At what point do we have to accept that they are "not that into us?"

[BrotherD]

Hey all

 

Been lurking here for awhile. After reading post after post from many anguished souls mulling over a thousand different scenarios

as to why out MM/MW wont leave marriage for them, is it safe to assume the following?

 

They're just not that into you?

 

My father left my mother and FIVE children under 15 yrs old for his "other woman." He and his "new" wife are still happily married after 30 years! He loved her. He was into her. Period.

 

Or is it that easy?

 

Seems like alot of these drawn out EMR's linger because an affair doesnt end becuase the particpants dont love each other. It ends becuase of external forces...Appearances, children, societal issues etc.

No amount of manueveruing gets around the fact that one partner is involved in a primary relationship. Until that relationship is completed, "all roads lead to the doghouse..." i.e. the same drama crops up: if you loved mke you'd leave etc....

 

What telling to me is the MM/MW going home to sleep with their spouse. I suspect that its a familar, known entity for them and easy to soldier on as opposed to re inventing the wheel...

 

So the question I pose to LoveShackians is the following:

 

Can true love be squelched by familiarity and "the devil you know is better that the devil you dont,"

 

Or are they just not that into you?

 

 

BrotherD

[jj33]

Thank you for stating it so plainly.

 

All the rubbish excuses in the world will not keep someone from divorcing and pursuing someone they believe is their true destiny.

 

Conclusion they are just not that into the us.

 

Yes they may care for us love us enjoy our company but not enough to disturb the status quo.

 

So whatever the flaws in the marriage (and the more rubbish they say it is the more I would think they are just not that in love who stays somewhere miserable) the MP still finds it more palatable than leaving for the OP.

 

Otherwise they would leave.

 

Very very few exceptions to that rule none with the possible exception of Sad in Texas that I have read on this forum.

[wildsoul]

I agree with you. I'm not one to settle for being with someone who isn't overwhelmingly into me, and can't understand why anyone would. In the examples of MP that let the OP know they don't intend to leave their M, it's clearly a case of "not that into you." It stymies why anyone would stay in a R under those terms, unless the OP is also "not that into them."

 

Where it gets murky is when the MM/W makes all the declarations of devotion, but then is slow to act. How fast is reasonable? How slow is slow enough to mean "not that into you?" This is where your premise becomes a bit of an oversimplification.

 

I have enough action happening from my SM that I know that yes, he's that into me. But even still, there's a point where if it's too slow. It's occuring to me now that I want to see him file for his D after the first of the year. That will have been 4-5 months after the official separation, after the holidays, and also a year since he and I met. Dunno if I want to tell him my date or not. I want to see what he does on his own, to know if he's truly serious about his D (and about me too.) If not, then I think I wouldn't be that into him. Yanno?

 

Being into each other is a 2-way street. Anything less than mutuality simply won't do.

[jj33]

WS I would definitely say he is that into you. You let him go he did what he had to do. As you say time will tell for the future but that is true of any relationship.

 

But as MM he was that into you. As well he should be!

 

As for me, its hard to accept but he just wasnt. Despite everything and all the ongoing help attention and care all this time later, he doesnt see me as the person he wants to come home to every night enough to change the status quo. harsh but true.

[mrmatt]

 

Very very few exceptions to that rule none with the possible exception of Sad in Texas that I have read on this forum.

jj33 can you expand on what you mean about sadintexas being an exception?

[wildsoul]

As for me, its hard to accept but he just wasnt. Despite everything and all the ongoing help attention and care all this time later, he doesnt see me as the person he wants to come home to every night enough to change the status quo. harsh but true.

And you also make another point as to why this is a bit of an oversimplification: The "that" part of "that into you," varies on the situation.

 

That into you for a single man means "so into you that he is willing to give up being single." If he's ready, then full steam ahead.

 

That into you for a married man might mean so into you he's willing to give up his wife and living arrangements (as in my guy's sitation, which isn't as complex.) But for others it might mean giving up his children, which is HUGE. For most MP, it's also going to mean some uncomfortable adjustments in their family, friends, and maybe their business too (for example, I know what couple who is seperating who own a biz together.)

