Question for OW here!

[stillafool]

7 minutes ago, Starswillshine said:

Now I know what will come next, but if the BS never finds out..... that is a BIG "If"

And this is even more cruel to be kept in the dark, exposed to diseases, thinking you're with someone you can trust and build a life with, only to learn you're just a fool who has wasted numerous years of your life.

Edited April 17, 2020 by stillafool

[Starswillshine]

6 minutes ago, stillafool said:

And this is even more cruel to be kept in the dark, exposed to diseases, thinking you're with someone you can trust and build a life with, only to learn you're just a fool who has wasted numerous years of your life.

True. And then when you find out many other people were aware. Co-workers were in on it. Friends assisted. Then you realize just how many people stabbed in you in the back. It takes away any sense of being able to trust people. Once the pain subsides, the BS very seldom can go back to normal. I know I will never be the same person. I am forever scarred by this. I'm in a relationship now that is awesome; however, I have severe trust issues. It is so hard to trust someone's words and actions having been through what I went through. I still deal with major anxiety. I am just fortunate for a partner who understands because he has been through it, too.

[pepperbird]

1 hour ago, Starswillshine said:

I am one of those BSs who had a great at home life. Traveled all over the world, etc. However, the mental and emotional turmoil that I experienced at DDay can only be described as abuse. Being exposed to STDs unknowingly... quite abusive. Abusing my trust in him.... abusive. Abusing the love that I have for me and our family, that was abusive. I just did not know it at the time. 

People like to sweep the real pain felt by BSs under the rug. Act like it is nothing. When you are blindsided and realize your entire life is fake... I never had "issues" before all of a sudden I found myself on meds to control the panic attacks. I did not eat. The triggers sent me to the bathroom to puke whatever I could consume. My psychologist diagnosed me with PTSD. It was an awful time in my life. Anyone putting someone through that... Yes, that is abusive. 

Now I know what will come next, but if the BS never finds out..... that is a BIG "If"

I agree.
It was so bad at home- my husband wasn't making any sense in what he was doing. To be fair, some of that was PTSD related, but some of it wasn't .
When he told me what he'd done we both knew we didn't have a lot of time left to begin working through it. One of the points he raised was that the OW was more "fun".

Fun? Of course she was fun! She was single almost 10 years younger than me. She wasn't at home raising three small kids, two of whom are autistic and one has a severe autoimmune disease, virtually alone because her spouse was deployed or on field duty ( yes, we knew that came with the job) She wasn't doing all the cooking, cleaning, housework, bill paying shopping going to medical appointments four or five times a week, setting up therapy, doing speech/occ and other therapy with the kids, volunteering, working at a job online, etc.

That was my life. Yes, it probably looked boring to an outsider looking in. She likely thought I was some frumpy, boring housewife. She even told me as much. What she forgot to include in that assessment ( small town, everyone knew everyone) was I was trying to raise three kids and look after a husband who, even though I didn't recognize it for what to was at the time, in the early stages of combat related PTSD.

This is what I mean when I say there's always three sides to the story. I don't the WS and Ow/Om are sitting around drumming up evil plans or cruel things they can do to the BS. I don't think they want to hurt them at all. They are simply collateral damage,  like when a bomb is dropped on a military headquarters and ends up destroying the hospital next door.
 

Edited April 17, 2020 by pepperbird

[heartwhole2]

1 hour ago, pepperbird said:

I agree.
It was so bad at home- my husband wasn't making any sense in what he was doing. To be fair, some of that was PTSD related, but some of it wasn't .
When he told me what he'd done we both knew we didn't have a lot of time left to begin working through it. One of the points he raised was that the OW was more "fun".

Fun? Of course she was fun! She was single almost 10 years younger than me. She wasn't at home raising three small kids, two of whom are autistic and one has a severe autoimmune disease, virtually alone because her spouse was deployed or on field duty ( yes, we knew that came with the job) She wasn't doing all the cooking, cleaning, housework, bill paying shopping going to medical appointments four or five times a week, setting up therapy, doing speech/occ and other therapy with the kids, volunteering, working at a job online, etc.

