My username sums it up; I'm in shock

[MJJean]

It wasn't all that long ago that homosexuality was considered a dysfunction. And I've known plenty of voyeurs who are perfectly happy watching people who know that they are watching not to mention that there are plenty of people who get off on the idea of being watched.

 

EXACTLY!

 

The reason voyeurism is still considered a sexual dysfunction/mental illness when homosexuality and some kinks have been removed is BECAUSE it violates others. Homosexuality, along with other former "conditions", are those that involve consenting particpants. HUGE difference.

 

 

 

You are still assuming things that have not been shown to be the case. I must have missed the part where the OP caught him in the past since I would assume that she wouldn't have been so shocked about finding out if she knew he wanted to do so.

 

She allowed some photos once and then became uncomfortable, made that clear to her H, and then asked he delete them.

 

She caught him filming her, I believe in a hotel on a trip, and had a basic WTF moment. Also, at that point, making it very clear she was not ok with being filmed. He claimed at that time it was just an impulse when the truth was he had been doing it without her consent for years by that point.

 

 

 

That's BS and you know it. Have you actually read most of the replies? People have leapt from this to all the things that he may have been doing (despite no evidence supporting such possibilities)

 

Again, the man has proven he is not trustworthy and has done some seriously sketchy shyte. OF COURSE people are speculating and suspecting the worst case scenario. What else could they do considering he's been lying and concealing his activities for 2 DECADES.

 

I agree that violating his wife's privacy was wrong, the point that I am trying to make is that his not talking to her about it is understandable given the vitriol with which people are reacting.

 

So, if I had a fetish and I felt uncomfortable talking about it, it would be perfectly ok to force someone to participate in my fetish unknowingly? Over a period of decades? No? Yeah, that's exactly what this guy did. Again, it's not that he has a fetish or what that fetish is. It's that he lied about it, concealed it, violated trust and privacy, and is STILL lying, denying, minimizing, and blame shifting.

 

 

 

 

I do agree that ideally that is what he should have done, what I am attempting to explain is why he wouldn't have done it. Likely he was embarrassed about it and was afraid of how she would react.

 

Also understanding is not condoning.

 

I think the point a a few people are missing is that IT DOESN'T MATTER why he did it. The point is that he did it.

 

Tens of millions of people, if not more, have fetishes or kinks that they don't want to share with their partners. Most of them also don't force their partners to participate in their fetishes without their knowledge and consent.

 

 

 

Read your line again, I understand the selfish part, but your description of it being sick clearly demonstrates that it's not just about the violation of privacy.

 

You don't consider forcing someone to unknowingly participate in a sexual fetish sick? Really?

 

No one is saying that what he did was right, what I am saying is that it is understandable that he was reluctant to share his kink with his wife.

 

As I said, not right, but understandable.

 

No, NOT understandable. Having the fetish is understandable. Concealing the fetish for fear of rejection is understandable. Actually filming his wife and possibly others during their most intimate and private moments without their knowledge and consent is NOT understandable.

[JamesM]

Except this flies in the face of logic. Unless he was running into the bathroom just before his wife OR he only filmed in a bathroom not used by anyone else...ever...then chances are he filmed others.

 

Yes, I thought of that. So I grant you that it is a possibility. However, it does not mean at all that he had interest in them or kept them. If he was filming his wife, then he would have only kept those.

 

I don't think we have any clue HOW he filmed her, do we? He used his phone while she was in the shower. He could have manually turned on the video when she was in there. And no, we don't know when he filmed her.

 

We question his word because A) he proven himself a liar and not trustworthy and B) because he won't be transparent.

 

Secrecy and lying are separate. And as for assuming, this is being done again. Since he lied in the past, then he must be lying now. Based on that logic, the truth will never be found out. So we can speculate, create facts that never were simply because he cannot be believed.

 

Use the evidence and go from there.

 

Again, logic. There is no evidence of others being filmed, but that doesn't mean he didn't film others. It just means that what his wife FOUND contained mostly her. which is logical since she'd be the easiest to record.

 

Seriously? That is a logical fallacy. You are saying that since we don't know, then it must or could very possibly be true. On that logical basis, we can assume he filmed anything and anyone because in the absence of proof, anything is possible. Again, use the evidence. What she found using her words was film of her only. And why would she be any easier to film than someone else if as you assume above, he simply filmed everyone going into the bathroom or bedroom or whatever room he set up a camera.