 

So the more entrenched a MP is in their life with their spouse, the MORE into you (and their desire to end their M) they have to be. It doesn't mean they aren't into you at all, but yes, it does come down to a matter of proportions.

[BrotherD]

JJ33

 

Agreed.

 

One thnigs for sure

 

If you stay involved with MW/MM, then you are the OTHER PERSON...

 

And essentially you've accepted the terms of the contract..i.e. second position...

 

And thats when the games begin!

 

The only way to hit the reset button is to bow out.

 

They certainly arent going to leave the marriage as long as you are enhnacing their lives with your lovin and attention...

 

I say the only way you'll know where you stand is to break it off first and let them find you after the marriage is kaput...Remember this oh disciples of no contact...What are you really losing? For "other person," it's like removing a pebble from you shoe, an irritant bannished. For the MM/MW they have to return to their dull as dishwater world with the "love of their life!!!!"

Knock yourself out MM/MW!!! A loveless, ho hum marriage is the best illustration of DESPAIR I've ever seen...And the best "revenge" for the OP... Hee Hee

 

Again, if they dont find you after the marriage is done, you'll have your answer....

 

Easy as that...

 

I still thinks some of these people are "torn between two lovers, feeling like a fool.." (like the song) But the above staragey works for the wishy washy as well....

 

Bro D

[wildsoul]

If you stay involved with MW/MM, then you are the OTHER PERSON...

 

And essentially you've accepted the terms of the contract..i.e. second position...

 

And thats when the games begin!

 

The only way to hit the reset button is to bow out.

 

They certainly arent going to leave the marriage as long as you are enhnacing their lives with your lovin and attention...

 

I say the only way you'll know where you stand is to break it off first and let them find you after the marriage is kaput...Remember this oh disciples of no contact...What are you really losing? For "other person," it's like removing a pebble from you shoe, an irritant bannished. For the MM/MW they have to return to their dull as dishwater world with the "love of their life!!!!"

Knock yourself out MM/MW!!! A loveless, ho hum marriage is the best illustration of DESPAIR I've ever seen...And the best "revenge" for the OP... Hee Hee

 

Again, if they dont find you after the marriage is done, you'll have your answer....

 

Easy as that...

 

I agree with you a thousandfold on this point!

 

And for those of you who don't know my story, it was only after I broke up with my guy and really meant it that he moved out for real. He had to experience being truly miserable without me.

 

If you're an OP, the only way out is to end it. You can't lose. You'll either heal and find someone new, or your MP will follow you.

[BrotherD]

So the more entrenched a MP is in their life with their spouse, the MORE into you (and their desire to end their M) they have to be. It doesn't mean they aren't into you at all, but yes, it does come down to a matter of proportions.

 

 

If he was 100% into you , he'd move mountains to be with you. Thats how I define "into you"

 

So are you siding with the notion that true love can be derailed by extrernal forces i.e hes into you, but not enough to blow up his world?

[jj33]

Brother D just to clarify I have been out of the A for over a year. But agree with everything you said. It is difficult for them and thats why they keep coming back again and again... or some find new OPs to play with I am not sure that many of the men divorce. Some but few.

 

And WS agree with you entirely its a matter of proportion. In my case MM has been with his W for 40 years... I understand why he would stay. He thought about it but just couldnt bring himself to pull the trigger.

[jj33]

Matt The man she is in love with is in an abusive marriage. That is somewhat different to me. I know Reggie disagrees but I think that we have to believe Sad's reporting about the situation.

 

Taking it at face value, situations where abuse are involved are very different than its my kids its the finances its this its that, my dog ate my divorce papers etc. Its a whole different psychological profile.

[wildsoul]

So are you siding with the notion that true love can be derailed by extrernal forces i.e hes into you, but not enough to blow up his world?

Yes, I suppose that is what I'm saying. It might be true feelings of love, but not enough love. It's a matter of degrees. But still, you and I agree overall.

 

If the feelings of love aren't enough for the MP to make the big change, then I think it's wrong for the OP (if they know they want/need more) to stick around. Only misery comes from that kind of compromised futility.

[mrmatt]

Matt The man she is in love with is in an abusive marriage. That is somewhat different to me. I know Reggie disagrees but I think that we have to believe Sad's reporting about the situation.

