When is it ok to have an affair?

May 13, 2010

Yes. I absolutely did. I think I might have mentioned that before. Had I been true to my morals, I might have spared myself a lot of pain. Instead, I made justifications, hoping for a happily ever after.

So I imagine the next question might be had I gotten my happily ever after, would the justifications been worth it? I've thought hard about this, and I honestly don't think so. Otherwise, I might have hung around another few years, lol.

So I guess in the end, I learned to be true to my morals instead of a MM's.
But I may still get that happily ever after, just with a SG. Who knows?

I hope you do get your happily ever after.

This is very interesting to me. Yes, I believe it is very important to not compromise your morals. I hope you can bear with me while I use the dreaded term, but I know no better way to express it: Could this be the difference between the reformed OW and the unapologetic OW? Could it be that the reformed OW compromised her morals during the affair while the unapologetic OW did not?

What I am talking about is moral relativism. If the reformed OW and the unapologetic OW had different morals regarding affairs even before the affair started, then one OW's morals would be compromised but the other's would not.

Edited May 13, 2010 by jennie-jennie

May 13, 2010

For the most part I am on the side that affairs are wrong, but there are exceptions. One, being as Liz pointed out. What is a spouse supposed to do? Divorce and break up the family? Or a discrete affair and their needs are met and the marriage continues on.

And in my case, I had two revenge affairs with the wives of associate OM's. It was either that or I would probably have spent a long time in prison, had I been caught. I am not a violent person, but I found that there was an ugly part of me that I did not know existed. The only way I could control it was to say some day, I will get even. It would not have been next month, or possibly next year, but some night when they were least thinking about it I would have been there. As it worked out I was able to move on, and nobody got physically hurt. It still scare me to think about it.

Also, if I might add, I have seen on a couple of occasions, where the revealing of an affair woke up the betrayed spouse into working on their marriage.

May 13, 2010

Yes, Jennie. I have always thought this to be the case.
And many thanks for the well wishes.

Would this then mean that the consequences of having an affair are worse for the reformed OW than for the unapologetic OW? An unapologetic OW could then very well be happy during the affair and then leave it at that. But the reformed OW most likely regrets ever having had the affair.

Perhaps we need to be more aware of this difference when new posters post on LS. It looks to me like having the affair IS an alternative for the unapologetic OW, since she is not compromising her morals. Preaching NC in every case would then not be consistent with reality. Putting out the options for the new poster to choose from seems more in line with reality to me.

May 13, 2010

If we could be more accepting towards a plurality of morals, thus accepting moral relativism, the climate on LS would probably not be as harsh.

May 13, 2010

Would this then mean that the consequences of having an affair are worse for the reformed OW than for the unapologetic OW? An unapologetic OW could then very well be happy during the affair and then leave it at that. But the reformed OW most likely regrets ever having had the affair.

Perhaps we need to be more aware of this difference when new posters post on LS. It looks to me like having the affair IS an alternative for the unapologetic OW, since she is not compromising her morals. Preaching NC in every case would then not be consistent with reality. Putting out the options for the new poster to choose from seems more in line with reality to me.

It probably isn't until the affair is over that a reformed OW becomes a reformed OW (hence the word "reformed"). Who knows how many currently unapologetic OW will become reformed OW in time? Is the difference in morals inherent to the individual, or part of the process of becoming a reformed OW? It is truly a difference of morals, or the end of justification?

Also, relative moralism does not mean another person needs to accept your actions as "moral for you". You (general you) could justify any kind of hurtful action as within your morals; it doesn't make it any less hurful to the people your actions affect.

May 13, 2010

If we could be more accepting towards a plurality of morals, thus accepting moral relativism, the climate on LS would probably not be as harsh.

Then that would mean compromising our morals, something that most of us, including you aren't willing to do.