 

But she did say in a post that on one recording she could hear the children. Meaning, had any of them come into the room their mother was in, they'd have been filmed, too.

 

Again, seriously? if you can hear any audio of anyone or anything, does that mean it is possible that they or it was also videoed? No. Have you ever videoed and then later listened and heard other people or animals or things that you did not even know were around? No. Children were heard because the microphone was sensitive. Of course if anyone or anything entered that room and walked in front of the camera, then yes, they would have been filmed. But there is no evidence of anyone else in that room.

 

Again, the evidence shows so far that this was about her. Not good for her but it is her.

 

Was he getting off on the kids and visitors he may have filmed? Don't know. Did he share videos he took so others could get off on them? Don't know. But it's certainly well within the realm of possibility.

 

No evidence that he filmed anyone besides his wife, so this is not even a point. Anything is in the realm of possibility but if there is no evidence, then getting in a panic mode is not necessary. You could just as easily asked if he was getting off on the family cat that he may have filmed.

 

Again, logic. Chances he DIDN'T film others, even accidentally, while trying to film his wife is pretty freakin low considering he was making covert recordings over a period of more than 20 YEARS.

 

I have taken video of animals at zoos for twenty plus years. I have taken pictures of flowers for more than that. I enjoy that. Look at the pictures and videos. You will hear people in the videos but I doubt that you will see them because I focused n the animals through the fence for a more natural look. The flowers are close views intended to show their beauty.

 

My point? We have no clue how he did this or how he may have focused the camera or if he manually started them. It doesn't matter then if it was twenty MINUTES. Again, you assume that he must have gotten others in the videos but there is nothing that indicates this.

 

Argument from Ignorance.

 

The fact that he was covertly filming is enough. THAT's the violation of others rights and trust all on it's own.

 

We agree. That doesn't prove he filmed anyone but his wife.

 

And, btw, filming their mother DOES mean he is NOT a good father. A good father does not trample over the basic human rights of their children's mother, nor does he lie to and conceal from his children's mother nor does he violate her trust and privacy in such a heinous way.

 

Could be right. This same logic can be used for men or women that betray their spouse with affairs. This logic can be used for men and women who divorce. Breaking the commitment and trust to a spouse can indicate that one is not a good parent...

 

Or does it?

 

Saying it would change their view of their mother smells of victim shaming.

 

Then your sniffer is off.

 

I am a parent and I know that how the children view us when we disagree and when we argue is different than we realize. I know this based on how they respond or comment later. And sometimes their interpretation of what we said is different than what we meant.

 

So you have good point. I just disagree with many of them. If evidence shows that your assumptions have validity, then I can agree.

[MJJean]

Yes, I thought of that. So I grant you that it is a possibility. However, it does not mean at all that he had interest in them or kept them. If he was filming his wife, then he would have only kept those.

 

I don't think we have any clue HOW he filmed her, do we? He used his phone while she was in the shower. He could have manually turned on the video when she was in there. And no, we don't know when he filmed her.

 

More carefully read the OP's posts. He was filming in multiple rooms, including the bathroom and she has found footage of herself using the toilet that he saved for so long some of it was on tape. HOW he pulled that off isn't the issue. The fact that he did it is the issue.

 

It DOESN'T MATTER that he may or may not have had interest in filming other family members or guests. WHO, exactly, he filmed is rather moot. He filmed at least 1 person without their knowledge or consent. That's enough to reasonably cast suspicion.

 

Secrecy and lying are separate. And as for assuming, this is being done again. Since he lied in the past, then he must be lying now. Based on that logic, the truth will never be found out. So we can speculate, create facts that never were simply because he cannot be believed.

 

Use the evidence and go from there.

 

So we should take his word he is suddenly being honest after TWO DECADES of lying and trust the "evidence" he may or may not have tampered with? Yeah, no.

 

No, the whole truth will probably never be found out. But the fact that he lied and concealed all those years is enough for any reasonable person to say that his word is worthless.

