Tomcat33 Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 I don't think a man that is getting "excitement" from another woman really ends up desiring his wife. if anything, sex with his wife seems even that much more boring and they will avoid it because they like the sex with the OW too much. Not necessarily true for some people it increases their libido it's talked about in psychology all the time and in fact when you look up all the signs to see if your spouse is cheating they list "does your parnter want less or more frequent sex than usual" True. I'd just as soon NOT bet my life on the strength of a rubber, thank you. Anybody who wants to play STD-roulette with their life, that's their choice. Well with that idea, all us single folk might as well join a monastery now because if we want to cater to our sexual urges we might as well get an STD, even while we protect ourselves... Fine married people should not be having sex with other people period, but to say a rubber won't cut it is not necessarily true.
Darth Vader Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Excellent point and I don't think anyone can disagree with that. I think it is a misdemeanor crime in some states but it is almost never prosecuted - why I don't know. Funny, I was going to post the same thing, but I saw you posted it first. Depends on the Country, religion and their views/rules/laws...I know in China it's illegal to chew gum! You've got to be kidding!
Darth Vader Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 No, it's only beneficial to the PERSON cheating, MM or MW. FOR THEM the marriage is better because they're getting 'whatever' on the side to keep them happier in the marriage, where the UNsuspecting betrayed spouse thinks all is OK, under false pretenses... So, it really is one sided. And very selfish. UNLESS MM/MW TELLS their spouse, are they're OK with having an open marriage. I REST MY CASE!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool::cool: Except for the open marriage thing............
Hazy Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 The French take on very much your view, women look the other way and pretend that they don't know their husband is sleeping with another woman. The French take a very laissez-faire attitude about affairs, like it's bound that their husband is going to stray at some point, so just let it go. It's not a big deal. Extramarital affairs just really aren't the big deal they are in the United States. However, I would never be an OW and I would never cheat on someone. I would end the relationship first.
outofdarkness Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Not necessarily true for some people it increases their libido it's talked about in psychology all the time and in fact when you look up all the signs to see if your spouse is cheating they list "does your parnter want less or more frequent sex than usual" Well with that idea, all us single folk might as well join a monastery now because if we want to cater to our sexual urges we might as well get an STD, even while we protect ourselves... Fine married people should not be having sex with other people period, but to say a rubber won't cut it is not necessarily true. Yeah , I would agree w/ you on both points...
outofdarkness Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Monogomy, IMO, is more of a myth than a norm. I may sound really callous but let's be real here - how many "happy" married couples do you know? After the wedding is over and the honeymoon scrapbook is put away couples settle in to routine and responsibility and, IMO, that replaces passion and romance! Many MM/MW find other outlets for their "affairs" - may not be another partner, may be work, their kids, etc. etc. whatever it takes to make them feel fulfilled and replace what is missing in their lives - I just don't buy that one person can be "everything" to another person for their whole lives. Why get married at all then? Well, I guess that is how we meet the norms that society dictates "Get married, have kids, buy a station wagon, get a mortgage, etc. etc. etc." Doesn't mean it works - just that its what is expected and most people want to conform and fit in with "what's expected". Just my opinion...... Well, My Mom has been D for 7 years now after being M to my Dad for almost 40 years...She found out he would rather be a woman and have a woman as partner....At this point, she would like to meet someone not to necessarily have sex w/ but more as a companion...Marriage is constantly changing and evolving as time goes by..It goes thru many different stages..I can honestly say that I know many couples who are at different stages, and the couples that I know of who are my parent's age and have stayed together, just enjoy having a companion..You know, their best bud...Someone to travel w/, take walks w/ have dinner with...AND they have a history together...They can enjoy their Grandchildren, etc, and not have to go thru the entire process again...
outofdarkness Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Biggest load of sh!it I have ever heard. An affair beneficial to the marriage? Ya...tell us another good one. I don't think a man that is getting "excitement" from another woman really ends up desiring his wife. if anything, sex with his wife seems even that much more boring and they will avoid it because they like the sex with the OW too much. Sorry...don't buy it. Yep....Every ounce of the MM is sucked up by the OW...From the mudane problem that come up that he would otherwise be consulting his W about, to the sex that he then constantly compares to sex w/ the OW...Or he's just plain too tired to do it w/ the W..It is the OW's JOB so to speak to totally and completely keep the MM happy..Most especially in the sack...She can buy and wear sexy nighties, be freshly showered and coiffed, smell very nice, have a romantic dinner ready for him...She caters to his every need..If the W then tries to do these things, it's already been done, so why would he be interested..The W is tired..She's been working, trying to take care of the kids, keep the home in at least some order, and on top of that, she's expected to do everything an OW would do to please her MM??? It's just not realistic IMO...
