Owl Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 This post got a lil' out of control....... I agree with what's here...........The intent to cheat & the choice to cheat........Not necessarily the intent to hurt though. Because as we all know.........EVERYONE involved in an affair gets hurt. The husband, the wife, the other husband, the other wife.....But you don't start out like the mad scientist wringing your hands & chanting...Who can I hurt today...Oh maybe my husband....Let's hurt him. I think you get so caught up in what's happening - hurting ANYONE isn't even a thought at the time. Does that make sense? I'll agree...there's almost never an "intent to hurt". BUT...per RD's post earlier...there most certainly is "constructive intent to hurt". They may not have entered the affair with the INTENT of hurting someone, but they DID enter the affair KNOWING that it would result in their spouse being hurt. Which brings in that "constructive intent". In other words...they may not have DESIRED to see their spouse get hurt...but they did indeed know full well that their spouse WOULD be hurt by their affair. See where the breakdown is here? Constructive intent is exactly what this is.
Owl Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 In other words...don't confuse DESIRE with INTENT. There may not have been DESIRE to harm...but there was absolutely an INTENT to harm, by deliberatly conducting actions that they knew would result in that harm. They didn't DESIRE the harm...but they intended to hurt the BS because they wanted to pursue the affair with that knowledge.
stuckinoz Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 Ah...I haven't spoken on the INTENT to HURT. Only the choices and the intention to cheat - and my own take on their interplay. And to say that people cheat with an intent to hurt the BS has ONE HUGE PROBLEM. THE WS keeps the A secret. How does it cause the pain a WS is seeking if the WS fails to tell the BS? How does a BS hurt if they BS is unaware? See my point? I realize you didn't say intent to hurt. I was just saying. What I meant by everyone getting hurt was......It eventually comes out. Most get caught. When the spouse finds out, they hurt. And even the person(s) involved in the affair get hurt.
confusedinkansas Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I'll agree...there's almost never an "intent to hurt". BUT...per RD's post earlier...there most certainly is "constructive intent to hurt". They may not have entered the affair with the INTENT of hurting someone, but they DID enter the affair KNOWING that it would result in their spouse being hurt. Which brings in that "constructive intent". In other words...they may not have DESIRED to see their spouse get hurt...but they did indeed know full well that their spouse WOULD be hurt by their affair. See where the breakdown is here? Constructive intent is exactly what this is. Wow - this is definitely interesting. I for one ~ didn't enter into an affair with the Intent to hurt. Hurting ANYONE was the furthest thing from my mind. It never crossed my mind that anyone would wind up getting hurt. It was just (at the time) supposed to be fun. (At first, not sexual) Now, Hind-site....I know like oz said....Everyone winds up getting hurt! All parties involved. (well except the man that I had the affair with, his wife was cheating on him at the very same time - so she left him for another man....So she never found out about us:rolleyes: ) ha ha.
angie2443 Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 Yes, at some moment my H knew that what he was doing was going to hurt me. But, as we know alcohol seriously impairs judgment ability. So whatever thoughts of, "oh crap, what am I doing to her" were probably pretty short lived. There is more information here with what was going on that I will not go into here. BUT, at least for me a stupid, drunken act is very different than deliberate planning to conduct and continue an affair (EA, PA or both) for any length of time. . I think I understand where you're comming from. If I'm understanding this right, your situation was an ONS? MIne involved an EA and I can see where an EA or a PA would take more deliberate planning, maybe more intent. I do not have the experience of the ONS, but I can see where I might see it as more of a mistake, especially if my husband dropped the behavior that landed him in the ONS.
Snowflower Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I think I understand where you're comming from. If I'm understanding this right, your situation was an ONS? MIne involved an EA and I can see where an EA or a PA would take more deliberate planning, maybe more intent. I do not have the experience of the ONS, but I can see where I might see it as more of a mistake, especially if my husband dropped the behavior that landed him in the ONS. Yes, it was basically a ONS. There were some other factors involved...the OW was a colleague although he didn't/doesn't work directly with her. They are located in different regions. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what was what with his A. Some people on this forum told me that it was definitely an EA on my H's part. In the end I decided it was not an EA as far as I am concerned. It took awhile for me to come to this conclusion. Basically, I had to look at my H's behavior before the A, during the brief A, after he confessed and how he has behaved ever since we decided to recover our marriage. My husband really screwed up but I see it more of a result of bad decision making on his part, a mistake if you will, than anything else.
angie2443 Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what was what with his A. Some people on this forum told me that it was definitely an EA on my H's part. In the end I decided it was not an EA as far as I am concerned. It took awhile for me to come to this conclusion. Basically, I had to look at my H's behavior before the A, during the brief A, after he confessed and how he has behaved ever since we decided to recover our marriage. . I guess the truth is, the only people who can define the situation, are the people who were in it.