 

 

 

Seriously? That is a logical fallacy. You are saying that since we don't know, then it must or could very possibly be true. On that logical basis, we can assume he filmed anything and anyone because in the absence of proof, anything is possible. Again, use the evidence. What she found using her words was film of her only. And why would she be any easier to film than someone else if as you assume above, he simply filmed everyone going into the bathroom or bedroom or whatever room he set up a camera.

 

Do some research into this type of mental illness. The suspicions of most people here actually fit very well into the most common behaviors of people like the OP's husband.

 

The "logical fallacy" you espouse is based on a LACK of evidence. He still hasn't agreed to let his wife take his computer and other electronic devices to a professional for data recovery. For all we know, he DOES have hours of footage of other people. Or maybe he just saves the footage of his wife for sentimental reasons and gets off to then deletes other footage.

 

Again, seriously? if you can hear any audio of anyone or anything, does that mean it is possible that they or it was also videoed? No. Have you ever videoed and then later listened and heard other people or animals or things that you did not even know were around? No. Children were heard because the microphone was sensitive. Of course if anyone or anything entered that room and walked in front of the camera, then yes, they would have been filmed. But there is no evidence of anyone else in that room.

 

Again, the evidence shows so far that this was about her. Not good for her but it is her.

 

Again, FOUND evidence. What about what hasn't been found? It's not like he's being forthcoming.

 

And, again, the kids on audio only, as far as OP knows, is because he was recording in one room and they didn't happen to be in that room at that moment. Had they come into that room at that moment, they'd have been part of the recording. Whether he used or allowed someone else to use that footage for nefarious purposes doesn't lessen the violation of the kids reasonable expectation of privacy in their own home.

 

 

 

No evidence that he filmed anyone besides his wife, so this is not even a point. Anything is in the realm of possibility but if there is no evidence, then getting in a panic mode is not necessary. You could just as easily asked if he was getting off on the family cat that he may have filmed.

 

Again, nothing FOUND. Considering the typical behavior of those with this illness, it's more probable he did film others or has watched film taken by others who violated the rights of people around them.

 

 

 

I have taken video of animals at zoos for twenty plus years. I have taken pictures of flowers for more than that. I enjoy that. Look at the pictures and videos. You will hear people in the videos but I doubt that you will see them because I focused n the animals through the fence for a more natural look. The flowers are close views intended to show their beauty.

 

HUGE difference between filming in a public place and filming unknowing subjects in their private moments. People in public have no expectation of privacy.

 

Reviewing your footage of that day at the zoo for the warm fuzzies of memory is one thing. Reviewing footage of someone who had expectation of privacy and were unknowingly being recorded because the violation of the act gets you off is something completely different.

 

My point? We have no clue how he did this or how he may have focused the camera or if he manually started them. It doesn't matter then if it was twenty MINUTES. Again, you assume that he must have gotten others in the videos but there is nothing that indicates this.

 

Argument from Ignorance.

 

 

 

We agree. That doesn't prove he filmed anyone but his wife.

 

 

 

Could be right. This same logic can be used for men or women that betray their spouse with affairs. This logic can be used for men and women who divorce. Breaking the commitment and trust to a spouse can indicate that one is not a good parent...

 

Or does it?

 

 

 

Then your sniffer is off.

 

I am a parent and I know that how the children view us when we disagree and when we argue is different than we realize. I know this based on how they respond or comment later. And sometimes their interpretation of what we said is different than what we meant.

 

So you have good point. I just disagree with many of them. If evidence shows that your assumptions have validity, then I can agree.

 

I think "Your father made about 20-25 years of secret recordings of at least myself in my most intimate and private moments without my knowledge or consent." is one of those things it's hard to misinterpret.

 

I honestly hope OP snatches her H's computer and does take it in for forensic recovery so that she knows more of what she's dealing with. Either it's legal because the computer is marital property or it's illegal. If it's marital property, tough cookies to him. If it's illegal, I'd pay to be a fly on the wall while he explains to the nice policeman or judge why his wife took his computer. It'd be like watching a drug dealer try to make a police report because someone stole his stash.

[BettyDraper]

It's hard for me to view a fetish which does not involve children as an illness, because such language encourages shaming of sexual desires. Just because an action is understandable, it doesn't mean that it should be condoned. Even if the OP would not have reacted well to her husband's fetish, they could have come to some sort of agreement or compromise and that wouldn't have led to violating her privacy.

