NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 What I am trying to convey is more the "How could you?" factor. It seems that is greater when it comes to money than when it comes to love. The BS saying to the OW: How could you have an affair with my husband? vs How could you accept our money? I disagree. There is no "or". Its an "and". How could you sleep with another woman AND how could you use our resources on her? The same question the kids will one day ask of their fathers should they ever find out.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 This sentence makes me see red. This sentence makes me see red. I am thinking it could be because one is seen as motivated by love, the other as motivated by greed. I am thinking that it could be because that is what this thread is about. I must say I am surprised, Ann_Igma, that you as a native English speaker seem to feel the need to borrow the words of a foreigner. You are not stalking me, are you?
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 (edited) I disagree. There is no "or". Its an "and". How could you sleep with another woman AND how could you use our resources on her? The same question the kids will one day ask of their fathers should they ever find out. Let's do the twist. I can't see I wrote any "or". "Versus" means "against". As far as I remember posters where discussing taking money not only from a MM but also from any man. So I guess my mistake was not writing: How could you have an affair with a MM? vs How could you accept money? My questions were asked by the BS to the OW, not by the BS to the WS. You are switching the focus of my posts, NID. Edited June 20, 2010 by jennie-jennie
TinaniT Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 I have said it before (and been called a liar for it) but I would rather live in a cardboard house with the man I love in my life, than live in a mansion without him in my life. I swear it on all that I hold dear. Money certainly makes life easier, but it in no way makes love stronger. If my sweetheart told me that he was divorcing tomorrow, but felt that he needed to give her everything they owned, everything he worked his whole life for, and he could only come to me penniless; I would rejoice in his love, bask in the warmth of his heart and celebrate the start of a new life for us together. Hell yes. My MM is, coincidentally, a man of some means. While I appreciate the qualities that got him there, I don't care about the money. He did indeed offer almost all the marital assets to his xw. I am happy he cares enough to take care of his wife and children. It reinforces what I know about him. And even if he were never to recover financially, I wouldn't care. I love him for who he is.
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 Let's do the twist. I can't see I wrote any "or". "Versus" means "against". As far as I remember posters where discussing taking money not only from a MM but also from any man. So I guess my mistake was not writing: How could you have an affair with a MM? vs How could you accept money? My questions were asked by the BS to the OW, not by the BS to the WS. You are switching the focus of my posts, NID. Versus and against imply "or" to me. One is going to win out in the worst contest. Its an either/or set up. Bulls vs. Magic. Who's going to win? The Bulls OR the Magic. Like I said, I disagree. They both suck. Its an "And", not an "or". Its like the BS vs Fraud AND Deceit (taking "my" money AND taking "my" man). You changed the meaning of your own post when you enter the "its about any man" argument. Don't change the goalposts everytime someone posts to you, and there would be no twisting.
Fallen Angel Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 What I am trying to convey is more the "How could you?" factor. It seems that is greater when it comes to money than when it comes to love. The BS saying to the OW: How could you have an affair with my husband? vs How could you accept our money? I disagree. There is no "or". Its an "and". How could you sleep with another woman AND how could you use our resources on her? The same question the kids will one day ask of their fathers should they ever find out. My point was simply that the thought that I accept him paying my phone bill seems to have touched more of a nerve in this thread, seems to have gotten more of a "shocked and dismayed" kind of reaction; than the fact that I am in a long term emotional and sexual relationship with him despite his maritial status has ever recieved on any other thread. The difference is shocking to me. That my accepting a few dollars seems to spark more criticism of me than the fact that I am in an affair. It seems telling about the priorities of some is all. I am in no way attempting to bait anyone. Just making an observation based on the reactions in this thread. Hell yes. My MM is, coincidentally, a man of some means. While I appreciate the qualities that got him there, I don't care about the money. He did indeed offer almost all the marital assets to his xw. I am happy he cares enough to take care of his wife and children. It reinforces what I know about him. And even if he were never to recover financially, I wouldn't care. I love him for who he is. I understand completely.
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 My point was simply that the thought that I accept him paying my phone bill seems to have touched more of a nerve in this thread, seems to have gotten more of a "shocked and dismayed" kind of reaction; than the fact that I am in a long term emotional and sexual relationship with him despite his maritial status has ever recieved on any other thread. The difference is shocking to me. That my accepting a few dollars seems to spark more criticism of me than the fact that I am in an affair. It seems telling about the priorities of some is all. I am in no way attempting to bait anyone. Just making an observation based on the reactions in this thread. I understand completely. I get what you are saying, but there is the ever so slight possibility that you are misreading the intent of those that you are "shocked and dismayed" by. We have accepted that the posters here are already in affairs. That horse has been out of the barn for a while. We have accepted that people behave in this way. The cheating is not excused, so don't think that is what anyone is saying. Its that, on top of cheating on their families, they are also stealing the funds from them too? Its not an either or proposition. They both are bad. But this thread assumes that the OW is ALREADY in an affair. No need for judgment on that. I thought you guys got tired of hearing judgment on that anyway. You finally get a thread where no one complains about the fact that one is an OW, and there are complaints. Too funny.
califnan Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 My point was simply that the thought that I accept him paying my phone bill seems to have touched more of a nerve in this thread, seems to have gotten more of a "shocked and dismayed" kind of reaction; than the fact that I am in a long term emotional and sexual relationship with him despite his maritial status has ever recieved on any other thread. The difference is shocking to me. That my accepting a few dollars seems to spark more criticism of me than the fact that I am in an affair. It seems telling about the priorities of some is all. I am in no way attempting to bait anyone. Just making an observation based on the reactions in this thread. ---------------- All that I have noted is that posters have tried to educate that the H can be held financially resposible to his W for half of monies spent on the OW. I would think in a three year relationship that his monies spent are more than the phone bill (and can add up) - but just my opinion.. "shocked and dismayed" reactions could have become diluted by time on here - as posters reading all kinds of OW stories, and becoming used to yours.. "long term emotional and sexual relationship with him" are just Words .. used for justification for being with and receiving from another woman's husband..
