NoIDidn't Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I was going to post this as a response in OWoman's "stay or leave" thread, but felt it might be a threadjack. In her thread she talks about basically taking what one can get from an A and either being satisfied enough with it or getting out if dissatisfied with it. It got me to thinking about the conversations I've had with friends when I was an OW, and with friends that were once OW as well. We seemed to be more willing to hang in there for the attached guy because he was attached. Because he showed a willingness to commit to (albeit, and cheat on) one person. Is it possible that some OP tolerate what I now feel is intolerable because of that very skewed view of "commitment" and what the MP/AP (attached person) is actually doing? I'm not considering the thought of self-respect and the like, just this assumption that the attached person has proven that they like to be attached as a motivator to "stay" with them longer than one might under normal circumstances. It was also interesting (and I think, true) what Got It and 2Sure said about compromising and sacrificing more in a M, than in other Rs. So this question isn't only to OPs, but to MPs as well. Do we stay with them because we might not find someone else that has proven that they will commit, at least for a period of time?
mem11363 Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 My wife and I have both worked really really hard to affair proof our marriage - and have been successful so far. I wonder though - after a short time in an affair - is there a desire to "win" the married person - to outperform their spouse so they leave the spouse and come to you full time? Seems like there might often end up being some competitive aspect to this. I was going to post this as a response in OWoman's "stay or leave" thread, but felt it might be a threadjack. In her thread she talks about basically taking what one can get from an A and either being satisfied enough with it or getting out if dissatisfied with it. It got me to thinking about the conversations I've had with friends when I was an OW, and with friends that were once OW as well. We seemed to be more willing to hang in there for the attached guy because he was attached. Because he showed a willingness to commit to (albeit, and cheat on) one person. Is it possible that some OP tolerate what I now feel is intolerable because of that very skewed view of "commitment" and what the MP/AP (attached person) is actually doing? I'm not considering the thought of self-respect and the like, just this assumption that the attached person has proven that they like to be attached as a motivator to "stay" with them longer than one might under normal circumstances. It was also interesting (and I think, true) what Got It and 2Sure said about compromising and sacrificing more in a M, than in other Rs. So this question isn't only to OPs, but to MPs as well. Do we stay with them because we might not find someone else that has proven that they will commit, at least for a period of time?
sally4sara Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I have wondered about this but with the belief that what the AP found desirous about the MP was the BS's influence on them. As though who they were actually drawn in by was not so much the MP, but the BS shining though in them. Women being attracted to the influences of another women. Men being attracted to the influences of other men. Since so much of the relationship is shaped around the fact that their spouse is part of the equation, they are kind of having a relationship with the BS too. Without the BS, there would be no need for the conspiracy tension adding passion to their approach. And the little things too; the MP's personal and communication style has been honed by their relationship with the BS before the AP came along. Maybe some only labor under a delusion that they are in love with the MP but are actually enticed and in love with the projection from the BS? Like, girl if you had a penis, I'd be in love - oh wait! you DO have a penis! Can I borrow it?
Author NoIDidn't Posted March 26, 2010 Author Posted March 26, 2010 I have wondered about this but with the belief that what the AP found desirous about the MP was the BS's influence on them. As though who they were actually drawn in by was not so much the MP, but the BS shining though in them. Women being attracted to the influences of another women. Men being attracted to the influences of other men. Since so much of the relationship is shaped around the fact that their spouse is part of the equation, they are kind of having a relationship with the BS too. Without the BS, there would be no need for the conspiracy tension adding passion to their approach. And the little things too; the MP's personal and communication style has been honed by their relationship with the BS before the AP came along. Maybe some only labor under a delusion that they are in love with the MP but are actually enticed and in love with the projection from the BS? Like, girl if you had a penis, I'd be in love - oh wait! you DO have a penis! Can I borrow it? So interesting that you say this. I've had plenty of women friends of my H say that they are grateful that I "trained" him for them. That I saved them the trouble. LOL. Its interesting that you say they are in love with BS's influence on them. I've always said married guys have had the rough edges taken off of them by marriage and the need to learn to compromise if they wanted to stay married. Thinking of it this way, it makes sense that another woman would be interested in a guy that just has more sense in dealing with women versus a single guy that acted like a relationship neanderthal.
