think the sun shines out of their APs backside, when they have both shown such fraudulent traits.

 

 

I honestly feel if fidelity is a problem for them...they should remain single or go on open relationship websites to find a partner that suits them.

 

How long was her affair?

 

I believe 18 months or so.

[Krashi]

Actually almost every single story of betrayal in the last 6 months has had posters claim the OP to be a troll. Including Zinger, including Hero...

 

People say things they ought not to say, regardless of whether they believe the thread or not.

 

Don't be so hard on yourself,fellini. Sure, you have been a little off topic at time and/or miscontrued things. But, do not beat yourself up over it. How patriarchy theory and misogyny got injected into this topic is beyond me.

[Krashi]

No offence taken Mermeade.

 

It's the English in me saying that..... stiff upper lip and all that jazz.

 

Pip, pip, Cheerio.

[understand50]

It looks like I'm picking on you but, really, I'm not.

 

To my way of thinking, either spouse is free to divorce at any time for any reason. If a wife is divorcing her husband and he asks why she might say "you won't pick up your socks" and that's that. So if she says "I can't pretend that I forgive you for your affair 10 years ago one more minute. Goodbye" - what's the difference. A spouses right to divorce because of a past affair is just that; their right.

 

The law in England doesn't make sense to my way of thinking, but then marriage is just a piece of paper to me. It's the commitment that makes a marriage. Anyway, I wonder if the mandatory two year separation period isn't just another kind of divorce. Since this is actually a legal separation and the couple cannot live (or have sex) during that time then I don't know how it is different from an American divorce.

 

No worries drifter.

 

No the law is set up in England to allow a fast divorce if one of the parties have been unfaithful or for other reasons. It takes longer, if you just need to split up. You must separate, and not have sex. But it looks like the English law, does not give a "for all time" exception, if one of the parties have been unfaithful in the past. So.... under the laws of England, you need to divorce close to when the infidelity happened. Or in "hot" blood. (if any Solicitor in England can set me straight, I would love to hear it)

[fellini]

Don't be so hard on yourself,fellini. Sure, you have been a little off topic at time and/or miscontrued things. But, do not beat yourself up over it. How patriarchy theory and misogyny got injected into this topic is beyond me.

 

Well if it is beyond you, perhaps responding makes no sense.

Although you did make 4 or 5 posts on the topic...

 

The short answer would be in the same way the topic got "injected" with British divorce law. Or the same way the topic got "injected" with a discussion of the legitimacy and abuse of posters on old threads.

 

But the real answer is in the post, which follows Friskyone4u introducing the idea that women's infidelity is different from men, and later taken up by Drifter.

 

So to connect the dots - presumably you have been here for 2 weeks, others among us more than 2 years, so we bring this experience of threads with us:

 

Men have a more firm stand against women in terms of the concept "deal breaker" than women do in LS. Men who attempt to discuss reconciliation with their WW's are more often than not going to be attacked for not "having the balls", being a complete "dormat", etc. etc. etc. and simultaneously their threads are "injected" with sperm, penis, and vagina talk. Sometimes all in one sentence.

 

The effect of this in the thread is to enrage and provoke a BH to end any hopes or desires of R.

 

So my point is very simple: Men are expected to END their marriages upon discovery of an A. And more often than not "deal breaker" is all that is needed to get there.

 

The threads about BW's focus more on the possibility of whether there is hope or room to salvage the marriage.

 

Experience has shown that when a woman comes to LS as a BW, it is more likely that the thread will be treated with more complexity and sensitivity to her needs if she is reluctant to end her marriage. The thread will be experience fewer if any "injections" that are the female equivalent of "grow a set of balls" and "call you lawyer yesterday". In fact, many if not most of the more aggressive posters never show up on threads to with with a BW.

 

If you don't believe this, that's fine. But that is how I have experienced the last 2 years of this side of the site. I rarely venture into the OM/OW threads, and less so to engage.

Edited December 2, 2015 by fellini

[sandylee1]

Our UK laws want people to take marriage very seriously and not get divorced on a whim or at the drop of a hat. No drive through divorces.

 

2 years gives time to show that you've thought it through and absolutely want to go through with it.

 

If infidelity is a dealbreaker... then the view is you would leave close to or immediately after discovery. The law doesn't take into account the trauma or PTSD you face or the struggles with reconciliation. However, if you discover additional facts (trickle truth ) after R, you can still cite infidelity as grounds and submit your evidence.

 

For example if you reconcile with your husband post infidelity....... but later discover there was a child born from his affair - that you were not aware of at the time.... you can cite infidelity.

[Krashi]

Well if it is beyond you, perhaps responding makes no sense.

Although you did make 4 or 5 posts on the topic...

 

The short answer would be in the same way the topic got "injected" with British divorce law. Or the same way the topic got "injected" with a discussion of the legitimacy and abuse of posters on old threads.