 

Taking it at face value, situations where abuse are involved are very different than its my kids its the finances its this its that, my dog ate my divorce papers etc. Its a whole different psychological profile.

 

Oh...I totally agree. My MP is physically afraid of her H and others have told me he has an issue with rage. She says she worries about his reaction when/if she makes her decision to leave. He apparently has not been outright violent to her, but that he has to other people and she feels the potential is right under the surface.

[NewSunrise]

Some people don't get the "s/he's not that into you" thing however subtle or obvious the clues.

 

The problem is people engaged in As rarely apply that thinking mode because they're locked in the la-la stage for however long it will take until the MP starts showing their true colors. Except that their true colors have already been demonstrated by their willingness to cheat on their spouse. Overtime, it's up to OP to decide to cut the cord from their MP or allow themselves to be pulled until one of them (the MP, BS or OP) pulls out of the race.

 

So it begs the question, WHY would any seemingly intelligent and responsible adults put themselves in a three way relationship with more risks than rewards. Possible answers:

 

1. It's in the core of where they are emotionally, mentally, confidence as well as their level of self worth.
   
2. OPs who choose to stay with MP don't want the full enchilada of a committed relationship. Perfect scenarios for those looking for "friends with benefits". A few here on LS are perfectly happy with this "arrangements".
   
3. Humans are social beings. Our capacity and ability/skills to resolve conflicts vary. People are better resolving non-emotional conflicts. BUT, many lack the personal skills to resolve relationships. It comes from our upbringing and family dynamics. Learned behaviors.
   

A little probing into family history (caretakers/parents), you'll find you've acquired skills or lack thereof in handling personal and relationship conflicts.

[NewSunrise]

If he was 100% into you , he'd move mountains to be with you. Thats how I define "into you"

 

So are you siding with the notion that true love can be derailed by extrernal forces i.e hes into you, but not enough to blow up his world?

My definition of "into you" is the same as yours.

 

If true love can be derailed by external forces other than being hit by a train or lightning, I'd say that s/he is not into you.

 

If you start using "external forces" to derail true love, then it's really not true love. It's an excuse to derail from love.

[frannie]

My father left my mother and FIVE children under 15 yrs old for his "other woman." He and his "new" wife are still happily married after 30 years! He loved her. He was into her. Period.

 

Or is it that easy?

 

Do you know how long the affair was going on for before he left?

 

Many marriages end... eventually. The timing may or may not be 'convenient' for an OP involved with someone who is married. But you only have to look at the increasing number of posts from MP who are agonising over whether to leave or not to see that it's just not a case of throwing a few things in a suitcase, kissing your kids on the brow and walking off into the night.

 

In fact, someone who would up and leave without much deliberation... can easily do the same to the partner they left for when the going gets tough, right (though obviously not in your father's case).

 

Judging from what I've seen on this and other boards, it usually takes a MP several years to actually pull the trigger on a 'dead' marriage. Unfortunately that's usually far too much stress for an OP to deal with, and they've usually long gone by the time the divorce papers are signed.

 

I think the bottom line, however is: that if you're leaving a marriage 'for' someone else, you're probably storing up a lot of potential damage for the new relationship: guilt, recrimination, second thoughts. People really should leave a marriage for one reason only: because the marriage is dead.

[GreenEyedLady]

If you stay involved with MW/MM, then you are the OTHER PERSON...

 

And essentially you've accepted the terms of the contract..i.e. second position...

 

Uhh, nope sorry, never ACCEPTED the notion that I was second string. Cuz I wasn't. If you accept that you're second, he'll never see you as being the only one.

 

I wasn't the other person. I'm the only person.

[RobertLS]

It seems like the consensus here is:

 

- If he's into you enough, he'll leave his marriage.

- If he doesn't leave, he's not that into you.

 

If so, then an OW can have evidence of whether or not he's into you. (How long it takes to get that evidence is what complicates things.)