califnan Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 The MM was intelligent, more considerate, more Communicative, humorous, more romantic, more Communicative, more mannerly, more considerate, sweeter, handsome, attractive, more Communicative ... than others out there ...
sally4sara Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 So interesting that you say this. I've had plenty of women friends of my H say that they are grateful that I "trained" him for them. That I saved them the trouble. LOL. Its interesting that you say they are in love with BS's influence on them. I've always said married guys have had the rough edges taken off of them by marriage and the need to learn to compromise if they wanted to stay married. Thinking of it this way, it makes sense that another woman would be interested in a guy that just has more sense in dealing with women versus a single guy that acted like a relationship neanderthal. Well I don't think it just applies to men. A woman can be influence by her male partner to be more fluent in "guy speak". She will learn from her relationship what similar men respond to and appreciate. In this way, I think AP would be a bit stunned to learn how similar they are to the BS if they had not come to know them as simply the person they were co-conspiring against. The MP was drawn by certain qualities to their spouse, so it stands to reason a similar person would be interesting for the same qualities. Another thing I keep noticing about people who've confided in me that their partner cheated is, when they discover who the AP is, it is often a less attractive or perceived successful person. This leads me to believe that while the AP and the BS are similar in some ways, the fact that the MP stepping out is committed to someone else, their options are a bit hampered by the limitation of what they can offer the AP over the BS. So maybe often, they find that they have to lower their physical requirement preferences to find someone willing to over look the lack of what they can feasibly offer to the AP. I suspect this only adds to the competition factor for the AP and what they do get from the MP feels like a larger accomplishment than they actually receive and keeps them from realizing they really are short changing themselves. The MP has qualities they don't typically find in their own dating pool making their come on harder to resist.
Author NoIDidn't Posted March 26, 2010 Author Posted March 26, 2010 The MM was intelligent, more considerate, more Communicative, humorous, more romantic, more Communicative, more mannerly, more considerate, sweeter, handsome, attractive, more Communicative ... than others out there ... LOL. Funny, but true. I've had single guys let a door slam in my face. The married guys would go out of their way to be chilvarous towards me. Its definitely treatment a lady can get used to!
Author NoIDidn't Posted March 26, 2010 Author Posted March 26, 2010 Well I don't think it just applies to men. A woman can be influence by her male partner to be more fluent in "guy speak". She will learn from her relationship what similar men respond to and appreciate. I agree. I have had many a FB conversation/chat with an old male friend about the influence my being married has had on me in my interactions with men now. But, somehow, I don't think that OM are as likely to be connecting the fact that a woman is married or attached, to thinking that she would do it to them if they managed to get her out of her marriage. IDK. Just thinking out loud.
silktricks Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Well, from a psychologist friend of mine, there are a number of studies that have been done. Women are FAR more attracted to men who are with other women. and that's before they've even said a word to each other.
hopeless4u Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 My wife and I have both worked really really hard to affair proof our marriage - and have been successful so far. I wonder though - after a short time in an affair - is there a desire to "win" the married person - to outperform their spouse so they leave the spouse and come to you full time? Seems like there might often end up being some competitive aspect to this. I never once tried to compete with my xMM's W but I did and still do think that I always put his happiness first. I've walked away and let him sort his head out even though I know his W is emotionally manipulating him. I could of stayed friends with him (he wanted to) and emotionally manipulated him also but thats not love, is it?