May 13, 2010

I don't know, Jennie. All I know is that a majority of people where I live believe infidelity is against their morals, so they are going to speak from that standpoint.
And it's not just the OW's morals people consider. It's the BS, kids, family, etc. Some OW's find that compelling, some don't.

But I agree, everyone is different. What will work for one person, won't for another. But as I said on Lila's thread, with the lessons I have learned, I could not in good conscience enable someone to stay in a relationship where they were unhappy, or that could be destructive.

Just my view. And by the way, I hope you know I hope things work out for you as well. I didn't say that in my last post because I know I have said it before, and took it as a given. But this morning I realized it was rude of me not to reiterate it.

Thanks.

May 13, 2010

It probably isn't until the affair is over that a reformed OW becomes a reformed OW (hence the word "reformed"). Who knows how many currently unapologetic OW will become reformed OW in time? Is the difference in morals inherent to the individual, or part of the process of becoming a reformed OW? It is truly a difference of morals, or the end of justification?

Also, relative moralism does not mean another person needs to accept your actions as "moral for you". You (general you) could justify any kind of hurtful action as within your morals; it doesn't make it any less hurful to the people your actions affect.

xxoo, I think you misunderstood jthorne's and my discussion. We were actually putting the theory out there that the morals of the reformed and the unapologetic OW are already set before the affair, and thus it is the OW who goes against her own morals that in turn becomes the reformed OW.

I can imagine a scenario however where the reformed OW appears to be unapologetic during the affair as some kind of rationalization to protect her against her compromising her morals. But if you take one step back and do what jthorne and I have done, consider what our morals were before falling in love with the MM, then you could see if you are in fact compromising your morals or not.

I find it interesting that jthorne states that she was living by her MM's morals during the affair, not her own. I think this is an important insight.

Can morals change during a lifetime? Are there some reformed OW who become unapologetic during the affair and stay unapologetic even if the affair ends badly? I don't know. I guess it is possible. And the opposite? Are there some unapologetic OW who end up being reformed OW once the affair has ended badly? I don't know. Perhaps morals are deeper set than that. Perhaps they do not change so easily during a lifetime.

May 13, 2010

Then that would mean compromising our morals, something that most of us, including you aren't willing to do.

Bent, I am trying to understand what you mean. Are you saying that because you believe in moral absolutism, it would be compromising your own morals to accept that other people's morals differ from yours? Interesting.

So would this give you the right to judge these people according to the absolute morals you believe exist? That would explain something which to me is unexplainable, the harsh and judgmental ways of the absolute moralists. But still, is it really okay even according to these absolute morals to act that condemning and judgmental?

Just because you believe there are morals set in stone, you still can not deny that there are people who have a different set of morals than these. Is it not possible for you to accept and be tolerant that this plurality exists in the world even if you consider these people to have the wrong conception of the truth?

May 13, 2010

Jen, You and Thorne make an interesting point. I realize that during my A, I was living by my MW's morals and not my own. She was/is a golddigger and is used to being deceptive, and using her looks to get men to do what she wants. When I realized this is when I forced D-Day on her. I saw her, for the first time , since our break-up, this weekend, and she's still beautiful, and still doing the same crap.

May 13, 2010

Where the problem comes in is when those differing sets of morals come into conflict.

Take this current issue here...infidelity.

Jennie, your morals tell you that it's ok to have an affair with a man who is married to someone else. That's fine...for you.

His wife's morals likely differ.

And when it's all said and done...she's going to suffer some sheer emotional devestation as a result of your choices, based on your morals.

Your beliefs directly hurt her...because you felt it was ok to sleep with her H, but that wasn't HER belief at all...nor was she even included in the decision making process.

That's why an affair is NEVER "ok" (in my book at least)...because it's almost never done with the open, knowing CONSENT of all three parties. Someone is pretty much always being lied to, cheated on, and ends up emotionally devestated as a result.

If someone else's "morals" tells them that it's ok to do this to another human being...that it's ok to get what THEY want regardless of the price paid by someone else who didn't have a choice in the matter...there's your conflict in a nutshell.