 

I couldn't stay with my husband if I found out that he was secretly taping our sex sessions or my bathroom visits.

 

My husband wanted to watch me masturbate. Though I enjoy masturbation, I always viewed that as a private thing. I was too shy and uncomfortable with being watched while I had sex with myself. My husband and I had several discussions about it. While we were on a getaway and I had too much wine, I suddenly agreed to masturbate in front of my husband on the condition that he stayed silent so that I could concentrate. I'm glad that my husband didn't peer through a door and secretly watch me instead of being honest about his desires. I would have been creeped out if he did.

[JamesM]

More carefully read the OP's posts. He was filming in multiple rooms, including the bathroom and she has found footage of herself using the toilet that he saved for so long some of it was on tape. HOW he pulled that off isn't the issue. The fact that he did it is the issue.

 

I agree. Yes, he filmed in different rooms. And yes, the issue is an invasion of privacy. The FACT that he did it is an issue. We have no evidence suggesting anyone else though. So far all we know is that the husband filmed his wife without her permission which has broken her trust in him.

 

It DOESN'T MATTER that he may or may not have had interest in filming other family members or guests. WHO, exactly, he filmed is rather moot. He filmed at least 1 person without their knowledge or consent. That's enough to reasonably cast suspicion.

 

Actually it DOES matter if he filmed others. Then he is left open to law suits and more. Your argument that he may have filmed others, IF supported with evidence, creates an additional problem.

 

Nothing raises the suspicion that anyone but the wife was filmed except the possibility exists since others were in the house over 25 years.

 

So we should take his word he is suddenly being honest after TWO DECADES of lying and trust the "evidence" he may or may not have tampered with? Yeah, no.

 

We cannot take his word without evidence supporting it, nor can we assume anything either. So far the evidence that changed the OP's world is videos and films of her. This alone is enough to cause up to believe he has a problem. His hiding and deception regarding the films indicates that he doesn't want her to know that he was filming her. This is the issue and the problem. Assuming more isn't necessary or beneficial until it is shown to be true.

 

No, the whole truth will probably never be found out. But the fact that he lied and concealed all those years is enough for any reasonable person to say that his word is worthless.

 

I agree. If he can prove he is telling the truth, then so be it. Until then, follow the evidence.

 

For all we know, he DOES have hours of footage of other people. Or maybe he just saves the footage of his wife for sentimental reasons and gets off to then deletes other footage.

 

And that is what we know....the saved or only footage is of her. Saying that anything else can be a possibility because it has not been proven to false is the fallacy.

 

Again, FOUND evidence. What about what hasn't been found? It's not like he's being forthcoming.

 

Again back to the argument from ignorance:

The argument from ignorance (or argumentum ad ignorantiam) is a logical fallacy that claims the truth of a premise is based on the fact that it has not been proven false, or that a premise is false because it has not been proven true. This is often phrased as "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

 

And, again, the kids on audio only, as far as OP knows, is because he was recording in one room and they didn't happen to be in that room at that moment. Had they come into that room at that moment, they'd have been part of the recording.

 

Again, anything can happen. See above. Odds are that if was really interested in his wife, then he would have deleted such footage because I think many men will tell you that it would kill the moment.

 

Again, nothing FOUND. Considering the typical behavior of those with this illness, it's more probable he did film others or has watched film taken by others who violated the rights of people around them.

 

Speculation. However, I could also speculate with you that yes, if an attractive woman visits whether it is a relative or friend, and the film is rolling, then he may enjoy it and keep it. And if I were him, then yes, that would be kept on that computer.

 

We just don't know so cannot think it true. We can hypothesize and see if evidence supports it.

 

HUGE difference between filming in a public place and filming unknowing subjects in their private moments. People in public have no expectation of privacy.

 

Please go back and read why I responded with this. It was because you stated that audio gives a strong possibility of him desiring or actually filming children. It had nothing to do with privacy or public filming.

 

Reviewing your footage of that day at the zoo for the warm fuzzies of memory is one thing. Reviewing footage of someone who had expectation of privacy and were unknowingly being recorded because the violation of the act gets you off is something completely different.

 

Agree...although this isn't related to what I said anyhow.

