Accepting personal responsibility

From what I've read here and other places it seems that most bs's do want all the details, sexual and descriptions. Are you saying that isn't what the majority want?

No I am saying that isn't what I was saying Pokeman should disclose. I wanted her to bring the bw in from the dark but that does not mean every detail. I wanted her to have some compassion for the woman who has been fed the same lies from the same man and tell her those lies.

No I am saying that isn't what I was saying Pokeman should disclose. I wanted her to bring the bw in from the dark but that does not mean every detail. I wanted her to have some compassion for the woman who has been fed the same lies from the same man and tell her those lies.

OK.........didn't realize you were specifically speaking of Pokeman's situation. I thought you were talking about bs's in general.

Side note.......I was asked a lot of detail by the bs. Of course when xmm finally did fess up (only part of it) he minimized the sexual contact and what it entailed. Which shouldn't be a shocker to anyone uh.

Oh? So now the BS is no concern of the OW? Isn't that the exact opposite of what OWs are usually told - "What about the BW! Think of the BW!"

 

So, which is it? You can't have it both ways just because it suits you to change horses midway....

I meant, what goes on in a closed marriage is none of the outsider's (OW) business. Any info about the BS will be used against her.

An OW who is trying to break up a marriage, has said that the BS burys her head and will not see. That's an example of an OW feeling frustration while trying to manipulate her way in.

I meant, what goes on in a closed marriage is none of the outsider's (OW) business. Any info about the BS will be used against her.

 

An OW who is trying to break up a marriage, has said that the BS burys her head and will not see. That's an example of an OW feeling frustration while trying to manipulate her way in.

DIC.........ya know I really like you and I get where your religious views come from, I do, as my mother has similar beliefs.

But.........I have to say a couple of things.

The mm/mw opens up the marriage by cheating.......right? Of course it's not with consent from the bs but it's opened up by the cheater. Personal details sometimes true, sometimes outright lies are told to the OW/OM. Most feel that sharing that kind of information is a betrayal and I agree it is, but it's a fact that it happens.

As for the OW trying to manipulate her way in as you put it, most, not all OW's have been manipulated and lied to that the marriage is already irreparably broken. Yes it's highly likely that it's not the way things really are, but this is where it starts. Most of us (we as decent human beings) would not cross that line, had we not been manipulated and lied to). Doesn't excuse it or make it right, but that's the way it often times IS.

Not quite - I provided the opportunity. He took it and did the requisite work. I would not be with a guy I could not respect. I would certainly never marry a guy I couldn't respect.

 

He reclaimed his backbone, raided the jar in the larder where his xW kept his balls, and faced his demons in IC. The man I'm with is not the man she married, though he does bear a marked resemblance to the son, brother and friend that went MIA all those decades ago - only, older, wiser, more mature and his own man, now.

 

This R has changed both of us in fundamental ways - and all our friends say it's for the better!

Good, I'm glad for you and your H. This seems like a situation where it was better that the D happened and he moved on. Not that I agree that an A was the ideal way for him to move on, but, it is what it is. I've known of people in similar situations.

I doubt most A situations are like yours tho. Some, yes. Most, no....from what I gather, IRL, internet and other media. As we know all situations are unique to themselves and the people involved...how can you advocate for all A's...(do you advocate for all A's)...knowing that every situations is different?

I may be getting you mixed up with another poster here, but is he your first and only MM?

DIC.........ya know I really like you and I get where your religious views come from, I do, as my mother has similar beliefs.

But.........I have to say a couple of things.

 

The mm/mw opens up the marriage by cheating.......right? Of course it's not with consent from the bs but it's opened up by the cheater. Personal details sometimes true, sometimes outright lies are told to the OW/OM. Most feel that sharing that kind of information is a betrayal and I agree it is, but it's a fact that it happens.

 

As for the OW trying to manipulate her way in as you put it, most, not all OW's have been manipulated and lied to that the marriage is already irreparably broken. Yes it's highly likely that it's not the way things really are, but this is where it starts. Most of us (we as decent human beings) would not cross that line, had we not been manipulated and lied to). Doesn't excuse it or make it right, but that's the way it often times IS.

BB, I could go through boring detail and give you a whole new set reasons for a possibly weak M of my ER/MM, and his W. An OW can think of Anything, to justify.