May 13, 2010

Bent, I am trying to understand what you mean. Are you saying that because you believe in moral absolutism, it would be compromising your own morals to accept that other people's morals differ from yours? Interesting.

So would this give you the right to judge these people according to the absolute morals you believe exist? That would explain something which to me is unexplainable, the harsh and judgmental ways of the absolute moralists. But still, is it really okay even according to these absolute morals to act that condemning and judgmental?

Just because you believe there are morals set in stone, you still can not deny that there are people who have a different set of morals than these. Is it not possible for you to accept and be tolerant that this plurality exists in the world even if you consider these people to have the wrong conception of the truth?

I don't have the right or power to condemn or judge. I don't want that right because then I would have to give myself what I deserve as well, and according to my belief system is death for sin. I am not trying to off myself anymore, so I am grateful for the mercy of God. I do have the right to say what I believe is wrong especially when in infringes on the right of others who don't believe the way the relative way others live their lives. There is always going to be a collision when the two points of view meet. I do accept that there are other views in the world, I have to, I live in the same world.

But as a black woman I have been asked to accept that others views of my color, ethnicity, geographical location, SES, education, gender and education all have differing viewpoints from the world I live in. And each of those view points in some shape or form have collided with my beliefs and in some way injured or impeded my right to happiness as well. Can't those people accept my way of life and leave it alone....nope. Why should they? They are humans living human lives.

Acceptance and tolerance are values that go both ways. Accepting that my values exist but only tolerating them until they stand in the way of something you (in general you) want is only tolerance in word not deed.

I wouldn't expect you to understand what I believe, just as I don't expect to ever understand the harshness that one can participate in where someone is being harshly treated by living a lie, being gas lighted and cheated on. I don't get it and I suspect I never will. I don't understand how your standards can be one thing in one situation and something entirely different in another. I believe molesting is wrong...always. I believe stealing is wrong...always. I believe killing is wrong....always. I believe cheating is wrong .....always.

I never said that I didn't understand some of the reasons that may be behind those actions and can even see where there may be a mindset of not having a choice(i.e. abortion) but that does not mean that I don't think we all have free will and when you will that your right is more than another's based on an emotion.....well.

May 13, 2010

Jennie, your morals tell you that it's ok to have an affair with a man who is married to someone else. That's fine...for you.

His wife's morals likely differ.

And when it's all said and done...she's going to suffer some sheer emotional devestation as a result of your choices, based on your morals.

Your beliefs directly hurt her...because you felt it was ok to sleep with her H, but that wasn't HER belief at all...nor was she even included in the decision making process.

I'm butting in here, because this raises an interesting point.

My morals say it's fine to have an A with a MM.

My H's xW (who was the BW in the scenario) had had an A herself, so clearly had no moral objection to As.

Does this make it OK by Owl's criteria?

... or might the fact that some people's morals are situational have some bearing, too? The fact that the BW considers As fine (when she's the WS) but not fine (when she's the BW) - does that make As acceptable to her or not? Does the context dependence / hypocrisy [depending on the generosity of your viewpoint] of her moral stance matter in weighing up whether or not As are acceptable to her, therefore whether or not an A with her H would be OK, morally?

May 13, 2010

I'm butting in here, because this raises an interesting point.

My morals say it's fine to have an A with a MM.

My H's xW (who was the BW in the scenario) had had an A herself, so clearly had no moral objection to As.

Does this make it OK by Owl's criteria?

Excellent question!!!

It could only be answered if the answers to another question were known. Did she change her viewpoint on things once she had her own affair?

Did she have an affair, and come to realize that she'd made a huge mistake and violated her own morals when she did so? Or did she have the affair, not feel it was a mistake, and felt that it clearly was an EXAMPLE of her own personal beliefs and morals?

Only the answer to that would help you to know whether or not SHE viewed her actions as a mistake or as an example of her actual morals...and whether or not she still felt that way after her own affair had ended.

