To The BS's - Don't Blame The OW

[Je Ne Regrette Rien]

So when the OW contemplates sleeping with a married man, assuming she knows he's married she knows that the likely detrimental effect this will have on his wife.

 

Well, that all depends on what type of relationship the MM has told the OW...a relationship whereby they live seperate lives, this has been coming for a long time, we just needed a reason to split...no, I dont agree that necessarily OW walk into these relationships thinking "This will cause a great deal of pain". Granted, some put a lot of that focus onto their MM to try to ensure things are done in a way where least hurt is caused for all parties involved. But things dont sometimes work out that way, do they?

 

 

What if a wife were to sue her husband and his mistress for emotional distress? If she could provide psychologists' reports demonstrating the detrimental effect on her, she might be successful. That would certainly clarify matters a bit regarding the role and responsibilities of the OW in these situations.

 

We dont really have compensation culture in the UK, although I'm sure that could be proven, YET, it depends WHAT the OW has been told. How can an OW be sure she is causing psychological distress if the MM has told her lies about the actual situation?

 

So in answer to your question "am I wrong?"...according to systems that adjudicate on matters of right and wrong, and that have developed as a result of how convincingly certain propositions can be argued, you're clearly wrong.

 

You are right Lindya. Marriage also has a "forever" clause in the vows. Once the marriage contract is broken by infidelity the law recognises that the contract has been broken and therefore divorce is granted upon request - the law sees the marriage as irretrievable (as the marriage contract is now null and void) by offering divorce in the UK. That doesn't make it right, because many believe their contract of marriage is still intact and try to rebuild their marriages.

[Je Ne Regrette Rien]

Do those people disrespect the religious beliefs of others all the time then, or just when it suits them?

 

 

I took the point as it was laid out NID. Its an interesting insight into beliefs for me, as there are very rare occasions in the UK where partners get married for religious beliefs.

[NoIDidn't]

Regardless of any permission a married cheater gives to the OP, you're still disrespecting the beliefs of the betrayed spouse, because if s/he didn't believe in marriage... s/he wouldn't BE MARRIED. What's more, a married cheater is in no position to give that permission anyway, because the marriage does not belong to him/her alone.. it also belongs to the spouse, who did NOT authorize the intrusion.

 

Je Ne

 

Again, you are missing the point. Her point was beliefs, not religion. Religion was a point she used to drive it home.

 

That's the whole point of using something as an analogy. Most people value their religious beliefs more than their marriage, so I think it was a good analogy to use to illustrate the point.

 

LJ took her own point further if you read her post that tops the page. Being a vegan is not a religious belief, its dietary. Again, religion was not the point, it was a valid analogy about respecting another's belief system be it religious or dietary.

[reboot]

There whole point is respecting other people, and that point is lost here, and always will be.

[OWoman]

Marriage also has a "forever" clause in the vows.

 

Luckily not in this country, nor an exclusivity clause. Though that gets added if people marry in a religious ceremony.

 

But to pick up on the issue of beliefs. My MM and his W lived together before they got M. W was reluctant at first, thought it would tie her down, but agreed so long as they both understood it was to be on their own terms. She said what mattered to her was not whether or not MM was faithful, but whether he looked after his family. Which he has done.

 

So according to her beliefs (hers by what she said, his by what he's doing) according to the argument below, there's no problem with our A, is there?

 

I don't think it's that simple. I'm sure when she said that, she didn't expect him to run off and shag the first woman who walked past. And perhaps if someone asked her now, she'd say something different. Beliefs and practice are not always the same thing. I don't believe in sexual exclusivity - I think it's unnatural and oppressive. I believe that very fervently. But yet, in my own life, right now, that's not what I'm doing. For now, this one man is all I want, sexually. And for him, me. We're de facto sexually exclusive although neither of us "believes" in that.

 

Rs are dynamic things, and expectations change all the time. I think expecting an OW to be in tune with a BW's "beliefs", unless she has a crystal ball, is unrealistic.