Author Tired03 Posted April 17, 2009 Author Posted April 17, 2009 There may not have been DESIRE to harm...but there was absolutely an INTENT to harm, by deliberatly conducting actions that they knew would result in that harm. They didn't DESIRE the harm...but they intended to hurt the BS because they wanted to pursue the affair with that knowledge. So, if I understand you correctly, this is more like someone who gets in the car drunk and drives and hurts people. Do they desire to harm anyone? No. But they do through their stupid action. When someone makes a stupid choice, I tend to call that a mistake. I think this is a terminology difference (because I also call what you are as defining as Desire, Intent) so i want to make sure I'm clear here too. An accident, for me, is different than a mistake - an accident is like elbowing someone you didn't know was there. Is that terminology what you all mean?
Reggie Posted April 17, 2009 Posted April 17, 2009 Not sure I'd agree that the drunk was merely acting stupidly. Regardless, with a drunk, there is the impaired judgement as a somewhat mitigating factor. Not so with a sober person who chooses to cheat. Difficult to imagine there was diminished cognizance of the potential harm.
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 This post got a lil' out of control....... I agree with what's here...........The intent to cheat & the choice to cheat........Not necessarily the intent to hurt though. Because as we all know.........EVERYONE involved in an affair gets hurt. The husband, the wife, the other husband, the other wife.....But you don't start out like the mad scientist wringing your hands & chanting...Who can I hurt today...Oh maybe my husband....Let's hurt him. I think you get so caught up in what's happening - hurting ANYONE isn't even a thought at the time. Does that make sense? YES! you totally make sense! I have always said that INTENT and MOTIVE are important in any case of infidelity. Some WS may be cheating INTENDING to hurt/cause damage to the BS or she/he may be cheating INTENDING to fill a void, to feel good about her/himself, etc...of course at D-day, the result is USUALLY the same-pain and devastation. Still it is important WHY the cheating occurred for everyone to be able to move on---whether to save the marriage, for self-discovery etc. If the WS is involved in an affair to INTENTIONAL hurt the BS...well, either you as a BS are a horrible person and must have done something really bad to the WS---so bad that he/she has to do something drastic to hurt you or the WS has really some serious Psych issues.
michelangelo Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Most cheaters may not want to harm their spouse by cheating; however they consider their selfish wants to be worth the harm they inflict. Collateral damage is all their spouse is when they want some sex on the side.
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Most cheaters may not want to harm their spouse by cheating; however they consider their selfish wants to be worth the harm they inflict. Collateral damage is all their spouse is when they want some sex on the side. I agree...still, most cheaters think or at least hope ,that they will not be found out....which if not found out there will be no collateral damage-at least that's the belief.
Mr. Lucky Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 which if not found out there will be no collateral damage-at least that's the belief. Kind of like the tree that falls in the forest. But there is another side to the same coin - if the A is found out, motives don't matter to the BS and intent (or lack thereof) doesn't lessen the damage... Mr. Lucky
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Kind of like the tree that falls in the forest. But there is another side to the same coin - if the A is found out, motives don't matter to the BS and intent (or lack thereof) doesn't lessen the damage... Mr. Lucky You may be right. Although I have read some BS talk about how when the dust settled, it felt better that the WS did not intend to hurt them...and they (BSs) start owning up to their part of the breakdown of the marriage...I think it makes it easier to move on...JMHO.
pelicanpreacher Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 This post got a lil' out of control....... I agree with what's here...........The intent to cheat & the choice to cheat........Not necessarily the intent to hurt though. Because as we all know.........EVERYONE involved in an affair gets hurt. The husband, the wife, the other husband, the other wife.....But you don't start out like the mad scientist wringing your hands & chanting...Who can I hurt today...Oh maybe my husband....Let's hurt him. I think you get so caught up in what's happening - hurting ANYONE isn't even a thought at the time. Does that make sense? On the flip side of the coin I know of no-one so bubble headed that they couldn't conceive of the notion that their SO/AP's SO wouldn't get hurt once the BS realized what they were doing might be wrong and cause harm to others. If so then there would never be a need for secrecy to nurture and protect the affair in the first place, right? The fact is that when the BS made a choice to not care who gets hurt when engaging in the act they've defined the impetus of their intent to harm! To minimize the effect of conscience when the intent to not care becomes clear I think most BS's rationalize that neither their SO nor AP's SO really cares that strongly about them anyways so the worst possible outcome to their betrayal is that they might get proverbially spanked for causing trouble.