That was my life. Yes, it probably looked boring to an outsider looking in. She likely thought I was some frumpy, boring housewife. She even told me as much. What she forgot to include in that assessment ( small town, everyone knew everyone) was I was trying to raise three kids and look after a husband who, even though I didn't recognize it for what to was at the time, in the early stages of combat related PTSD.

This is what I mean when I say there's always three sides to the story. I don't the WS and Ow/Om are sitting around drumming up evil plans or cruel things they can do to the BS. I don't think they want to hurt them at all. They are simply collateral damage,  like when a bomb is dropped on a military headquarters and ends up destroying the hospital next door.
 

Yours was “fun.”  My husband’s OW “seduced him with sweetness.” 🙄🤣 It was pretty obvious he was implying my lack of sweetness. I am compassionate. I am kind. I am loyal. I am encouraging. I am gracious. But do I sit around listening to people complain about being a martyrs when they’re actually being a selfish man-child? Well no, that’s not my thing.

This is a man who went out four nights a week when we had a newborn. (What if I went out four nights a week too? We would be at negative one nights for someone to watch the baby.) He happily went on 10 day long guys’ trips but complained so bitterly about visiting my family for Christmas that we cut that to two nights. In his mind he was put upon and unappreciated and sweet old OW was there to show him what true happiness was. 

We did MC briefly after DDay and boy did she lay into my husband about his completely skewed perspective. And we needed that because he simply wouldn’t believe me. His belief was that he was controlled and unappreciated and he even had a mistress who agreed. When we don’t share our thoughts they can quickly lose touch with reality. Telling others helps us see we might be out of touch. 

[Starswillshine]

Oh the OW in my case was reckless and he found that attractive. Ha! He would talk about how often they would talk on the phone (when he traveled), she would be slurring her speech and fall asleep on the phone. He discussed her drug usage. Etc. I guess he found her more fun than my boring, frumpy housewife. 

But yeah, he was also the man who went on guy trips even though he was gone 70% of the time. He was out in bars, drunk most nights. 

I was at home, taking care of our 4 kids and their insane, hectic schedules. He made some comment about how I couldnt even stay awake to watch a full movie. Yeah, starting a movie at 11pm when I have to get up at 6am, while he slept in, to get the kids up and ready for school was really doable. He admired the fact that his OW could stay up all night (except he didnt see that she also slept all day). The things that he admired about her were things that a typically college kid does. Not a 30 something year old. 

I think I'm a ball of fun when I can get away. I just need to be in bed by like 11. Ha!

[elaine567]

1 hour ago, pepperbird said:

I don't the WS and Ow/Om are sitting around drumming up evil plans or cruel things they can do to the BS. I don't think they want to hurt them at all.

I wouldn't be so sure of that...

[preraph]

Her type is his type.  But I've seen lots and lots of men go against type when they marry to marry someone not like them and ones who are mild and not argumentative so they can just keep doing what they're doing without a fuss and not worry about her home with the kids.  Not sure if this is a cultural thing, but I'm in the US and ran with wild crowd and saw guys do this over and over when they decided to marry.  And then yes, they were bored and had little in common with her so they got that elsewhere.  I don't approve of it, but I've been surprised the guys who would do this. 

[mark clemson]

1 hour ago, Starswillshine said:

People like to sweep the real pain felt by BSs under the rug. Act like it is nothing. When you are blindsided and realize your entire life is fake...

I'm not suggesting we should "acting like it's nothing," SWS. It's quite possible to acknowledge people's genuine emotional distress without labeling an entire class of people in a way that implies they're criminals when they're not.