The bottom line is, and at the end of the day : It is true that the M covenant is closed, and the outsider working their way in, is as much of a robber as the one who felt that he needed my valuables from my storage -more than I.

We're not talking to the deceitful H, here. I'm speaking to the role of the outsider, or the OW.

No - your values are different.

 

Just as I could never be in the military (any military - not yours in particular!) because taking orders is one thing I just don't get...

 

If everyone was the same, it would be so boring!

I think that this is the crux of it all...especially in the discussions between BS's/fBS's and the "unapologetic" OW here on LS.

Our values are drastically different.

I think that a key difference between the two groups of people described are the importance of self vs. empathy for others. The importance of one's own happiness over that of anyone else, and the price you're willing to exact or expect others to pay in order to attain/maintain your own happiness.

That, coupled with different views on the importance of relationships in general seem to be the two biggest differentiators.

I think that this is the crux of it all...especially in the discussions between BS's/fBS's and the "unapologetic" OW here on LS.

 

Our values are drastically different.

 

I think that a key difference between the two groups of people described are the importance of self vs. empathy for others. The importance of one's own happiness over that of anyone else, and the price you're willing to exact or expect others to pay in order to attain/maintain your own happiness.

 

That, coupled with different views on the importance of relationships in general seem to be the two biggest differentiators.

Owl, does this mean that one can be considered not to have empathy for others if one does not place someone else's happiness/needs/desires above one's own?

I thought empathy was about sharing feelings/understanding and 'getting' it, I didn't believe that required then changing one's actions accordingly. That would be selflessness, to me; not empathy.

Owl, does this mean that one can be considered not to have empathy for others if one does not place someone else's happiness/needs/desires above one's own?

 

I thought empathy was about sharing feelings/understanding and 'getting' it, I didn't believe that required then changing one's actions accordingly. That would be selflessness, to me; not empathy.

It doesn't mean that one has no empathy...

But if you view the WS as "irrelevent" or don't care if you hurt them or not, you're certainly don't appear to have much empathy for them.

But perhaps you're right. If you do indeed take time to consider what they're going to feel, imagine what it would be like if it was done to you...and then still proceed on with that action, you may have had empathy but chose to act selfishly instead of selflessly.

If you don't take the time to consider their feelings at all...then you'd be displaying no empathy for them.

But perhaps you're right. If you do indeed take time to consider what they're going to feel, imagine what it would be like if it was done to you...and then still proceed on with that action, you may have had empathy but chose to act selfishly instead of selflessly.

 

If you don't take the time to consider their feelings at all...then you'd be displaying no empathy for them.

Okay, it's making more sense (for me) now, thanks. I acted in a manner that could be deemed selfish but I do not accept I had no empathy. Far from it.

Owl, does this mean that one can be considered not to have empathy for others if one does not place someone else's happiness/needs/desires above one's own?

 

I thought empathy was about sharing feelings/understanding and 'getting' it, I didn't believe that required then changing one's actions accordingly. That would be selflessness, to me; not empathy.

For me, when I have empathy for another (and the compassion that follows from empathy) I don't want to take action that hurts them. So, for me, they are closely connected. When I chose to become the OW, I never thought of the BW with empathy or compassion. I really was thinking of myself at that point. So, IMO, Owl has nailed it.

Okay, it's making more sense (for me) now, thanks. I acted in a manner that could be deemed selfish but I do not accept I had no empathy. Far from it.

Doesn't that lead to having to live with a lot of guilt?

Doesn't that lead to having to live with a lot of guilt?

For a long time the guilt was very bad.

Owl, does this mean that one can be considered not to have empathy for others if one does not place someone else's happiness/needs/desires above one's own?

 

I thought empathy was about sharing feelings/understanding and 'getting' it, I didn't believe that required then changing one's actions accordingly. That would be selflessness, to me; not empathy.

Would you have an affair with your best friend's or sister's husband if you were attracted to him? If not, do you consider, denying yourself some subset of men because of these connections, to be selfless behavior?

I'm just curious if you consider every action that conflicts with some personal desire or want to be selfless. To me selflessness is about a particular balance between one's own interests and the interests of others which swings pretty far toward others and away from oneself. Usually it is associated with sacrifice and having little concern for yourself.

Would you have an affair with your best friend's or sister's husband if you were attracted to him? If not, do you consider, denying yourself some subset of men because of these connections, to be selfless behavior?