White Flower Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Do we stay with them because we might not find someone else that has proven that they will commit, at least for a period of time? It is an interesting question and I was going to quickly say no, not at all until I remembered something. During off times with MM I would chat with guys on dating sites and found that there are quite a lot of them who have never M nor have had kids. I caught myself thinking there must have been something wrong with them. Who knows, maybe I am wrong. Yet, there was no allure for me in that MM was M; at least I don't think there was. Sure I had questions and assumptions but when I began to fall I only saw him being M as a barrier or hurdle. At least the MM has proven he can commit himself and be a successful family man. Maybe there is a deep-seeded understanding and familiarity with this concept even if we don't cognitively dwell on it?
White Flower Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 LOL. Funny, but true. I've had single guys let a door slam in my face. The married guys would go out of their way to be chilvarous towards me. Its definitely treatment a lady can get used to! I will agree with this as well. Even the last SG had been M before and he was a complete gentleman, putting my jacket on for me before stepping out into the rain.
jennie-jennie Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Err... no. This quality of his makes me NOT want to marry him. I want a man to stay with me for me not because of a sense of duty or obligation to a vow.
Got it Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Oh good lord. No it was never a competition with his spouse. I was attracted to him for attributes soley tied to his personality, demeanor, and sense of humor. I was in an EMR because of the man not because of the marital status.
Just a stone's throw Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 At my age, and at the age of partners that I'd likely be seeking out (if I were single right now) they would have had to have been in some sort of relationship (probably divorced or widowed) because it would be hard for me to imagine a man at that age having never been in a committed relationship. I guess that's my shallow mind or at least something I hadn't really thought through. If they're single by that age, something is probably wrong and committment just isn't there thing. Funny but if they had cheated and were divorced at that age, is committment really their thing either?? Hmmmm.. I guess I can hold my own debate in my mind.
jennie-jennie Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Another thing I keep noticing about people who've confided in me that their partner cheated is, when they discover who the AP is, it is often a less attractive or perceived successful person. This leads me to believe that while the AP and the BS are similar in some ways, the fact that the MP stepping out is committed to someone else, their options are a bit hampered by the limitation of what they can offer the AP over the BS. So maybe often, they find that they have to lower their physical requirement preferences to find someone willing to over look the lack of what they can feasibly offer to the AP. I suspect this only adds to the competition factor for the AP and what they do get from the MP feels like a larger accomplishment than they actually receive and keeps them from realizing they really are short changing themselves. The MP has qualities they don't typically find in their own dating pool making their come on harder to resist.[/QUOTE] Well, in our case I am pretty much out of my MM's league. I don't think he ever got a shot at such a woman as me before. (except when we were teenagers of course)
Got it Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Well I don't think it just applies to men. A woman can be influence by her male partner to be more fluent in "guy speak". She will learn from her relationship what similar men respond to and appreciate. In this way, I think AP would be a bit stunned to learn how similar they are to the BS if they had not come to know them as simply the person they were co-conspiring against. The MP was drawn by certain qualities to their spouse, so it stands to reason a similar person would be interesting for the same qualities. Another thing I keep noticing about people who've confided in me that their partner cheated is, when they discover who the AP is, it is often a less attractive or perceived successful person. This leads me to believe that while the AP and the BS are similar in some ways, the fact that the MP stepping out is committed to someone else, their options are a bit hampered by the limitation of what they can offer the AP over the BS. So maybe often, they find that they have to lower their physical requirement preferences to find someone willing to over look the lack of what they can feasibly offer to the AP. I suspect this only adds to the competition factor for the AP and what they do get from the MP feels like a larger accomplishment than they actually receive and keeps them from realizing they really are short changing themselves. The MP has qualities they don't typically find in their own dating pool making their come on harder to resist. Seriously!?! Okay I will bite. What about two married individals? How does that play into the above?
ladydesigner Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I actually decided to have my RA with my co-worker because I felt comfortable with him, we had a lot in common, and the biggest thing "he had a girlfriend." From a MW POV, well my point of view, knowing that he had a girlfriend ensured the fact that we could never become more than what it was..an affair.