outofdarkness Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 You know what I meant when I said that...but if you push it to the extreme, yes, of course a STD would hurt the W... the H has to be responsible when having sex outside and use a condom...which will eliminate most of the STDs. UMMM...Lizzie...STD's can't ALL be prevented from using a condom!!!!!!! My H brought myself and our two small toddlers a wonderful little gift one day years ago...A WICKED case of scabies...Last time I checked, there was not such thing as a "body" condom! There are also things that the MM will bring home that are not considered to be STD's...Colds, etc...NOT serious for a normal healthy person, but for small kids it can be deadly...
Cliche Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Yep....Every ounce of the MM is sucked up by the OW...From the mudane problem that come up that he would otherwise be consulting his W about, to the sex that he then constantly compares to sex w/ the OW...Or he's just plain too tired to do it w/ the W..It is the OW's JOB so to speak to totally and completely keep the MM happy..Most especially in the sack...She can buy and wear sexy nighties, be freshly showered and coiffed, smell very nice, have a romantic dinner ready for him...She caters to his every need..If the W then tries to do these things, it's already been done, so why would he be interested..The W is tired..She's been working, trying to take care of the kids, keep the home in at least some order, and on top of that, she's expected to do everything an OW would do to please her MM??? It's just not realistic IMO... Oh my, I am obviously shirking my OW duties. :lol As with all things, this may be the case some of the time, but I doubt that most OWs are like this, OOD. It sounds more like a movie than a real life relationship.
sadbuttrue Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 yes, and OOD, i have stated elsewhere, that i have all these family responsiblities you speak of, and i do them alone. why should you use those as an excuse not to be romantic with your husband? dont you think that OW are sometimes tired too? the difference is we just make the effort i guess.
Cliche Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 My H brought myself and our two small toddlers a wonderful little gift one day years ago...A WICKED case of scabies... Your H brought home and gave you scabies from an affair he had?! Geez, OOD, I've read some of why you stay with this man, but really, that is awful. You're on this board a lot, and I know you probably find comfort here and that's why, and that's a great thing, but maybe if you cut down on online posting a bit, you could find some time to focus on an escape plan. Neither you nor your children should have to deal with things like this.
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 I’m more disappointed that living an honest life seems an unobtainable and therefore twisted concept to some…. I once dated a woman who was very much against drinking alcohol. It was okay because I almost never drink. One day I was hanging out with some friends and someone offered me a drink and I drank it. I never told my girlfriend. No harm done. By your logic I should have told her so she would know that I sometimes might have a little drink. Honesty is admirable but not always the best choice. If there was a gang roaming the street killing everyone named Bob, and your name was Bob, would you tell them?
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 C'mon, this is a counseling forum for adults...Not a high school debating class. That "imaginary friend" as you say, by the way, is the cornerstone of far, far greater things in civilization than your own meager existence so let's curb the arrogance a bit. Besides, as I see it, it is not the religion that is flawed so much as it is the humans practicing it. So....A little humility please. How is religion anything if it isn't humans practicing it. I'm taking you can't demonstrate a god exist either.
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 ... I am saying that both parties are participating in an act that harms others....- It's not the affair that causes the harm, it is the knowledge of it.
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 Exactly....... I don't think it is worth knowingly taking that risk simply for sex. In every affair that I've been involved in, it wasn't simply for sex. They involved unmet emotional needs that the husband wasn't giving his wife. That is what people are missing here. Affairs aren't just about someone going out for a little sex. They are about dysfunctional marriages. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that many of the people here blasting me are the same people that on another thread were telling me that men and women couldn't be friends because they can't see past the possibility of sex with every person that they meet of the opposite sex. I am not at all obsessed about sex. It happens but it doesn't at all affect me nearly to the degree that it does for others, apparently. You all complain about my morals, but I very much care about every woman in my life, with or without sex. Sex isn't at all the deciding factor. Some of you moral robots can't see that.