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 On the flip side of the coin I know of no-one so bubble headed that they couldn't conceive of the notion that their SO/AP's SO wouldn't get hurt once the BS realized what they were doing might be wrong and cause harm to others. If so then there would never be a need for secrecy to nurture and protect the affair in the first place, right? I think that is the whole point to the secrecy and the lies...because WS know the cheating is wrong and would hurt and that is NOT what they want to do ( at least not all WS want to intentionally hurt)....otherwise if WS do not care they would just do it openly and blatantly.
bentnotbroken Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 I think that is the whole point to the secrecy and the lies...because WS know the cheating is wrong and would hurt and that is NOT what they want to do ( at least not all WS want to intentionally hurt)....otherwise if WS do not care they would just do it openly and blatantly. Wow. And I always thought they kept secrets and lied to cover their on azzes....
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Wow. And I always thought they kept secrets and lied to cover their on azzes.... Obviously, that too. Don't be silly. But I am talking specifically about the "intention to hurt", but you know that already, you just want to have parse my post to have the last word.
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 oooppps....failed to delete "have". Sentence should be "you just want to parse my post..." (lol...like it matters)..
pelicanpreacher Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 I think that is the whole point to the secrecy and the lies...because WS know the cheating is wrong and would hurt and that is NOT what they want to do ( at least not all WS want to intentionally hurt)....otherwise if WS do not care they would just do it openly and blatantly. This is the rationalization that cheaters use to mitigate the damages they may cause others when knowingly engaging in a wrongful act, ie. "if I can successfully lie well enough to obscure the harm that I'm doing to my SO while engaging in infidelity then no-one is harmed"! Wow. And I always thought they kept secrets and lied to cover their own azzes.... This is the cold hard truth factoring into a cheater's intent to do harm! Don't you love it when the rules of life remains black and white!
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 This is the rationalization that cheaters use to mitigate the damages they may cause others when knowingly engaging in a wrongful act, ie. "if I can successfully lie well enough to obscure the harm that I'm doing to my SO while engaging in infidelity then no-one is harmed"! This is the cold hard truth factoring into a cheater's intent to do harm! Don't you love it when the rules of life remains black and white! Rationalization or not, the fact is, many cheaters believe or at least, take the risk of cheating hoping that they can get away with it...of course, more often than that the cheating is discovered..and well, we all know how devastating that is.... Many things in life are black and white, but many more are grey. Cheating is wrong-that's black and white. What actions people do after D-day is not black and white. Many advocate divorce(regardless of mitigating reasons or if there is remorse, etc), still others advocate saving the marriage-depending on different factors. If life and particularly, issues in marriage are black and white, we won't have books about relationships on the best-seller list, or popular sites like this, or the lucrative business of relationship experts.
pelicanpreacher Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Rationalization or not, the fact is, many cheaters believe or at least, take the risk of cheating hoping that they can get away with it...of course, more often than that the cheating is discovered..and well, we all know how devastating that is.... Many things in life are black and white, but many more are grey. Cheating is wrong-that's black and white. What actions people do after D-day is not black and white. Many advocate divorce(regardless of mitigating reasons or if there is remorse, etc), still others advocate saving the marriage-depending on different factors. If life and particularly, issues in marriage are black and white, we won't have books about relationships on the best-seller list, or popular sites like this, or the lucrative business of relationship experts. Jesus admonished us to beware when the intent to help is parsed with the intent to make money less the true intent be corrupted! The Bible is the only self-help book issued that I refer to for its intent to help was freely borne on the innocent truth's indelible intent to help by our maker.
desertmoon Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 Jesus admonished us to beware when the intent to help is parsed with the intent to make money less the true intent be corrupted! The Bible is the only self-help book issued that I refer to for its intent to help was freely borne on the innocent truth's indelible intent to help by our maker. ahhh....hmmm....okaaay...thanks, I think.
pelicanpreacher Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 ahhh....hmmm....okaaay...thanks, I think. Also, although an adulterer makes the choice of forcing themselves to believe the lie they tell themselves isn't a lie, it doesn't change the fact a lie is a lie is a lie is a lie, does it?
starrattraction Posted April 18, 2009 Posted April 18, 2009 The person guilty of infidelity really just has a lack of confidence. The person being cheated on needs to understand that the guilty party always has an excuse. It could be so simple as "I am not appreciated, not listened to" or a million other rationalizations. What it boils down to is the insecure one wanted an ego fix. The new "flame" is there because the guilty one has not yet figured out how to get a life.
Recommended Posts