 

But what about the other way around? What evidence can a MM have that the OW is into him? It seems like several OW here don't want their MM to leave for them; they want their MM to first decide whether or not, like Frannie said, their marriage is dead. If it is, then leave the marriage. But some MM can coexist with their wives peacefully in a dead marriage. It takes an external catalyst, like an OW, to get him to think about leaving. If he's attracted to his OW but not sure she's into him, he may waffle in indecision over whether to leave. He'll want to know if the OW is into him, but she may not want to tell him, not wanting to influence his marital decision. You can go round and round in circles over this one:

 

- OW doesn't want to influence MM's decision to leave.

- MM needs confirmation from OW in order to leave.

[blinded]

Believe it or not, some come right out and say it. Just like my MM did the other day Maybe not in the exact words, but the writing was definitely on the wall...Talk about a drop kick to the gut.

[KismetGirl]

I think I agree with the whole "proportions" idea brought up by WildSoul.

 

The more ingrained an MM is in his marriage, the harder it is to make a decision to leave. I mean, let's say he's been married 10 years, but has no kids, and both him and his wife are financially independant. They both work, whatever. So basically, if he finds someone he likes better, why not leave? Sure, there's the history of 10 years, but they are both left to find better compatibility. Its a matter of paperwork and some division of finances.

 

Now add several children, or a marriage that's been on for 30 years, or both, and just loving someone else isn't enough to upset this balance. And really, you can love someone all you want, but if you arenot free to date them as you would "normally" how SURE can you ever be that this love is strong enough to be worth giving up full-time fatherhood to severeal children, or to dissolute a 30+ year marriage and everything obtained throughtout the course of that loooooooooooong relationship?

 

Children, finances, acceptance by familyfriends- easily the biggest three obstacles to leaving a marriage, and yes children can be ok after a divorce, and yes you might bounce back financially, and yes your family and friends will learn to accept your new life, but that period of transition is going to be SOOOOOOOOOOOO hard.....it is difficult to imagine even.

 

I think most people would rather stay miserable and satiate themselves occasionally with these affairs to keep a bit of sanity in a situation that they otherwise don't know what the hell to do about.

 

I don't think its a matter of "he's just not that into you". Maybe if its just about sex, purely and physical, that can be the idea, and im sure in many cases its just some MM trying to get his rocks off and has no emotional involvement with the OW , but I find, more ofteh than not, that if the A is kept going for any reasonable length of time its probably because deep down the MM really does have strong feelings for the OW.....but all the confusion about everything else makes it hard. men hate conflict, pure and simple, and they'll avoid it as long as they possibley can. Women are quite the opposite. They hate a situation, they'll address it head on, even if it means getting a divorce. I find women are MUCH more apt to change a situation they don't like in such a case than a man....but that's just in my experience with other couples that have been trhough this, I gues.

 

PS- there are exceptions to every rule, but don't be so quick to think you know the whole story. My dad left my mom to marry his mistress, who he is still married to like ten+ years later, but I suspect that my mother pretty much told him to just leave. Either way , there will be exceptiosn to every rule, and some men are hopeless romantics just like some women and will "risk it all" for love....but most won't. Risking it all for true love, well, I think that happens more often in the movies.

[BrotherD]

- OW doesn't want to influence MM's decision to leave.

- MM needs confirmation from OW in order to leave.

 

This board has given me so many insights...but this is brilliant!

 

As the OP, you dont want to push for the following reasons..

 

1.) You will be blamed for the breakup of the marriage should new realtionship fizzle...

2.) It's probably best to be far far away when marriage busts up so it can't be attributed to OP. i.e. let it self destruct on its own

3.)OP feels that any nudge towards a break up is pressuring MP to do something...And people dont like to be pressured...

 

As far as MP goes

 

How would a OP go about delivering confirmation without resorting to the 3 points above?

 

Round and Round indeed...

 

Thanks Robert LS for your keen insight....

[BrotherD]

Do you know how long the affair was going on for before he left?

 

I dont know, I was 9 years old when it happened....

 

But, bottomline. He left.

 

It created devastation that still remains present in my family dynamic to this day. And though the devastation was weighed heavily prior to the decsion, he left....

 

It really is a gigantic decsion to leave your wife and children. And one must make sure they are leaving for "perfect" love of their life...Even though a "perfect love," doesnt exist...