 

I'm just curious if you consider every action that conflicts with some personal desire or want to be selfless. To me selflessness is about a particular balance between one's own interests and the interests of others which swings pretty far toward others and away from oneself. Usually it is associated with sacrifice and having little concern for yourself.

Affair with sister's husband? If my sister's husband were in exactly the same position as my bf was then.... had been treated the same and was suffering the same... I am not prepared to say 100% no, if I felt the same way about him and she had behaved in the same way.... But I know more now about the whole situation, the guilt it brings, the worries and sleepless nights, so I can't put myself back before this experience and make the distinction (which is what I think you are trying to elicit) between a stranger's husband and my sister's husband.

I don't consider every action conflicting with my own desire to be selfless. The point was about whether empathy must dictate one's actions, and I don't think it must.

And certainly one must never 'have little concern for yourself'. One's first obligation in life is to oneself, else there is no possibility of being a happy, stable person with any positive influence on others.

DIC.........ya know I really like you and I get where your religious views come from, I do, as my mother has similar beliefs.

But.........I have to say a couple of things.

 

The mm/mw opens up the marriage by cheating.......right? Of course it's not with consent from the bs but it's opened up by the cheater. Personal details sometimes true, sometimes outright lies are told to the OW/OM. Most feel that sharing that kind of information is a betrayal and I agree it is, but it's a fact that it happens.

 

As for the OW trying to manipulate her way in as you put it, most, not all OW's have been manipulated and lied to that the marriage is already irreparably broken. Yes it's highly likely that it's not the way things really are, but this is where it starts. Most of us (we as decent human beings) would not cross that line, had we not been manipulated and lied to). Doesn't excuse it or make it right, but that's the way it often times IS.

BB, I will concede that YOU, personally were manipulated and lied to.

But, whether the marriage is irreparably broken or not, most OW/OM WILLINGLY engage with a married partner. These MPs claim they are miserable, unhappy, unloved and unappreciated, but they are STILL MARRIED.

Many would NOT engage with a MP no matter the attraction, the flirting, the lies or manipulation.

There's a difference, don't you think?

So, if you choose to go that route, knowing your partner is miserably married, but STILL married, you have to personally accept the consequences of that decision: To engage in a relationship with an already committed (married) partner, IMHO.

DIC.........ya know I really like you and I get where your religious views come from, I do, as my mother has similar beliefs.

But.........I have to say a couple of things.

 

The mm/mw opens up the marriage by cheating.......right? Of course it's not with consent from the bs but it's opened up by the cheater. Personal details sometimes true, sometimes outright lies are told to the OW/OM. Most feel that sharing that kind of information is a betrayal and I agree it is, but it's a fact that it happens.

 

As for the OW trying to manipulate her way in as you put it, most, not all OW's have been manipulated and lied to that the marriage is already irreparably broken. Yes it's highly likely that it's not the way things really are, but this is where it starts. Most of us (we as decent human beings) would not cross that line, had we not been manipulated and lied to). Doesn't excuse it or make it right, but that's the way it often times IS.

BB, I will concede that YOU, personally were manipulated and lied to.

 

But, whether the marriage is irreparably broken or not, most OW/OM WILLINGLY engage with a married partner. These MPs claim they are miserable, unhappy, unloved and unappreciated, but they are STILL MARRIED.

 

Many would NOT engage with a MP no matter the attraction, the flirting, the lies or manipulation.

 

There's a difference, don't you think?

 

So, if you choose to go that route, knowing your partner is miserably married, but STILL married, you have to personally accept the consequences of that decision: To engage in a relationship with an already committed (married) partner, IMHO.

I'd like to add to this. BB, I understand what you are saying, that the OW/OM is often manipulated into believing the marriage is "over". But as Spark says, it isn't really over, and the OW/OM knows this as well. (By really over, I mean the MM/MW is not divorced.)

So whether manipulated or not, the OW/OM is knowingly involved with a married person. That is a choice they are making while in the relationship. Are they attempting to bring the end more quickly? Possibly, possibly not. (My humble opinion is that if they love the MP they are attempting to bring the end of the current marriage, as they are invested in the future relationship, but that's only my opinion, I grant.)

The thing is, if they do "take responsibility" for their own actions, they must acknowledge that they did indeed know the person was married. They cannot then later claim hurt based upon lack of knowledge. Granted, their "knowledge" may not be completely accurate, as they were almost undoubtedly led to believe things that were not true (i.e. the marriage is over, she doesn't care what I do, etc.) the underlying base is that they did know they were involved with a married person. A person who had at least divided loyalties and at best was a lying schmuck .