 

I think "Your father made about 20-25 years of secret recordings of at least myself in my most intimate and private moments without my knowledge or consent." is one of those things it's hard to misinterpret.

 

I agree. Will the boys view this as severely as their mother does? Will they view it as an invasion of her privacy? Or will they view it like some others have here?

 

I honestly hope OP snatches her H's computer and does take it in for forensic recovery so that she knows more of what she's dealing with.

 

So do I. So do I. It will help her immensely to know the extent of the problem. It will give additional evidence as to the severity or extent of his problem. It will help resolve this all for her and her family.

[Mr. Lucky]

Second how do you know that it's about the lack of permission for him? You don't, you are making assumptions and attempting to divine someone's thinking from very limited information.

 

If I'm making assumptions he "has" and "is", you're making the same assumptions he "hasn't" and "isn't".

 

I'd guess the odds are on my side...

 

Mr. Lucky

[spyedonfor20plus]

To answer some questions:

 

I have not YET asked him for access to his computer because I feel since our initial discussion and my subsequent out of town trip he has wiped it clean. If I'd had my composure at the time I would have demanded to see it then. I still might and honestly, he should at LEAST be offering me that option even if it's a moot point now but he hasn't.

 

All of the videos I saw where taken in our master bathroom and bedroom, or our hotel room so I think it's unlikely he has video of anyone else. Nothing would surprise me at this point however.

 

And whoever said "this is now a woman who will never go to the bathroom, take a shower, dress, or have sex again without wondering if she's being filmed..." Nailed it. I do not feel safe nor comfortable in this house or would in any other. He did this in three different houses and hotel rooms.

 

He did inadvertently film one of the boys; one son as a toddler ran in front of the camera saying, "oh hey theres my book." Nearly killed me to see/hear that. Somehow it made it worse. Also after I was dressed in bra d underwear the, the film continues as I had a telephone conversation but could not hear much.

 

I just tried to get an appointment with a psychiatrist (not my therapist) to discuss my husband but her assistant said she would only speak with the patient directly.

[spyedonfor20plus]

Is there any reason I shouldn't leave the house for a few days? Legally? He's out of town until tomorrow but I homestly don't like to be around him right now.

[BlueIris]

Is there any reason I shouldn't leave the house for a few days? Legally? He's out of town until tomorrow but I homestly don't like to be around him right now.

 

Not that I can think of. I think you can go anywhere you want whenever you want. Go somewhere wonderful and get some peace.

 

I agree with you that he has probably deleted all or most of the incriminating stuff on his computer. I think I'd still look sometime to see if you can see where he goes, if he goes, to voyeur sites to see if any videos of you are up.

[privategal]

You have nothing to lose by having a professional check the computer.

Hes likely spying on you from out of town...voice recorders and even more cameras. Cant understand why you are still THERE. I worry your anger will fade and you will accept the shame to stay comfortable.

[BettyDraper]

The hard drive will have everything your husband claimed to erase.

I wouldn't trust that your husband really wiped the computer clean.

[spyedonfor20plus]

You have nothing to lose by having a professional check the computer.

Hes likely spying on you from out of town...voice recorders and even more cameras. Cant understand why you are still THERE. I worry your anger will fade and you will accept the shame to stay comfortable.

 

Yes, I want to stay here! I want HIM to leave. I asked him.to leave more than once and he refuses. Says it is his house too. Well its my house also and he is the one who has wronged me! I will not accept "shame" as you put it. If I go away for a few days its just because he won't move out, even temporarily and frankly I need a change of scenery.

 

If I have the house sweeped he can always put stuff back again as long as we are married and legally own the house together. There is no legal separation in my state, I've checked.

 

Tomorrow I plan to speak to my counselor about these issues and others.

[spyedonfor20plus]

Also I plan on speaking to an attorney before I have the computer checked. What I'd like to do.is ask him for the password and see his reaction. Tell him that I'm worried he has recorded others and \or posted videos of me and I need to know

[bathtub-row]

I forget the age of your kids but if they're still living at home, then DO NOT LEAVE YOUR HOUSE. This is very important. Don't leave without your kids until you talk to an attorney. This could come back and seriously backfire on you.