... or might the fact that some people's morals are situational have some bearing, too? The fact that the BW considers As fine (when she's the WS) but not fine (when she's the BW) - does that make As acceptable to her or not? Does the context dependence / hypocrisy [depending on the generosity of your viewpoint] of her moral stance matter in weighing up whether or not As are acceptable to her, therefore whether or not an A with her H would be OK, morally?

But here's the real ghist of my perspective...

Did her H (at the time) ensure that she clearly knew, understood, and agreed that he was having an affair, and she approved of it?

If she said she was ok with it...then that would definitely tell me that there was no violation of her morals/etc... If she agreed and approved, then clearly she was an active participant in the situation, not an uninformed/uninvolved victim like most BS's are.

I'm betting however that she wasn't included in the decision making process.

I'm betting she was never given a 'vote' in the whole situation. In fact, I'd bet that it was all kept from her to some degree while it was ongoing, until it reached a point where her say in the matter was irrelevent.

I'm also betting she was likely devestated when she finally had the full understanding of what had been going on.

If the affair is done with the consent/agreement of the BS, and with no emotional trauma to them or anyone else...THAT would meet "Owl's criteria".

Is that what happened in your situation? Would she agree with that assessment?

May 13, 2010

I'm betting however that she wasn't included in the decision making process.

This is the crux of the problem. For all the people who say A's are okay, what about the spouse of the cheater? If they do NOT think A's are okay, did the cheater tell them prior to marriage that he/she was going to sleep around?

If there wasn't full disclosure prior to entering the marriage, then it's WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!!!

May 13, 2010

I'm butting in here, because this raises an interesting point.

My morals say it's fine to have an A with a MM.

My H's xW (who was the BW in the scenario) had had an A herself, so clearly had no moral objection to As.

Does this make it OK by Owl's criteria?

... or might the fact that some people's morals are situational have some bearing, too? The fact that the BW considers As fine (when she's the WS) but not fine (when she's the BW) - does that make As acceptable to her or not? Does the context dependence / hypocrisy [depending on the generosity of your viewpoint] of her moral stance matter in weighing up whether or not As are acceptable to her, therefore whether or not an A with her H would be OK, morally?

It's all wrong. Hers, his yours...(my moral stance of course). I believe Owl's view is similar. Tough I could be wrong.

May 13, 2010

I'm butting in here, because this raises an interesting point.

My morals say it's fine to have an A with a MM.

My H's xW (who was the BW in the scenario) had had an A herself, so clearly had no moral objection to As.

Does this make it OK by Owl's criteria?

... or might the fact that some people's morals are situational have some bearing, too? The fact that the BW considers As fine (when she's the WS) but not fine (when she's the BW) - does that make As acceptable to her or not? Does the context dependence / hypocrisy [depending on the generosity of your viewpoint] of her moral stance matter in weighing up whether or not As are acceptable to her, therefore whether or not an A with her H would be OK, morally?

----------------------

It is never OK to sin against others - even though they are sinners as well. We are Responsible for our own actions..

May 13, 2010

It's interesting that threads like this go on, and on, and on, and on... since LoveShack first appeared.

And we shall never reach a conclusion.

Society states that affairs are wrong - people cheat.

Society states that stealing is wrong - people steal

Society states that murder is wrong - people kill

Society states that doing drugs is wrong - people get high

Society states that pedophila is wrong - people molest children

Society states that lying is wrong - people lie

I'm not saying that cheaters are criminal. Just that they find a logic reason and justification within themselves to perform their actions. A logic that others find it's "wrong".

In the end, though, regardless of all that is said and done... people will always cheat, steal, bla bla bla

Let everyone act according to their consciousness, then.

May 13, 2010

Where the problem comes in is when those differing sets of morals come into conflict.

Take this current issue here...infidelity.

Jennie, your morals tell you that it's ok to have an affair with a man who is married to someone else. That's fine...for you.