[reboot]

But you're saying that because you feel this way about relationships, everyone else has to also. We're supposed to respect your way, and yet not get ours respected in return. As I said before, and I don't know how you can't see this, your situation is unusual compared to what most of the people here are used to.

[OWoman]

But you're saying that because you feel this way about relationships, everyone else has to also.

 

No. I'm saying, you can't assume anything about anybody's beliefs. Being married doesn't mean necessarily that the MP buy into that "only each other forever" bit. And saying that they don't doesn't mean they don't. What someone says, or even what someone does, isn't necessarily the whole story.

 

That's why I have problems with the basis of this thread. I don't think it's possible to work with concepts like "blame" in a simplistic way when none of us knows the whole story of someone else's situation, or even our own (from the other perspectives of the other people involved). One size fits all this aint.

 

Though, of course, each person is going to look at it through the sunglasses of their own situation and experience. Which is why no one's going to agree with anyone else, really.

[NoIDidn't]

OW

 

I have to agree with what you posted, to a degree. Using you as my example. It seems clear from your thread that you are expecting a level of exclusivity from your A with the MM, but that you also don't necessarily believe in exclusivity normally. Your sitch is the perfect example of having beliefs of one thing, but actually behaving totally different.

 

I, myself, can not live with such cognitive dissonance. If my actions no longer were consistent with my beliefs, one of the two would have to change.

[KenzieAbsolutely]

OW

 

I have to agree with what you posted, to a degree. Using you as my example. It seems clear from your thread that you are expecting a level of exclusivity from your A with the MM, but that you also don't necessarily believe in exclusivity normally. Your sitch is the perfect example of having beliefs of one thing, but actually behaving totally different.

 

I, myself, can not live with such cognitive dissonance. If my actions no longer were consistent with my beliefs, one of the two would have to change.

 

good post, very well-put.

 

if a MP doesn't "buy into the only each other forever" thing, then they shouldn't have agreed to it by getting married. and if their beliefs changed after marriage, then they should stop being married before they move on without telling the person who entered into marriage with them.

 

the person who is helping the MP cheat is like the getaway car...but one that isn't really going anywhere.

[reboot]

No. I'm saying, you can't assume anything about anybody's beliefs. Being married doesn't mean necessarily that the MP buy into that "only each other forever" bit. And saying that they don't doesn't mean they don't. What someone says, or even what someone does, isn't necessarily the whole story.

 

That's why I have problems with the basis of this thread. I don't think it's possible to work with concepts like "blame" in a simplistic way when none of us knows the whole story of someone else's situation, or even our own (from the other perspectives of the other people involved). One size fits all this aint.

 

Though, of course, each person is going to look at it through the sunglasses of their own situation and experience. Which is why no one's going to agree with anyone else, really.

Ok. I live in the Deep South, USA. People here still have a lot of old fashioned beliefs. We get married and still say things like "forsaking all others". And (some of us at least) still believe in that. I know that where you are you say things aren't like that. Marriages are just for convienence typically. And I can respect that (although surely in such a marriage you don't say stupid stuff like "forsaking all others"?).

 

The point of this thread is, BS can't blame OP, and that's hogwash. In your specific case, it doesn't sound like she can. But your case doesn't reflect all cases. Many OW/OM are preditory. In my case, OM knew she was married, knew she was at a low point in her life, and made a concious decision to pursue her. Do I blame him that she cheated? Hell no. That lays squarely 100% on her. Do I blame him for being there in the first place. Absolutely. For that matter, do I blame me for her feeling like she needed to reach out to someone else. Again, absolutely.

 

There's always plenty of blame to pass around. And to make some ridiculous blanket statement that we should never blame the OP is silly.

[LucreziaBorgia]

After reading all of this, I guess for me its pretty simple. When you participate in hurting someone, the injured party tends to hold you partly or equally responsible. When you help injure someone, you should expect to get part of the blame, whether you feel you deserve it or not. I'm not sure what planet you have to be on to expect otherwise.