 

But the real answer is in the post, which follows Friskyone4u introducing the idea that women's infidelity is different from men, and later taken up by Drifter.

 

So to connect the dots - presumably you have been here for 2 weeks, others among us more than 2 years, so we bring this experience of threads with us:

 

Men have a more firm stand against women in terms of the concept "deal breaker" than women do in LS. Men who attempt to discuss reconciliation with their WW's are more often than not going to be attacked for not "having the balls", being a complete "dormat", etc. etc. etc. and simultaneously their threads are "injected" with sperm, penis, and vagina talk. Sometimes all in one sentence.

 

The effect of this in the thread is to enrage and provoke a BH to end any hopes or desires of R.

 

So my point is very simple: Men are expected to END their marriages upon discovery of an A. And more often than not "deal breaker" is all that is needed to get there.

 

The threads about BW's focus more on the possibility of whether there is hope or room to salvage the marriage.

 

Experience has shown that when a woman comes to LS as a BW, it is more likely that the thread will be treated with more complexity and sensitivity to her needs if she is reluctant to end her marriage. The thread will be experience fewer if any "injections" that are the female equivalent of "grow a set of balls" and "call you lawyer yesterday". In fact, many if not most of the more aggressive posters never show up on threads to with with a BW.

 

If you don't believe this, that's fine. But that is how I have experienced the last 2 years of this side of the site. I rarely venture into the OM/OW threads, and less so to engage.

 

Yes, this seems inaccurate to me.

[fellini]

What this means then, is that British law believes people to be completely capable of deciding with whom they wish to make a decision to spend "the rest of their lives with" - which is strange when you think about it, that there is no law that requires a couple to live together for 2 years before they tie the knot.

 

But then this same couple, who have lived together and now knows that they are not compatible for whatever reason, are asked to wait 2 years to officially end what clearly did not work. Seems very backwards to me.

 

 

 

Our UK laws want people to take marriage very seriously and not get divorced on a whim or at the drop of a hat. No drive through divorces.

 

2 years gives time to show that you've thought it through and absolutely want to go through with it.

 

If infidelity is a dealbreaker... then the view is you would leave close to or immediately after discovery. The law doesn't take into account the trauma or PTSD you face or the struggles with reconciliation. However, if you discover additional facts (trickle truth ) after R, you can still cite infidelity as grounds and submit your evidence.

 

For example if you reconcile with your husband post infidelity....... but later discover there was a child born from his affair - that you were not aware of at the time.... you can cite infidelity.

[fellini]

 

For example if you reconcile with your husband post infidelity....... but later discover there was a child born from his affair - that you were not aware of at the time.... you can cite infidelity.

 

 

From an actual case I know of in Canada, which at one time had the two year rule (although if one of the partners admitted in "open court" that infidelity was involved, the 2 year rule was waived), lawyers who defend WH's, especially, who "move out" or are "thrown out" because of their infidelity, are encouraged to try to convince their BW's to allow them back in the house, at least for one sleep, and even encouraged to have a sexual encounter with them, in order to "erase" the infidelity card. The claim is that having allowed the WH back in, and sleeping with him, he can then walk away and simply declare "irreconcilable differences". Whether a judge will buy it or not, is not the point, the point is that is what they are encouraged to do in order to improve their chances in the financial settlement.

[NewLeaf512]

No worries drifter.

 

No the law is set up in England to allow a fast divorce if one of the parties have been unfaithful or for other reasons. It takes longer, if you just need to split up. You must separate, and not have sex. But it looks like the English law, does not give a "for all time" exception, if one of the parties have been unfaithful in the past. So.... under the laws of England, you need to divorce close to when the infidelity happened. Or in "hot" blood. (if any Solicitor in England can set me straight, I would love to hear it)

 

The law simply stated: if you have sexual relations with your spouse after they have committed adultery is a legal sign the adultery has been forgiven and it is then disqualified as grounds in a divorce action.

 

I'm unclear on which point of law to which you refer that allows for the provision of a speedy divorce in the UK

[NewLeaf512]

Our UK laws want people to take marriage very seriously and not get divorced on a whim or at the drop of a hat. No drive through divorces.

 

2 years gives time to show that you've thought it through and absolutely want to go through with it.

 

If infidelity is a dealbreaker... then the view is you would leave close to or immediately after discovery. The law doesn't take into account the trauma or PTSD you face or the struggles with reconciliation. However, if you discover additional facts (trickle truth ) after R, you can still cite infidelity as grounds and submit your evidence.

 

For example if you reconcile with your husband post infidelity....... but later discover there was a child born from his affair - that you were not aware of at the time.... you can cite infidelity.

 

This is substantively correct.