There is an old saying that if you play with fire you're going to get burned. Personal responsibility (to me) means that when you've gotten burned you don't complain that the fire was hot. (and of course, I don't mean you personally) It's a given that the fire is hot. You may get lucky and be able to snatch the coals without getting scorched, but the odds are against you.

Affair with sister's husband? If my sister's husband were in exactly the same position as my bf was then.... had been treated the same and was suffering the same... I am not prepared to say 100% no, if I felt the same way about him and she had behaved in the same way.... But I know more now about the whole situation, the guilt it brings, the worries and sleepless nights, so I can't put myself back before this experience and make the distinction (which is what I think you are trying to elicit) between a stranger's husband and my sister's husband.

 

I don't consider every action conflicting with my own desire to be selfless. The point was about whether empathy must dictate one's actions, and I don't think it must.

 

And certainly one must never 'have little concern for yourself'. One's first obligation in life is to oneself, else there is no possibility of being a happy, stable person with any positive influence on others.

Thanks for the explanation.

I think there are some times when it is good to act with little concern for yourself, but most of us aren't likely to encounter them. During terrible times, one selfless person may make a big difference to the lives of many people. And parents may risk their own life to save their child, if it came to that. Moving along the "little concern" spectrum, some donate a kidney, etc., risking surgery unnecessary for them but to help another. People do behave in selfless ways, typically motivated by love, empathy and compassion.

 

So, if you choose to go that route, knowing your partner is miserably married, but STILL married, you have to personally accept the consequences of that decision: To engage in a relationship with an already committed (married) partner, IMHO.

Yeah, I would agree. But again, it goes back to what a specific definition of "over" is.

To ME (and "anti-affair" people): marriage over=divorce papers

OW: marriage over=relationship is deteriorating, but he needs to stay for other reasons

MM: marriage over=starting an affair, and using the fact that marriage is deteriorating to justify behavior

So, in an attempt to continue to engage in a betrayal such as an A, one has to convince themselves that what they are doing is justified in order to continue. Then there are those AP's (both MM and OW) who just don't give a crap who they hurt and are fine with it and don't need any justifications because they just don't care.

Empathy is complicated. A lot of people don't care to be empathetic because it leaves them vulnerable to disappointment and hurt. The fact that I do have empathy has left me disappointed on several occasions. But I refuse to stop being empathetic because I find the rewards outweigh the consequences (being disappointed). But those are my values.

It doesn't mean that one has no empathy...

 

But if you view the WS as "irrelevent" or don't care if you hurt them or not, you're certainly don't appear to have much empathy for them.

 

But perhaps you're right. If you do indeed take time to consider what they're going to feel, imagine what it would be like if it was done to you...and then still proceed on with that action, you may have had empathy but chose to act selfishly instead of selflessly.

 

If you don't take the time to consider their feelings at all...then you'd be displaying no empathy for them.

And should the BS then also take time to consider what the OW/OM is going to feel and imagine what it would be like if it was done to you... and then if the BS still proceeds on with that action (trying to keep the marriage), s/he has chosen to act selfishly instead of selflessly?

There are two parallel relationships. Why is the OP asked to be more empathetic and selfless than the BS? Why is the OP judged harder than the BS if s/he tries to keep their relationship intact?

Both the BS and the OP are human beings in love with another human being. Why is more asked of the OP?

A person who had at least divided loyalties and at best was a lying schmuck .

whoops - I meant at worst was a lying schmuck.... sorry

BB, I will concede that YOU, personally were manipulated and lied to.

 

But, whether the marriage is irreparably broken or not, most OW/OM WILLINGLY engage with a married partner. These MPs claim they are miserable, unhappy, unloved and unappreciated, but they are STILL MARRIED.

 

Many would NOT engage with a MP no matter the attraction, the flirting, the lies or manipulation.

 

There's a difference, don't you think?

 

So, if you choose to go that route, knowing your partner is miserably married, but STILL married, you have to personally accept the consequences of that decision: To engage in a relationship with an already committed (married) partner, IMHO.