Do you think people don't have very similar feelings when a partner announces divorce? How about that they're going to join a cult and the kids will be going along 50% of the time. Some people would be VERY hurt by decisions like that. And some people will (understandably) flip out over decisions that are much more minor, e.g. smoking pot (in states where it's legal) in front of the kids, buying the kid an expensive car, taking the 18 year old son to a strip club, etc etc.

If being (understandably) very hurt and upset by some major decision your spouse makes without your input or knowledge is "abuse", shouldn't EVERYONE frankly be going into marriage EXPECTING some level of abuse.  We know our spouse is an independent human being, right?

Cheating in and of itself isn't generally acknowledged as abuse. That's an ACCURATE view, despite what internet echo chambers and the like might have some people believing. It doesn't mean that some cheaters aren't abusers, but to be fair some small percentage of BS are no doubt abusers as well.

 

1 hour ago, stillafool said:

And this is even more cruel to be kept in the dark, exposed to diseases, thinking you're with someone you can trust and build a life with, only to learn you're just a fool who has wasted numerous years of your life.

See above. As for disease, for better or worse carelessness is generally not a crime either. I can't count the number of times I've seen people leave a public restroom without washing their hands. And then they touch whatever surfaces in offices, grocery stores, airports, etc. Maybe we should label all these people "abusers" as well (they ARE risking others' safety) and dish out jail time for not washing your hands a full 30 seconds?

If someone KNOWS the AP has an STD, that would be a different story.

[stillafool]

4 minutes ago, mark clemson said:

3 hours ago, stillafool said:

 

See above. As for disease, for better or worse carelessness is generally not a crime either. I can't count the number of times I've seen people leave a public restroom without washing their hands. And then they touch whatever surfaces in offices, grocery stores, airports, etc. Maybe we should label all these people "abusers" as well (they ARE risking others' safety) and dish out jail time for not washing your hands a full 30 seconds?

If someone KNOWS the AP has an STD, that would be a different story.

Are you serious Mark?  I guess if one's baby sneezes on them and gives them their cold he should be sued too, huh?  If you don't know the difference so be it!

[Starswillshine]

14 minutes ago, mark clemson said:

Do you think people don't have very similar feelings when a partner announces divorce?

No. 

[mark clemson]

10 minutes ago, stillafool said:

Are you serious Mark?  I guess if one's baby sneezes on them and gives them their cold he should be sued too, huh?  If you don't know the difference so be it!

Hmm. I don't recall saying that. If someone knowingly exposes others to diseases, I could see that being a criminal act (and I believe it's recognized as one).

Fecal matter can spread pretty serious diseases, that's why we have all these hygienic facilities that many people don't bother to use.

You seem to be saying it's ok to risk others' safety when you're not also cheating, but not ok when you are.

 

 

[mark clemson]

6 minutes ago, Starswillshine said:

No. 

I didn't say exactly similar, or this just stubbornness? Of course an unexpected divorce announcement is traumatizing for most spouses, it's just a matter of degree.  And that will vary from person to person.

I would bet there are some people who'd actually be more distressed at the prospect of divorce than at cheating. IN FACT, we have threads here that show exactly that.

Those who want to completely deny rational views can end up believing whatever they want. Witness Flat Earthers, etc. We had a guy posting here who was convinced his foreign prostitutes weren't being pimped. I'm not saying anyone on this thread is that bad off, but think about it. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

[stillafool]

Mark, it's never okay to knowingly expose others to disease.  However, when you are in a married union, have taken vows to remain faithful to the one you married, but;  decide to have sex with someone else and not tell your spouse, then have sex with your spouse, exposing them to God knows what, that is selfish and abusive.

[mark clemson]

I like to at least back up my opinions with some reasoned thinking rather than emotional logic. Anyone married to a schoolteacher, daycare worker, doctor, nurse, and no doubt many other jobs can reasonably expect to be exposed to diseases (although not STDs). Is not having sex with your spouse because some school kid had the flu a reasonable thing to do? (As you aware, the flu can KILL people.) That's for individuals to decide. It's not a crime, nor is it generally considered abusive.