[child_of_isis]

I have to agree with this. I don't believe in marriage, have never been married, and will never be married. But I would never disrespect a woman in such a manner.

 

BUT...I was raised in a more matriarchial setting than most, and a large one at that. Disrespect one of the women in my family and bad stuff is going to happen.

 

That being said.....maybe some of it is about upbringing.

 

And to steal from Oprah....One can only do better when they know better.

Well, let's look at a couple of small hypothetical situations then...

 

Say, you're having a dinner party and one of your guests is a person who eschews pork on religious conviction. Do you slip it to him anyway in the meatloaf and then lie about what you served?

 

Or maybe you're a nurse at a hospice and your patient is a Roman Catholic who wants a priest to perform Last Rites. Do you just blow off his request because you weren't baptized Catholic and it's time to take your break?

 

Would you slip an egg to a vegan? Or would you respect his personal beliefs?

 

Regardless of any permission a married cheater gives to the OP, you're still disrespecting the beliefs of the betrayed spouse, because if s/he didn't believe in marriage... s/he wouldn't BE MARRIED. What's more, a married cheater is in no position to give that permission anyway, because the marriage does not belong to him/her alone.. it also belongs to the spouse, who did NOT authorize the intrusion.

[serial muse]

Luckily not in this country, nor an exclusivity clause. Though that gets added if people marry in a religious ceremony.

 

But to pick up on the issue of beliefs. My MM and his W lived together before they got M. W was reluctant at first, thought it would tie her down, but agreed so long as they both understood it was to be on their own terms. She said what mattered to her was not whether or not MM was faithful, but whether he looked after his family. Which he has done.

 

So according to her beliefs (hers by what she said, his by what he's doing) according to the argument below, there's no problem with our A, is there?

 

I don't think it's that simple. I'm sure when she said that, she didn't expect him to run off and shag the first woman who walked past. And perhaps if someone asked her now, she'd say something different. Beliefs and practice are not always the same thing. I don't believe in sexual exclusivity - I think it's unnatural and oppressive. I believe that very fervently. But yet, in my own life, right now, that's not what I'm doing. For now, this one man is all I want, sexually. And for him, me. We're de facto sexually exclusive although neither of us "believes" in that.

 

Rs are dynamic things, and expectations change all the time. I think expecting an OW to be in tune with a BW's "beliefs", unless she has a crystal ball, is unrealistic.

 

I think, though, it's likely that if the BW is being kept in the dark about the affair, then the MM, at least, knows full well what her beliefs are. No crystal ball needed. Naturally, the MM sometimes lies to the OW about whether the BS knows or not, but it's a pretty sure bet that if the OW and BS aren't talking and/or haven't met, the BS doesn't know. Not rocket science. And if she doesn't know and is being intentionally kept in the dark, then it's rather disingenuous to pretend that she wouldn't be upset. Arguing about uncertainty over what the BS knows or feels may sound reasonable-ish, but it's a red herring. Here's the thing: People may feel how they feel about sexual exclusivity, but lying and sneaking around are pretty much universally despised.

 

I think that Trimmer's post summed up many BS' point of view nicely - apportioning out pieces of the blame pie, as though it were a single unit, makes no sense. Everyone is responsible for what they themselves choose to do. Sure, the BS is responsible for what's going on in her marriage. There you go, OpenBook. BUT. The BS is not responsible for her husband (or his wife) having an affair. So yes, I say you are most certainly wrong, and I think that's the logical way to look at it. Choosing to start an affair is the MM's decision, and his alone. He has a buffet of options open to him, as everyone does at every minute of their life, and he picked that one. That is, and always will be, entirely on him. As for the OW - of course she is not responsible for problems in the marriage. But she is responsible for her choice to be in an affair, and for whatever compromises she has to make in her belief system to maintain it (which is also true of the MM).