Everything you said Spark, I do agree with and I admit that I have a responsibility in what happened and that I crossed a line that I shouldn't have even though I was lied to and he manipulated me the first time being several years ago. It ate at me and I regretted it and I knew I wouldn't go there again. To find out that I did it again even though it was unknowingly and unwillingly has been a a hard pill to swallow. It's been a double whammy.

I don't think I'm burnt up with bitterness but I'm very cynical and I don't know if I will ever open my heart again. As FOG said, my man picker is broken and I don't trust myself.

I'd like to add to this. BB, I understand what you are saying, that the OW/OM is often manipulated into believing the marriage is "over". But as Spark says, it isn't really over, and the OW/OM knows this as well. (By really over, I mean the MM/MW is not divorced.)

 

So whether manipulated or not, the OW/OM is knowingly involved with a married person. That is a choice they are making while in the relationship. Are they attempting to bring the end more quickly? Possibly, possibly not. (My humble opinion is that if they love the MP they are attempting to bring the end of the current marriage, as they are invested in the future relationship, but that's only my opinion, I grant.)

 

The thing is, if they do "take responsibility" for their own actions, they must acknowledge that they did indeed know the person was married. They cannot then later claim hurt based upon lack of knowledge. Granted, their "knowledge" may not be completely accurate, as they were almost undoubtedly led to believe things that were not true (i.e. the marriage is over, she doesn't care what I do, etc.) the underlying base is that they did know they were involved with a married person. A person who had at least divided loyalties and at best was a lying schmuck .

 

There is an old saying that if you play with fire you're going to get burned. Personal responsibility (to me) means that when you've gotten burned you don't complain that the fire was hot. (and of course, I don't mean you personally) It's a given that the fire is hot. You may get lucky and be able to snatch the coals without getting scorched, but the odds are against you.

I get what you are saying Silk and you are right......and along with the lies that mm/mw tell to the ow/om about the marriage being dead, ow/om lie to themselves. Maybe it's off topic but it always amazes me when a poster says, (but I never expected him/her to leave for me) such a contradiction don't you think? lol Well other than those rare instances when the ow/om is perfectly happy with things as they are. Anyway usually the ones who make those statements are talking about how much they love the AP and how miserable they are.

Back to your post Silk.......yes I played with fire and got burned........I own it. As I said to Spark, yes I was lied to and manipulated but that doesn't excuse where I crossed a line that I shouldn't have several years ago. If that line hadn't been crossed I wouldn't have found myself in more of the current web of deceit and lies. Well current isn't the correct term as I am out of it. Yay for me!

I have learned some hard painful lessons and I tell myself that I'm better for it. Maybe some day I can find a balance of being open to a new relationship without being too cynical. On the other hand right now I feel perfectly fine without having a man in my life.

I believe I have to agree with desert here. To me it doesn't matter whether the marriage is abusive or not. I have a relationship with my MM. I choose to be with him, he chooses to be with me. I personally do not need to justify this by my MM's marriage being abusive. (It's not. His wife is a good woman.)

 

I accept responsibility for participating in our relationship. I will endure any consequences of it. But I will not let my MM go for his BS's sake. She doesn't have more right to a fulfilling relationship than I do.

 

My opinion is not that OWoman should have respected her husband's marriage. It is that she doesn't need the excuse of it being abusive not to.

OWoman, wondering if you missed my post above? I'm interested in if you would not have felt the right to pursue a full-time relationship/marriage with your husband had his BS not been abusive?

And should the BS then also take time to consider what the OW/OM is going to feel and imagine what it would be like if it was done to you... and then if the BS still proceeds on with that action (trying to keep the marriage), s/he has chosen to act selfishly instead of selflessly?

It's her (the BS) marriage to begin with. OW just butted in on it. It's BS's marriage/relationship to keep, NOT the OW's. She (OW) is not entitled to it.

Both the BS and the OP are human beings in love with another human being. Why is more asked of the OP?

Because the BS is the one who exchanged vows, put money into a wedding, takes care of the house, kids, ect. OW just waits on the sidelines and does virtually nothing except wait for MM to come be with her. I see what you are getting at, but as long as MM is still married, BS has got the rights to him, not the OW.

OWoman, wondering if you missed my post above? I'm interested in if you would not have felt the right to pursue a full-time relationship/marriage with your husband had his BS not been abusive?

Interesting, I was wondering the same thing. It's easy to betray someone who you feel is a bad person. What if BS was a very kind hearted, sweet woman who genuinly loved MM?