[mark clemson]

Taking a minute here, I want to apologize if anything above was phrased in a way that hurt feelings or re-triggered old wounds. I am trying to argue from what I see as facts, but I recognize that many if not most BS's were/are people simply trying their best and who were treated VERY unfairly by the WS and experienced trauma they certainly did not deserve in any way. So, I apologize if I've hurt any feelings in the above.

I kind of wish posters would be a bit less direct when countering my arguments, so I wouldn't be triggered into responses that are equally direct and probably don't take very understandable feelings from very difficult and traumatic experiences into account.

Again, my apologies.

[elaine567]

I have a feeling you are being triggered here Mark, hence your defensive stance.
You do not like the idea of you being viewed as an "abuser". 

[pepperbird]

1 hour ago, mark clemson said:

I'm not suggesting we should "acting like it's nothing," SWS. It's quite possible to acknowledge people's genuine emotional distress without labeling an entire class of people in a way that implies they're criminals when they're not.

Do you think people don't have very similar feelings when a partner announces divorce? How about that they're going to join a cult and the kids will be going along 50% of the time. Some people would be VERY hurt by decisions like that. And some people will (understandably) flip out over decisions that are much more minor, e.g. smoking pot (in states where it's legal) in front of the kids, buying the kid an expensive car, taking the 18 year old son to a strip club, etc etc.

If being (understandably) very hurt and upset by some major decision your spouse makes without your input or knowledge is "abuse", shouldn't EVERYONE frankly be going into marriage EXPECTING some level of abuse.  We know our spouse is an independent human being, right?

Cheating in and of itself isn't generally acknowledged as abuse. That's an ACCURATE view, despite what internet echo chambers and the like might have some people believing. It doesn't mean that some cheaters aren't abusers, but to be fair some small percentage of BS are no doubt abusers as well.

 

See above. As for disease, for better or worse carelessness is generally not a crime either. I can't count the number of times I've seen people leave a public restroom without washing their hands. And then they touch whatever surfaces in offices, grocery stores, airports, etc. Maybe we should label all these people "abusers" as well (they ARE risking others' safety) and dish out jail time for not washing your hands a full 30 seconds?

If someone KNOWS the AP has an STD, that would be a different story.

I

 

1 hour ago, mark clemson said:

I'm not suggesting we should "acting like it's nothing," SWS. It's quite possible to acknowledge people's genuine emotional distress without labeling an entire class of people in a way that implies they're criminals when they're not.

Do you think people don't have very similar feelings when a partner announces divorce? How about that they're going to join a cult and the kids will be going along 50% of the time. Some people would be VERY hurt by decisions like that. And some people will (understandably) flip out over decisions that are much more minor, e.g. smoking pot (in states where it's legal) in front of the kids, buying the kid an expensive car, taking the 18 year old son to a strip club, etc etc.

If being (understandably) very hurt and upset by some major decision your spouse makes without your input or knowledge is "abuse", shouldn't EVERYONE frankly be going into marriage EXPECTING some level of abuse.  We know our spouse is an independent human being, right?

Cheating in and of itself isn't generally acknowledged as abuse. That's an ACCURATE view, despite what internet echo chambers and the like might have some people believing. It doesn't mean that some cheaters aren't abusers, but to be fair some small percentage of BS are no doubt abusers as well.

 

See above. As for disease, for better or worse carelessness is generally not a crime either. I can't count the number of times I've seen people leave a public restroom without washing their hands. And then they touch whatever surfaces in offices, grocery stores, airports, etc. Maybe we should label all these people "abusers" as well (they ARE risking others' safety) and dish out jail time for not washing your hands a full 30 seconds?

If someone KNOWS the AP has an STD, that would be a different story.