 

That's what the different parties can claim responsibility for. Whether people assign moral implications to any of those things is, perhaps, their own choice. You could certainly view is as a continuum of bad behavior - clearly the MM stands out here, because he's responsible both for his share of the troubled marriage (and yes, of course he shares the blame for that) AND for choosing to have an affair.

 

Personally, I think it's a matter of personal morals; do unto others as you'd have them do unto you. That, too, is rather simple. And from what I have read on here, the vast majority of OW/OM would certainly not be okay with a third (fourth?) party interfering in their relationship. If, like you, OWoman, the OW wouldn't care a whit if the MM slept with other people, then I applaud her lack of hypocrisy - really, I do. But OWoman, the thing is, you're still contradicting your own beliefs by not being honest and open about the relationship, right? The BS does not know, and you know it. So that is the moral question you may have to deal with - to maintain the affair, you're choosing to behave to someone in a way you personally wouldn't accept from others.

 

And that's generally where "morals" come in, IMO. Be true to yourself, or else you're diminishing yourself. Perhaps it's idealistic - but then, so is love. And I don't see many OW/OM claiming that love is too much to expect.

[NoIDidn't]

I think, though, it's likely that if the BW is being kept in the dark about the affair, then the MM, at least, knows full well what her beliefs are. No crystal ball needed.

 

Great point!

 

But I am always amazed at the response by the MM who find out that their Ws could take them or leave them because they are having their own A. It seems like the MM goes out of his way to keep his W believing that he's exclusive, and out of his way to have the OW believe that he can return to being exclusive but only with her (the OW).

 

So confusing, it is. Glad I don't have to deal with either scenario.

[Impudent Oyster]

In my own personal experience, I get hit on a LOT more by MM than I do by single guys. And I'm SICK of it. I wish they would just leave it alone already. I want to scream at their wives, "Lose weight!! Go to the gym!! Victoria's Secret is having a sale!!"

 

.

 

If you ever screamed those words at me (doubtful, since I would bet I'm in better shape and have a better selection of lingerie than you could ever hope for), you would be eating your words, that is, if you could make them after I knocked your teeth back into your throat.

 

What kind of woman justifies cheating because a woman doesn't have abs of steel or isn't dressing like a Playboy bunny? Are you for real?

 

I guess when you get older and maybe put on a few pounds or wear a flannel nightie you should just expect your husband to cheat, right? The epitome of shallow.

[Impudent Oyster]

Oyster,

 

Wow this must be difficult for you always having to watch your back, however it is not the OW fault that your husband is good looking charming ect ect ect. !

 

Not difficult at all, I'm his wife, not his babysitter. It's not my job to watch him.

[Impudent Oyster]

I totally agree with this. Also why can't we women learn to respect each other. This whole self-entitlement thing has gotten way out of hand. I think this is one reason why men aren't showing women as much respect as they use to because women will not respect themselves or each other. It is totally unrespectful to seek the attention of someone else's husband, period. There are no good excuses to continue such a relationship once you find out this man is married. Why would a woman want to lower herself to the level of a mistress? Don't they feel they deserve more? Don't they want to be the 1st lady? Is it fun to sit around waiting for sloppy seconds? Women please, wake up! Don't be so desperate for a man that you would do anything (no matter how despicable it is) to have him.

 

I agree, and this is why so many MM ultimately dump the OW....because deep down, while they may have had fun with her and enjoyed themselves, they don't respect her.

 

You can never really have a long lasting relationship with someone you don't respect.

[jj2007]

That's EXACTLY what I meant. The BS has no room to blame the OW because it's her own fault for making her H so unhappy that he is looking for fulfillment outside the M. And even if she wasn't making her H unhappy, she STILL doesn't have room to blame the OW because she has chosen to remain married to the louse, despite his deliberate betrayal.

 

 

So what you are saying is it's ok for the OW to blame the BS but the OW can't be blamed for anything?!

 

hypocrite much?

[luvmy2ns]

If you ever screamed those words at me (doubtful, since I would bet I'm in better shape and have a better selection of lingerie than you could ever hope for), you would be eating your words, that is, if you could make them after I knocked your teeth back into your throat.