 

Wow, he certainly doesn't seem remorseful in the least. If he were, or if he was concerned about how hurt you are by this, he would leave just because he would want to show you that he respects you. I'm not seeing that. He really thought he had the right to do as he pleased. That alone is irksome.

[spyedonfor20plus]

I forget the age of your kids but if they're still living at home, then DO NOT LEAVE YOUR HOUSE. This is very important. Don't leave without your kids until you talk to an attorney. This could come back and seriously backfire on you.

 

Wow, he certainly doesn't seem remorseful in the least. If he were, or if he was concerned about how hurt you are by this, he would leave just because he would want to show you that he respects you. I'm not seeing that. He really thought he had the right to do as he pleased. That alone is irksome.

 

Luckily my boys are ages 19 and 24 and are not even in the state for now. And yes, I would've thought he'd leave if he really wants me to forgive him, like he says. We are going to revisit this when he returns tomorrow.

[SincereOnlineGuy]

his only issue really is not telling you.

 

 

 

 

The FACT that he did it is an issue.

 

 

 

 

The plot of your position on this, with so very little "logic" applied, and so very many flip-flops, has almost as great a magnitude as do the actions described by the OP.

 

 

So how about you select a side - one side - and at least stay on that one side?

[Parannonx]

If I'm making assumptions he "has" and "is", you're making the same assumptions he "hasn't" and "isn't".

 

I'd guess the odds are on my side...

 

Mr. Lucky

 

I'm not making any assumption, I'm saying that your assertion isn't supported by the evidence and that you are making multiple leaps to conclusions that are not supported.

 

Let me be clear, what Spyedon"s husband did was wrong, no one is arguing otherwise. What I am saying is that it's not reasonable to jump to conclusions that are not supported by the available facts.

 

People do things that are wrong all the time, none of us are saints, but just because someone does one thing wrong does not make them a horrible person. Speeding doesn't make one more likely to rob a bank. Filming his wife doesn't mean that he's getting off on violating people's privacy, sure it might be, but we have no way of knowing.

 

What Spyedon"s husband did was wrong, but that doesn't mean that he is a rapey pedophile.

[privategal]

It just seems really critical that you act swiftly and quickly. It seems like you are taking your time but this is your life. Its so short and precious. I dont know if you are just in a state of shock or what but the calls and things should be well under way.its like your kindof being passive saying "I'll ask for the password and see his reaction"

Meanwhile he violated you in the most vile way. You've given him time to get his story straight, hide evidence.

You are not a professional.

You cannot sir back though.

This is scary. What if he starts to get overwhelmed with fear of being exposed. Would he do something desperate? Have you been able to confide in family? Your operating in a vacuum and it seems you need more help and support to take some action.

This is not ok.

Im truly worried for you.

[privategal]

Even your phone and car could have recorders. He may know every step your going to take and have already taken.

Spyware doesnt need a bundle of wires inside of walls...detectives can put a camera inside a pair of eyeglasses. He is going to take control if his situation and clearly he is in charge as he unapologetically explained he's not budging its his house too. He isnt sorry. Thats a sociopath type of behavior. Its scary.

[privategal]

I'm not making any assumption, I'm saying that your assertion isn't supported by the evidence and that you are making multiple leaps to conclusions that are not supported.

 

Let me be clear, what Spyedon"s husband did was wrong, no one is arguing otherwise. What I am saying is that it's not reasonable to jump to conclusions that are not supported by the available facts.

 

People do things that are wrong all the time, none of us are saints, but just because someone does one thing wrong does not make them a horrible person. Speeding doesn't make one more likely to rob a bank. Filming his wife doesn't mean that he's getting off on violating people's privacy, sure it might be, but we have no way of knowing.

 

What Spyedon"s husband did was wrong, but that doesn't mean that he is a rapey pedophile.

 

No...he is a rapey pedophile. He didn't just do one thing wrong. He did 25 years of the worst wrong I could think of. The kids HAD to be taped if the camera was continuous. But not suggesting he was interested in viewing them but realistically no one can just rule that out either. But.... Why do we have to have a psychobabble debate and unrelated examples and theories when its black and white her privacy and dignity was STOLEN from her.

Its like the matter is being confused and diluted by all these debates.

Wrong is wrong is wrong.

How can that even be debated or excused.

This is a heinous crime plain and simple.