Mark,
I appreciate what you're trying to get at, even though it might seem like I don't.
If it was simply the man or woman seeing someone else, I could see how you could feel it's not abuse. The problem is that, many times, it's not that simple.
I do appreciate you working hard and being open minded enough to try and see the BS side, but it could be that you can't "get" it if you haven't experienced it.
 

[pepperbird]

1 hour ago, stillafool said:

Mark, it's never okay to knowingly expose others to disease.  However, when you are in a married union, have taken vows to remain faithful to the one you married, but;  decide to have sex with someone else and not tell your spouse, then have sex with your spouse, exposing them to God knows what, that is selfish and abusive.

When a single person decides they want to sleep with someone, they usually (I hope) give some consideration to the fact that their newest sexual partner may have slept with other people. They can choose to take steps to prevent the spread of a disease.

A married person assumes their spouse is faithful and they don't have to worry.

[pepperbird]

15 minutes ago, mark clemson said:

Taking a minute here, I want to apologize if anything above was phrased in a way that hurt feelings or re-triggered old wounds. I am trying to argue from what I see as facts, but I recognize that many if not most BS's were/are people simply trying their best and who were treated VERY unfairly by the WS and experienced trauma they certainly did not deserve in any way. So, I apologize if I've hurt any feelings in the above.

I kind of wish posters would be a bit less direct when countering my arguments, so I wouldn't be triggered into responses that are equally direct and probably don't take very understandable feelings from very difficult and traumatic experiences into account.

Again, my apologies.

 When you say that you feel your posts are triggering, why do you think they are?

[MilaVaneela]

My take on cheating as a form of abuse:  

My xH picked up an STI from his OW and transmitted it to me while I was pregnant, and as a result I miscarried. It was heartbreaking. Yes, I became “emotional” over losing my unborn baby. Yes, I feel that my xH brazenly disregarded two lives due to his blatant negligence. 
 

When it comes to children or pets, negligence is a form of abuse, yes? So how is brazen negligence in the form of exposing a spouse or partner to a (PREVENTABLE by not engaging in risky sex) disease? STI =/= influenza as the first could be prevented by, say, not having unprotected sex with an AP. The second may be “preventable” but the average person doesn’t go out to the grocery store or the bank and come home with chlamydia or HIV. They have to willfully go out and engage in a risky sexual activity to contract them, with the potential to pass them to an unsuspecting BS. 
 

I hope I don’t seem unhinged or unreasonable but... I do believe that blatant negligence toward the health and wellbeing of a partner is abusive. Take it for what it’s worth. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by MilaVaneela

[mark clemson]

39 minutes ago, pepperbird said:

 When you say that you feel your posts are triggering, why do you think they are?

Well, it's because I'm being very direct. I do recognize that some BSs experienced extreme emotional and other distress. And I'm not trying to claim that no cheater is ever abusive in other ways or that cheating can't be part of a pattern of abuse. Those things CERTAINLY DO happen, and I'm not trying to downplay posters' genuine negative experiences. It's the broad labeling and/or misapplication of that label I take issue with.

[mark clemson]

23 minutes ago, MilaVaneela said:

I hope I don’t seem unhinged or unreasonable but... 

You certainly don't IMO.  Please take the below as a discussion of logical points. I'm sorry for what happened to you, and I very much recognize I'm not taking your personal and no doubt extremely difficult experiences into account.

The issue with criminal negligence is generally it's only recognized when there are actual consequences as a result. Plenty of negligence occurs on freeways and in myriad other ways every day with no consequences or at least easily traceable consequences (those hand non-washers I mentioned come to mind).

We can't go labeling every negligent person/act such as the above an abuser over harm that might or might not come to others. If we did, we'd have some huge fraction of humanity locked up, no doubt including most people reading this. It's not a realistic view or approach.

[spiritedaway2003]

1 hour ago, elaine567 said:

I have a feeling you are being triggered here Mark, hence your defensive stance.
You do not like the idea of you being viewed as an "abuser". 