Trialbyfire Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 In every affair that I've been involved in, it wasn't simply for sex. They involved unmet emotional needs that the husband wasn't giving his wife. That is what people are missing here. Affairs aren't just about someone going out for a little sex. They are about dysfunctional marriages. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that many of the people here blasting me are the same people that on another thread were telling me that men and women couldn't be friends because they can't see past the possibility of sex with every person that they meet of the opposite sex. I am not at all obsessed about sex. It happens but it doesn't at all affect me nearly to the degree that it does for others, apparently. You all complain about my morals, but I very much care about every woman in my life, with or without sex. Sex isn't at all the deciding factor. Some of you moral robots can't see that. Oh? So you feel you're doing these women favours by sleeping with them? What you fail to see is that you're being used. Make yourself out to be the big, strong wolf but in reality, your role within the affair is nothing but the side chippy. On the other hand, you do get laid for your efforts and an ego boost. Hey, look man, I'm better than you, I've just slept with your selfish wife. Ah well, this is a disposible society anyways. When the wife gets tired of you, she'll find another side bit for her own ego boost. Mutual use.
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 I don't have to demonstrate... Can't See ... for the whole debate that you missed out on.
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 No, it's only beneficial to the PERSON cheating, MM or MW. FOR THEM the marriage is better because they're getting 'whatever' on the side to keep them happier in the marriage, where the UNsuspecting betrayed spouse thinks all is OK, under false pretenses... So, it really is one sided. And very selfish. UNLESS MM/MW TELLS their spouse, are they're OK with having an open marriage. I REST MY CASE!!!!!!!!!!!!:cool::cool: Except for the open marriage thing............ Except for reality
Author halfarock Posted July 31, 2007 Author Posted July 31, 2007 UMMM...Lizzie...STD's can't ALL be prevented from using a condom!!!!!!! My H brought myself and our two small toddlers a wonderful little gift one day years ago...A WICKED case of scabies...Last time I checked, there was not such thing as a "body" condom! There are also things that the MM will bring home that are not considered to be STD's...Colds, etc...NOT serious for a normal healthy person, but for small kids it can be deadly... You can die in an automobile accident. Does that mean that you shouldn't drive? An airplane can fall out of the sky and crash into a school. Does that mean that you shouldn't send your children to school? People get scabies off of toilet seats. Does that mean that you shouldn't use the toilet?
a4a Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 In every affair that I've been involved in, it wasn't simply for sex. They involved unmet emotional needs that the husband wasn't giving his wife. That is what people are missing here. Affairs aren't just about someone going out for a little sex. They are about dysfunctional marriages. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that many of the people here blasting me are the same people that on another thread were telling me that men and women couldn't be friends because they can't see past the possibility of sex with every person that they meet of the opposite sex. I am not at all obsessed about sex. It happens but it doesn't at all affect me nearly to the degree that it does for others, apparently. You all complain about my morals, but I very much care about every woman in my life, with or without sex. Sex isn't at all the deciding factor. Some of you moral robots can't see that. First lets get this straight. I am not a member of the moral police squad ( since you directed this at me with a quote I have to think it was meant in response). And as for a dysfunctional marriage.... I disagree. It is about dealing/sleeping with dysfunctional people. There are plenty of single people with unmet needs why not focus on them? If you like the risk, drama, and all the problems that come along with being the third party to a marriage..... go for it.
OldEurope Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 It's not the affair that causes the harm, it is the knowledge of it. No, it is the affair that causes the harm. Knowledge of it causes the confrontation with its fact. And one almost always finds out, someway, somehow, sometime. To your other point about demonstrating the existence of God, my arguments are too numerous, and this is not the forum for that anyhow. (One also has to wonder how you argue that he does not exist. But again, another forum, another place.)
EnigmaXOXO Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 Okay ... you took your thread off topic ... so I’ll answer the hypothetical. I once dated a woman who was very much against drinking alcohol. It was okay because I almost never drink. One day I was hanging out with some friends and someone offered me a drink and I drank it. I never told my girlfriend. No harm done. By your logic I should have told her so she would know that I sometimes might have a little drink. Similarly, because of my not-so-pleasant experience with addicts, I would not ever intentionally involve myself with a druggie or anyone who used them, however infrequently. My life. My choice. My right. But if someone I was seeing deliberately lied to me about their occasional drug use just to get in my pants, your d*mn right I’d be pretty pissed. It speaks VOLUMES about that individuals lack of character and substance. The slimeball would be history. But no worries, since there are plenty of other desperate chicks who’d be happy to have the loser. Honesty is admirable but not always the best choice. If there was a gang roaming the street killing everyone named Bob, and your name was Bob, would you tell them? Well, this one’s just silly. But I’ll play along ... If I knew who this individual was ... I wouldn’t tell them ... I’d tell the cops who the little wack-job was. And I’d be happy to strut into court wearing my Kiss BIG BOB’S Ass tee-shirt when I testified against him. Now, if this proposed hypothetical is supposed to simulate your precarious position with the husbands of the desperate housewives you service ... than the solution to your problems are far simpler than you make it out to be. Stud yourself out single women (unless you can’t handle the challenge) and you’ll never have to worry about p*ssing off BIG BOB ... who might just have a bigger set of balls than you.