Someone who loves you would protect your decency and dignity at the very LEAST in the bathroom.

Delete all these posts and just read her VERY FIRST POST. The ways she felt, her most private moments invaded, I can not even imagine or ever understand why every single one of you aren't saying CALL THE POLICE.

Id never ever want to see him again nor let him sleep under the same roof.

Forgive me for saying strongly this is a MONSTER and should be feared.

Each day that passes it seems op is going in circles, unclear and like has hidden PTSD and is confused on where to turn. The counselor would be AMONGST the calls that Id make but the first is the police who would automatically involve a detective.

Edited January 27, 2016 by privategal

[JamesM]

The plot of your position on this, with so very little "logic" applied, and so very many flip-flops, has almost as great a magnitude as do the actions described by the OP.

 

 

So how about you select a side - one side - and at least stay on that one side?

 

When one cherry picks words from posts, then one can create all kinds of straw man arguments. I think my position has been the same.

 

What he did (as in "it) is film his wife without her permission. That is a fact and the issue.

 

He did 25 years of the worst wrong I could think of. The kids HAD to be taped if the camera was continuous. But not suggesting he was interested in viewing them but realistically no one can just rule that out either.

 

I think that one could think of many worse things that he could have done starting with daily rape and torture of the OP and then perhaps adding in the children.

 

And while the children may have inadvertently been in a film, that in no way indicates that he was interested in watching them sexually or even at all.

 

No one can rule out anything, but then no one can add in anything either.

 

OP, while what he did was very wrong and honestly as a guy, I can see how it would make you paranoid in your own house (all I have to do is compare that to discovering that my male neighbor had filmed me in my most private moments and used those for his sexual pleasure), I would caution imagining what all could be that probably never was. Stick with the facts as it appears you have done and deal with them both for you, your boys, and yourself.

 

What you know is that he filmed you for his own pleasure. This may have been sexual. It was an invasion of privacy and it took away your trust in him. Pursue the possibility of him sharing the films.

 

Seek out counsel for yourself and decide if divorce is the best option.

[Mr. Lucky]

I'm not making any assumption, I'm saying that your assertion isn't supported by the evidence and that you are making multiple leaps to conclusions that are not supported.

 

Your first sentence from your first post in the thread:

 

Reading the responses ITT does kind of explain why the guy wouldn't want to come clean about what he was doing. He was likely embarrassed.

 

You started with an assumption.

 

And equating an assumed cooperative interest in filming the OP in naughty poses (which she doesn't have) with 20 years of non-consensual sex, shower and bathroom videos makes as much sense as equating my interest in martial arts with having four guys hold me down and beat me senseless.

 

No, the OP's husband isn't a "rapey pedophile", he's a sneaky, narcissistic creep with no boundaries. Neither description would make me want to spend any portion of the life I have remaining with him...

 

Mr. Lucky

[privategal]

When one cherry picks words from posts, then one can create all kinds of straw man arguments. I think my position has been the same.

 

What he did (as in "it) is film his wife without her permission. That is a fact and the issue.

 

 

 

I think that one could think of many worse things that he could have done starting with daily rape and torture of the OP and then perhaps adding in the children.

 

And while the children may have inadvertently been in a film, that in no way indicates that he was interested in watching them sexually or even at all.

 

No one can rule out anything, but then no one can add in anything either.

 

OP, while what he did was very wrong and honestly as a guy, I can see how it would make you paranoid in your own house (all I have to do is compare that to discovering that my male neighbor had filmed me in my most private moments and used those for his sexual pleasure), I would caution imagining what all could be that probably never was. Stick with the facts as it appears you have done and deal with them both for you, your boys, and yourself.

 

What you know is that he filmed you for his own pleasure. This may have been sexual. It was an invasion of privacy and it took away your trust in him. Pursue the possibility of him sharing the films.

 

Seek out counsel for yourself and decide if divorce is the best option.

 

Your whole post talks in circles and this is exactly what I mean, too many senseless arguments to the contrary for instance when you said

"I think that one could think of many worse things that he could have done starting with daily rape and torture of the OP and then perhaps adding in the children"

What sense does it make and how is it related. Then you close with stick to the facts. You go back and forth practically defending him, to telling her to get help.

Your confusing things and debating and chopping up posts to support your points and analysis of something that doesn't need analyzed.