Nah.  I'll let Mark speak for himself, but I totally didn't read it that way.  I think he actually wanted to have a logical discussion on the usage of "abuse".  And separately, I think he is apologizing to others because I think he understands that the experience can be painful and that the focus on the discussion (and usage of the word "abusive") might trigger others.  And he doesn't want to minimize or undermine the pain a BS experience as a result of infidelity.   I think he actually took great care to be thoughtful in this discussion.  I could certainly be wrong, but that's just how I read it.  Not every discussion needs to come in from a personal or emotional response. 

I am in agreement with his view of the usage.  Semantically, I also reserve the word "abuse" and don't use it lightly. Yes, I realize that it narrows the definition, but if used in the broadest sense of the definition (anything that's bad, wrong, improper), then why bother with the term at all?  That label doesn't need to apply to WS.   Let's just apply it to everyone:  Anyone who lashes out at another because he or she is having a bad day.  When a spouse neglects his/her half because that person is focused on kids, or work or whatever, etc.

When a person steps out of the marriage, there are terms to describe it.  Cheater. Infidelity. Adultery.  I'm not saying that there can't be abuse within the context of infidelity,.  For example, if a spouse keeps gaslighting another, that is a form of emotional abuse.  It's certainly not mutually exclusive., and I see Mark took pains to mention exceptions like STI, etc and clarifying it with, for example, the difference with abuse vs say, "negligence".  To blanket the use of "abuse" to all WS, that isn't logical to me.  Because one could just easily blanket the use of that term for pretty much anything.

I think I read somewhere upthread that if someone spends money on the AP, that's also abuse.  One can call it improper use of funds, stupidity, or lack of fiscal responsbility but abuse?   At the end of the day, people can define it whatever they want (it doesn't really matter to me), but I personally think that's quite a bit of stretch. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by spiritedaway2003

[spiritedaway2003]

Sorry Jimmy, it looks like your your thread got threadjacked.

[JimmyNorth]

1 hour ago, MilaVaneela said:

My take on cheating as a form of abuse:  

My xH picked up an STI from his OW and transmitted it to me while I was pregnant, and as a result I miscarried. It was heartbreaking. Yes, I became “emotional” over losing my unborn baby. Yes, I feel that my xH brazenly disregarded two lives due to his blatant negligence. 
 

When it comes to children or pets, negligence is a form of abuse, yes? So how is brazen negligence in the form of exposing a spouse or partner to a (PREVENTABLE by not engaging in risky sex) disease? STI =/= influenza as the first could be prevented by, say, not having unprotected sex with an AP. The second may be “preventable” but the average person doesn’t go out to the grocery store or the bank and come home with chlamydia or HIV. They have to willfully go out and engage in a risky sexual activity to contract them, with the potential to pass them to an unsuspecting BS. 
 

I hope I don’t seem unhinged or unreasonable but... I do believe that blatant negligence toward the health and wellbeing of a partner is abusive. Take it for what it’s worth. 

Here’s the deal. Mark is not saying that BS’s are overreacting or are wrong for feeling hurt. What he is trying to demonstrate is that there are many decisions in a marriage that could affect a spouse like an affair can, just with a different flavor.

Now let’s examine something else. We will assume that the BS’s here making comments were the good wives. We will assume they did the best they could to keep a strong marriage. And you know what? I LOVE women like you. You are the type that takes care of a spouse and does what they can to make them happy. It may be weird to say this, but that’s what made me fall for my OW. My OW was a damn good refreshing change for me!!! I think we can all agree, nothing feels better than feeling loved.

Can the BS’s here take in consideration that maybe some of the MM’s here didn’t have someone like you? Maybe some MM’s had selfish or loveless spouses due to the wife’s choice, NOT because of busy life or anything. So it’s completely understandable for a MM to fall for a OW when in fact the MM may have felt taken advantage of or “abused” for many years in the marriage.

Just something to think about.

Edited April 17, 2020 by JimmyNorth