 

What kind of woman justifies cheating because a woman doesn't have abs of steel or isn't dressing like a Playboy bunny? Are you for real?

 

I guess when you get older and maybe put on a few pounds or wear a flannel nightie you should just expect your husband to cheat, right? The epitome of shallow.

 

No sh**t! That post you quoted SCREAMED VOLUMES about the kind of - er, human being (and I use the term loosely) - she must be.

[Jinnah]

...the BS ignoring her H's repeated requests for sex, or emasculating him with withering words and looks.

 

 

Married people should definitely think about this. It does not excuse a cheater for cheating, but it lets some people see that in some cases, they play a part in it. No one should cheat EVER... but spouses should try to keep each other happy. Yes, some people cheat anyway, no matter how good you are to them, but others do cheat for the above reasons... they are still wrong (and I would still divorce them for cheating), but it might have been preventable.

[Jinnah]

I totally agree with this. Also why can't we women learn to respect each other. This whole self-entitlement thing has gotten way out of hand. I think this is one reason why men aren't showing women as much respect as they use to because women will not respect themselves or each other. It is totally unrespectful to seek the attention of someone else's husband, period. There are no good excuses to continue such a relationship once you find out this man is married. Why would a woman want to lower herself to the level of a mistress? Don't they feel they deserve more? Don't they want to be the 1st lady? Is it fun to sit around waiting for sloppy seconds? Women please, wake up! Don't be so desperate for a man that you would do anything (no matter how despicable it is) to have him.

Totally agree.

[KenzieAbsolutely]

 

So according to her beliefs (hers by what she said, his by what he's doing) according to the argument below, there's no problem with our A, is there?

 

 

we wouldn't know; is there? why don't you call her and ask her how she feels about it? then at least you're not assuming her feelings are that it's okay.

[Jinnah]

I've been thinking about the entire BS/OWorOM/MMorMW triangle. Yes, I see a lot of blame placed on certain people for whatever reason. But, I have a question. Doesnt this thread speak of OWorOM getting blamed for the infidelity of a marriage? What if the OWorOM doesnt believe in marriage. I know several people who are of the belief the marriage is merely an institution created by reglion (church) and not anything more. There are OWorOM whom do not wish to marry the MMorMW. So, to judge their morality I think is short-sighted by assuming they even share the same beliefs as the BS/MWorMM. Regardless if the OWorOM knew the person is married or not they did not make any committment to that person's spouse. I think complete responsibilty lies with the MMorMW not the OWorOM. Only time I beleive blame would lay on OWorOM is when, and if, they are requested to NC the MMorMW (by that person). Then it becomes an issue of respect for such a request, not respect for the institution of a marriage they are not contracted to. I never believed anyone should tell BS about relationship except the MMorMW. Even when they are told nothing will ever take back the actions that have already transpired outside their marriage.

 

Umm, then they are still 100% responsible for wrecking someone else's life! They're still a "homewrecker"; they hurt someone else... is that not enough?

[Jinnah]

That's EXACTLY what I meant. The BS has no room to blame the OW because it's her own fault for making her H so unhappy that he is looking for fulfillment outside the M. And even if she wasn't making her H unhappy, she STILL doesn't have room to blame the OW because she has chosen to remain married to the louse, despite his deliberate betrayal.

 

Do you have a point?

Um, what if she (or he) doesn't know?

[pjean]

Umm, then they are still 100% responsible for wrecking someone else's life! They're still a "homewrecker"; they hurt someone else... is that not enough?

 

the MM/MW is the one wrecking their home...the OW/OM is enjoying his/her life...they are not responsible/committed to anyone's family/spouse/etc. so no, they are not homewreckers... responsiblity lies within the one who made the committment to be married. How many A do you think continue on and how many BS give it another chance because a MM/MW says oh, I was seduced...I really wouldnt do that. BS should quit letting blame slip to OW/OM because they cant accept that their MM/MW strayed from their committment.