Your creating smoke and confusion if indeed OP does use any advice here, it should be consistent to seek professional council and nothing else.

Great job showing your intellectual prowess but a crime against your spouse doesn't need to involve debate. It needs to involve police.

[JamesM]

Your whole post talks in circles and this is exactly what I mean, too many senseless arguments to the contrary for instance when you said

"I think that one could think of many worse things that he could have done starting with daily rape and torture of the OP and then perhaps adding in the children"

What sense does it make and how is it related.

 

Did you read what I was responding to?

 

You said and I quote:

He did 25 years of the worst wrong I could think of.

 

I simply remarked that I could think of worse things/wrongs and gave examples of what I considered to be worse.

 

Then you close with stick to the facts. You go back and forth practically defending him, to telling her to get help.

 

Yes, I did. Too many posts here are of the kind "OMG! He must be violent and really nasty!" Those are not based on the evidence thus far. (And I know this will be quoted). Getting more in a panic over what hasn't been done will do nothing to help the OP get herself healed or get help for her children. What her husband has done is bad enough and dealing with that is enough.

 

And "practically" defending him? Nope. I am simply stating that too many are adding in what hasn't been shown to be true. What he did is wrong, and as I stated, if I compare that to a male neighbor filming me and getting off on it, then I can somewhat understand what it has done to her.

 

Your confusing things and debating and chopping up posts to support your points and analysis of something that doesn't need analyzed.

 

Sorry if you think that, and sorry if you think I am doing it again. I know of no other way to respond to each statement as they come. In a conversation with you, then it would be easier. Here it is difficult to do. I leave the whole quote and simply break it apart as opposed to picking sentences and not leaving supporting sentences in my quote.

 

Your creating smoke and confusion if indeed OP does use any advice here, it should be consistent to seek professional council and nothing else.

 

I responded to you and then gave my advice (albeit only mine I understand) to her.

 

And yes, I think as I stated before, she should seek counsel as to what to do next. IMO if she were my sister or some close relative, then I would advise her to call a lawyer or perhaps a detective for advice on how to proceed. Since she has already called a therapist, then perhaps this therapist would know who is best to call.

 

Great job showing your intellectual prowess

 

Thank you?

 

but a crime against your spouse doesn't need to involve debate. It needs to involve police.

 

If it is a crime, then yes it does. Again, to determine what crime or if a crime has been committed, a person educated in this would be best to call.

 

I am not attempting to debate but discuss. As for a debate or discussion, it does involve two.

Edited January 27, 2016 by JamesM

[Cablebandit]

Did you read what I was responding to?

 

You said and I quote:

 

 

I simply remarked that I could think of worse things/wrongs and gave examples of what I considered to be worse.

 

 

 

Yes, I did. Too many posts here are of the kind "OMG! He must be violent and really nasty!" Those are not based on the evidence thus far. (And I know this will be quoted). Getting more in a panic over what hasn't been done will do nothing to help the OP get herself healed or get help for her children. What her husband has done is bad enough and dealing with that is enough.

 

And "practically" defending him? Nope. I am simply stating that too many are adding in what hasn't been shown to be true. What he did is wrong, and as I stated, if I compare that to a male neighbor filming me and getting off on it, then I can somewhat understand what it has done to her.

 

 

 

Sorry if you think that, and sorry if you think I am doing it again. I know of no other way to respond to each statement as they come. In a conversation with you, then it would be easier. Here it is difficult to do. I leave the whole quote and simply break it apart as opposed to picking sentences and not leaving supporting sentences in my quote.

 

 

 

I responded to you and then gave my advice (albeit only mine I understand) to her.

 

And yes, I think as I stated before, she should seek counsel as to what to do next. IMO if she were my sister or some close relative, then I would advise her to call a lawyer or perhaps a detective for advice on how to proceed. Since she has already called a therapist, then perhaps this therapist would know who is best to call.

 

 

 

Thank you?

 

 

 

If it is a crime, then yes it does. Again, to determine what crime or if a crime has been committed, a person educated in this would be best to call.

 

I am not attempting to debate but discuss. As for a debate or discussion, it does involve two.

 

I appreciate that you have not forgotten empathy and compassion while not giving Op's H a free pass. .