His wife's morals likely differ.

And when it's all said and done...she's going to suffer some sheer emotional devestation as a result of your choices, based on your morals.

Your beliefs directly hurt her...because you felt it was ok to sleep with her H, but that wasn't HER belief at all...nor was she even included in the decision making process.

That's why an affair is NEVER "ok" (in my book at least)...because it's almost never done with the open, knowing CONSENT of all three parties. Someone is pretty much always being lied to, cheated on, and ends up emotionally devestated as a result.

If someone else's "morals" tells them that it's ok to do this to another human being...that it's ok to get what THEY want regardless of the price paid by someone else who didn't have a choice in the matter...there's your conflict in a nutshell.

I agree with Owl. Moral relativism is a snarky idea when it comes to harming others.

May 13, 2010

It's interesting that threads like this go on, and on, and on, and on... since LoveShack first appeared.

And we shall never reach a conclusion.

Society states that affairs are wrong - people cheat.
Society states that stealing is wrong - people steal
Society states that murder is wrong - people kill
Society states that doing drugs is wrong - people get high
Society states that pedophila is wrong - people molest children
Society states that lying is wrong - people lie

I'm not saying that cheaters are criminal. Just that they find a logic reason and justification within themselves to perform their actions. A logic that others find it's "wrong".

In the end, though, regardless of all that is said and done... people will always cheat, steal, bla bla bla

Let everyone act according to their consciousness, then.

What a good point

May 13, 2010

Using the idea that its ok for me to do it because my "morals" are different from theirs. Is stupid! You could say the same thing if you wanted to kill someone!!

May 13, 2010

Can morals change during a lifetime?

I believe the answer to that is clearly yes, and morals develop over a lifetime.

Are there some reformed OW who become unapologetic during the affair and stay unapologetic even if the affair ends badly? I don't know. I guess it is possible.

I don't understand how it is possible to be a "reformed" OW and remain in the affair. Doesn't that negate the definition of "reformed"?

And the opposite? Are there some unapologetic OW who end up being reformed OW once the affair has ended badly? I don't know. Perhaps morals are deeper set than that. Perhaps they do not change so easily during a lifetime.

I am sure this scenario is common among people who see the devastation of their choices and recognize their own responsibility in another person's pain, whether it be affairs or other harmful behavior.

May 13, 2010

Moral relativism....

I usually hear this term in the context of other cultures, and often in the treatment of women. Things like female genital mutilation, or honor killings--these things are considered acceptable by some in a different moral structure than my own.

My thoughts on this generally go to the percieved "victim", from my pov. How do the women in these cultures feel? Are they supportive of FGM? Are they in favor of honor killings, usually of young women? Often (but not always), the answer is strongly NO! And if the victims are against it, then I am not intested in hearing jusitifications of moral relativism.

The same is true, for me, as far as the "victim" of the affair. How does the BS feel about the affair? Everything is good? Just part of the culture? If so, why all the trouble to keep the betrayal a secret?

May 13, 2010

Can morals change during a lifetime?

I'm sure they develop and change as do people. However, I think for some morals can change with the wind depending on their convenience for some people. Case in point: Rielle Hunter. Ugh.

May 13, 2010

I think for some morals can change with the wind depending on their convenience for some people.

Agreed. If it makes me happy, then it must be right...regardless of how others are affected.

And that is how "morals" are defined by some people. True morality refers directly to what is right and wrong, regardless of what people think.

Sign In

When is it ok to have an affair?

Recommended Posts

jennie-jennie

2.50 a gallon

jennie-jennie

jennie-jennie

xxoo

bentnotbroken

jennie-jennie

jennie-jennie

jennie-jennie

JustJoe

Owl

bentnotbroken

OWoman

Owl

donnamaybe

bentnotbroken

califnan

karnak

michelangelo

Maxxx

Maxxx

xxoo

xxoo

donnamaybe

JamesM

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...