 

The proviso regarding a child resulting from an affair is a sticky wicket legally in that the mother of a minor child who is presumed to be the child of a WH must give consent to a paternity review or give evidence that WH is in fact the Father. If the mother of the minor child isn't interested in participating in the divorce action she can not be compelled to do so. Therefore no grounds could be considered.

[Krashi]

The law simply stated: if you have sexual relations with your spouse after they have committed adultery is a legal sign the adultery has been forgiven and it is then disqualified as grounds in a divorce action.

 

I'm unclear on which point of law to which you refer that allows for the provision of a speedy divorce in the UK

 

I have hear this forgiveness deal is true in a small % of jurisdictions here in the US, as well. I think it is the exception , here, but, very few states seem to have fault divorce now, anyway. So, it is of very limited significance.

[merrmeade]

This is substantively correct.

 

The proviso regarding a child resulting from an affair is a sticky wicket legally in that the mother of a minor child who is presumed to be the child of a WH must give consent to a paternity review or give evidence that WH is in fact the Father. If the mother of the minor child isn't interested in participating in the divorce action she can not be compelled to do so. Therefore no grounds could be considered.

How do you feel about this and divorce law in general there? Do people accept it generally or want it changed?

 

Sounds uncomfortably meddlesome to me and I'm the most liberal voting person I know (in the US. Guess it's what you're used to.

 

Might be kind of interesting to compare evolution of divorce laws in different countries under different governments.

[merrmeade]

I have hear this forgiveness deal is true in a small % of jurisdictions here in the US, as well. I think it is the exception , here, but, very few states seem to have fault divorce now, anyway. So, it is of very limited significance.

I was worried we were t/j-ing, but if the threads starter's joined in, must be ok. So meandering's a good thing here - right, Krash?

[Krashi]

I was worried we were t/j-ing, but if the threads starter's joined in, must be ok. So meandering's a good thing here - right, Krash?

 

Indeed. Quite interesting.

[NewLeaf512]

How do you feel about this and divorce law in general there? Do people accept it generally or want it changed?

 

Sounds uncomfortably meddlesome to me and I'm the most liberal voting person I know (in the US. Guess it's what you're used to.

 

Might be kind of interesting to compare evolution of divorce laws in different countries under different governments.

 

The fastest divorce I ever saw took 2 days shy of 1 year as there were special circumstances.

 

The U.K. Family law in general is completely not fit for purpose. Shambles! Here are 2 facts about uk divorce law.

 

You can't divorce if you're married less than 1 year. You have to wait to file the petition until a year and 1 day.

 

Approximately 80% of divorces here get heard at a hearing.

 

If a spouse files on adultery, they name the OW/OM usually although the petitioner doesn't have to. Solicitors try to stop the naming for 3 reasons. 1. If you name there must be at least a hearing costly and add at the bare minimum outside London 2 months in London 5 months. 2. If you hope to reconcile you have now named your spouse and their alleged lover in open court documents. If children who are young are involved its devastating. If you need spousal support certain companies and industries don't like your name being tied to them if you're an adulterer and if the spouses alleged lover is a work mate the company may fire them both and any spousal support disappears. Lastly if you name the wrong person (the alleged lover you name) or you can't prove it, the alleged lover will turn around right on the day usually and slap the accusing spouse with a claim which are basically indefensible. More legal fees to petitioner and + another 3 months.

 

Lots of complexity but on average 24 months plus. Hats off to family lawyers there is no way I could do it.

 

OP as bad as all that is, it's still better than North Carolina in America. They even regularly award lifetime alimony!

[Krashi]

The fastest divorce I ever saw took 2 days shy of 1 year as there were special circumstances.

 

The U.K. Family law in general is completely not fit for purpose. Shambles! Here are 2 facts about uk divorce law.

 

You can't divorce if you're married less than 1 year. You have to wait to file the petition until a year and 1 day.

 

Approximately 80% of divorces here get heard at a hearing.

 

If a spouse files on adultery, they name the OW/OM usually although the petitioner doesn't have to. Solicitors try to stop the naming for 3 reasons. 1. If you name there must be at least a hearing costly and add at the bare minimum outside London 2 months in London 5 months. 2. If you hope to reconcile you have now named your spouse and their alleged lover in open court documents. If children who are young are involved its devastating. If you need spousal support certain companies and industries don't like your name being tied to them if you're an adulterer and if the spouses alleged lover is a work mate the company may fire them both and any spousal support disappears. Lastly if you name the wrong person (the alleged lover you name) or you can't prove it, the alleged lover will turn around right on the day usually and slap the accusing spouse with a claim which are basically indefensible. More legal fees to petitioner and + another 3 months.

 

Lots of complexity but on average 24 months plus. Hats off to family lawyers there is no way I could do it.

 

OP as bad as all that is, it's still better than North Carolina in America. They even regularly award lifetime alimony!

 

I am pretty sure a lot of states still award lifetime alimony if the facts are right. In some instances , it is warranted.