jennie-jennie Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Oh good lord. No it was never a competition with his spouse. I was attracted to him for attributes soley tied to his personality, demeanor, and sense of humor. I was in an EMR because of the man not because of the marital status. Exactly. I am in love with the inside attributes of my MM, not the outside. :love:
sally4sara Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Another thing I keep noticing about people who've confided in me that their partner cheated is, when they discover who the AP is, it is often a less attractive or perceived successful person. This leads me to believe that while the AP and the BS are similar in some ways, the fact that the MP stepping out is committed to someone else, their options are a bit hampered by the limitation of what they can offer the AP over the BS. So maybe often, they find that they have to lower their physical requirement preferences to find someone willing to over look the lack of what they can feasibly offer to the AP. I suspect this only adds to the competition factor for the AP and what they do get from the MP feels like a larger accomplishment than they actually receive and keeps them from realizing they really are short changing themselves. The MP has qualities they don't typically find in their own dating pool making their come on harder to resist.[/QUOTE] Well, in our case I am pretty much out of my MM's league. I don't think he ever got a shot at such a woman as me before. (except when we were teenagers of course) My comment was not a personal one against anyone on this forum; there will always be exceptions. It was only a comment about something I noticed in the relationships I've been exposed to where one spouse was cheated on. The perception of less attractive can mean many things. A man or woman who is less physically attractive that the spouse. A man or women who is less well established in their life goals than the spouse or less intelligent. Or having a life that is perceived to be less stable or holding more personal baggage than the MP's spouse.......
sally4sara Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 Seriously!?! Okay I will bite. What about two married individals? How does that play into the above? As I said before, no one need take my comment personally. I do not know you.
jennie-jennie Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 (edited) As I said before, no one need take my comment personally. I do not know you. I don't think anyone took it personally. Your comment was just the total opposite of our experiences. The thing is both MM and I had partners when we got together. We want something better than what we had already, why would we bother otherwise? This does however not contradict what Ladydesigner is saying. She was looking for an affair, not a relationship. Edited March 26, 2010 by jennie-jennie
sally4sara Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I don't think anyone took it personally. Your comment was just the total opposite of our experiences. The thing is both MM and I had partners when we got together. We want something better than what we had already, why would we bother otherwise? IMO, something better would be handled with bit more integrity, ending the "lesser" situation to the benefit of the "better" one rather than making the "lesser" one even worse for the existence of the "better" one. And there would be no cake eating if one was "better" or "lesser". You don't keep brussel sprouts on your plate if you prefer and have access to cherry cobbler.
ladydesigner Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 My comment was not a personal one against anyone on this forum; there will always be exceptions. It was only a comment about something I noticed in the relationships I've been exposed to where one spouse was cheated on. The perception of less attractive can mean many things. A man or woman who is less physically attractive that the spouse. A man or women who is less well established in their life goals than the spouse or less intelligent. Or having a life that is perceived to be less stable or holding more personal baggage than the MP's spouse....... This is interesting because there is a theory of "Affairing Up" or "Affairing Down". In my case I "Affaired Down" because I was feeling insecure at the time and I felt very comfortable with my XAP because he was not overly good looking and he viewed me as someone who he looked up to and admired not only in profession, but looks wise too. I got a good ego feed from it. I think people that "Affair UP" are looking for something better to leave their relationship for. I was not looking to leave my M I was looking for that ego boost, hence cake eating at its finest.
jennie-jennie Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 IMO, something better would be handled with bit more integrity, ending the "lesser" situation to the benefit of the "better" one rather than making the "lesser" one even worse for the existence of the "better" one. And there would be no cake eating if one was "better" or "lesser". You don't keep brussel sprouts on your plate if you prefer and have access to cherry cobbler. You do if you are a married man with a great sense of obligation and duty. Didn't you ever eat the brussel sprouts just to make someone else happy or because you were taught to eat all that was on your plate?
Recommended Posts