amerikajin Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 You can die in an automobile accident. Does that mean that you shouldn't drive? An airplane can fall out of the sky and crash into a school. Does that mean that you shouldn't send your children to school? People get scabies off of toilet seats. Does that mean that you shouldn't use the toilet? I don't think those examples involve ethical questions. Perhaps a better analogy would be this: You can drink, you can drive, but you should not drink and then drive - you might kill somebody. Similarly, ladies and gents may have sex with each other, and these same individuals can fall in love and get married. But they probably shouldn't continue to have sex with a third party - someone might get hurt.
serial muse Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 It's not the affair that causes the harm, it is the knowledge of it. Wow, halfarock, that is so not true. I've read this statement here before, many times, but it still surprises me that people think this. I think it's just an easier thing to believe, because the damage done is more abstract than concrete prior to D-Day. In my own experience, there were all sorts of things I didn't understand, little cruelties, little distances that didn't used to be there, coming home later for dinner, little differences in the way he'd relate to me or confide in me. Those things hurt like hell, but he wouldn't explain himself when I asked him (he'd either tell me lies or tell me I was imagining it, or both), and I couldn't keep asking every day, day in and day out. I didn't understand, and there were so many possible reasons why it could be happening: there was a legal issue he was dealing with that I knew was troubling him; there were big logistical changes going on in both our lives (moving, career changes); I thought perhaps it was as simple as he was falling out of love with me. It was a long time before it crossed my mind that he might be having an affair. All of that doubt, that uncertainty, that hurt, that distance, the irritability, the sudden hurtful things he'd say - all of that did some serious damage to my self-esteem, my feelings for him, my sense of reality, even, because he was doing some Grade-A gaslighting and yes, it really really really does make you feel like you're CRAZY. I KNEW something was wrong, alarm bells were jangling, but he kept telling me it was me, my problem, all in my head, I was suspicious and jealous, I was insensitive, I was this, I was that. All, all me. When I first discovered the affair, my initial, gut reaction was relief. Because at last, I got it. Then, of course, the wash of pain. But I was able to make decisions now - before, I had felt paralyzed. Paralyzed because I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS WRONG. I knew SOMETHING was wrong, and I knew he wasn't telling me. But WHAT?? How can I respond appropriately when I don't know what's going on? How can I make a reasonable, informed decision about my own future? That is some serious damage to an intimate relationship, halfarock. And yes, when I discovered what was at the root of it all, the absolute completeness of the lies - and, worst of all, the callousness with which he carried it all out and treated me - that was the nail in the coffin. But I was ALREADY desperately unhappy. It couldn't have lasted anyway; something was going to burst, because I didn't want to be in a relationship that lacked intimacy and trust, even if I didn't know why those things had disappeared. Do you understand now?? I really want to help you, and others who want to believe this convenient statement, understand the very real emotional damages that are inflicted pre-D-Day, because it keeps coming up, over and over, no matter how many times the BS tries to make the MM/MW and the OM/OW understand. I really don't know why people can't get this. It seems so clear.
amerikajin Posted July 31, 2007 Posted July 31, 2007 In every affair that I've been involved in, it wasn't simply for sex. They involved unmet emotional needs that the husband wasn't giving his wife. That is what people are missing here. Affairs aren't just about someone going out for a little sex. They are about dysfunctional marriages. I can understand that to a point. The problem is, for what can only be self-serving reasons, you are only taking into consideration your lover's point of view; you're not taking into consideration the husband's feelings. You've made a definitive judgment that your lover's claims of having "unmet emotional needs" is a valid appraisal of their relationship - on what grounds? Aside from the fact that she's in your bed, what makes you think you know anything about their marriage? The only thing you know is that she likes having sex with you, and apparently she likes having sex with you more than she does her own husband. Sure, she could have unmet emotional needs. It's indeed possible that her husband leaves her to wither on the vine; then again, it's also possible that she's just an impossibly demanding partner. How are you in any position to know what the truth is? How are you in any position to be objective about finding out what the truth is? You already know the truth: you're not. Come clean and just admit that you simply like tapping a nice piece of ass once in a while. Hell, we all do. And yes, sometimes the temptation to oblige a married woman is rather strong, I must admit myself. But never forget that there are always consequences for your behavior. The thing about affairs is, once you make that decision to descend into the world of underground relationships, you lose control of the dynamic. The likely outcome is one helluva lot of drama.
Recommended Posts