Fallen Angel Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 I get what you are saying, but there is the ever so slight possibility that you are misreading the intent of those that you are "shocked and dismayed" by. We have accepted that the posters here are already in affairs. That horse has been out of the barn for a while. We have accepted that people behave in this way. The cheating is not excused, so don't think that is what anyone is saying. Its that, on top of cheating on their families, they are also stealing the funds from them too? Its not an either or proposition. They both are bad. But this thread assumes that the OW is ALREADY in an affair. No need for judgment on that. I thought you guys got tired of hearing judgment on that anyway. You finally get a thread where no one complains about the fact that one is an OW, and there are complaints. Too funny. I disagree with this premise. If we were on a dating board and I said that I allowed my boyfriend to pay my cell phone bill as I am a single mother and to me a cell phone is a luxury that I was willing to do without but that because of his love for me and his desire to have easier communication with me he chooses to pay my bill and allow me that luxury, no one would get so completely offended as to imply that my relationship with him was one of poorly paid prostitute as has been alluded to on this thread. It is my position as OW accepting this same monetary assistance that has people so up in arms. Yet, while I agree that the same posters who are most adamantly opposed to my accepting monetary gifts from him are the same ones who most adamantly oppose my relationship with him at all; the outrage at my accepting his assistance appears to have struck a more vital nerve than the fact of the affair itself in some of those same people. Hence leading me to believe that financial fidelity is a much higher priority to them than emotional or sexual fidelity. IMHO.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 Versus and against imply "or" to me. One is going to win out in the worst contest. Its an either/or set up. Bulls vs. Magic. Who's going to win? The Bulls OR the Magic. Like I said, I disagree. They both suck. Its an "And", not an "or". Its like the BS vs Fraud AND Deceit (taking "my" money AND taking "my" man). You changed the meaning of your own post when you enter the "its about any man" argument. Don't change the goalposts everytime someone posts to you, and there would be no twisting. I am sorry, but I was actually considering whether or not to write "How could you have an affair with my husband and accept our money?" in my original post, but I decided against that for the very reason that we had been discussing accepting money from any man. I wanted the focus in the second question on the money, not on the affair. So this is not about changing goalposts, it is about understanding that my original post was not phrased well enough for people to understand what I was saying.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 My point was simply that the thought that I accept him paying my phone bill seems to have touched more of a nerve in this thread, seems to have gotten more of a "shocked and dismayed" kind of reaction; than the fact that I am in a long term emotional and sexual relationship with him despite his maritial status has ever recieved on any other thread. The difference is shocking to me. That my accepting a few dollars seems to spark more criticism of me than the fact that I am in an affair. It seems telling about the priorities of some is all. I am in no way attempting to bait anyone. Just making an observation based on the reactions in this thread. This is exactly what I too am trying to convey.
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 I am sorry, but I was actually considering whether or not to write "How could you have an affair with my husband and accept our money?" in my original post, but I decided against that for the very reason that we had been discussing accepting money from any man. I wanted the focus in the second question on the money, not on the affair. So this is not about changing goalposts, it is about understanding that my original post was not phrased well enough for people to understand what I was saying. Nice. LOL. Blame others for not understanding what you were saying when you weren't clear. LOL. (I really am laughing. I've done this a time or two.)
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 I disagree with this premise. If we were on a dating board and I said that I allowed my boyfriend to pay my cell phone bill as I am a single mother and to me a cell phone is a luxury that I was willing to do without but that because of his love for me and his desire to have easier communication with me he chooses to pay my bill and allow me that luxury, no one would get so completely offended as to imply that my relationship with him was one of poorly paid prostitute as has been alluded to on this thread. It is my position as OW accepting this same monetary assistance that has people so up in arms. Yet, while I agree that the same posters who are most adamantly opposed to my accepting monetary gifts from him are the same ones who most adamantly oppose my relationship with him at all; the outrage at my accepting his assistance appears to have struck a more vital nerve than the fact of the affair itself in some of those same people. Hence leading me to believe that financial fidelity is a much higher priority to them than emotional or sexual fidelity. IMHO. FA, I think you misinterpret what they said. Just like I said before. First you say no one is complaining that you are sleeping with someone's husband. Then you come back and say they likened you taking his money AND sleeping with him to prostitution. Which is it, hun? Seems to me then, that people are both appalled by the cheating AND the taking of the money. Why are you trying to imply that Wives/people care more about his money than anything else (who he's sleeping with)? That is straight outta the MM Handbook. Its ALWAYS the MM that first complains that HIS W only cares about his money. Even my H said he felt like a paycheck (after realizing that was what he himself set up by escaping the hard work of family) while in MC. You have revealed that you shouldn't have the complaint that you raise about people caring only about the money, IMO. Its pretty obvious that someone bringing prostitution into it has problems with BOTH (the money and the outside sex).
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 I've only read about 4 pages in, so perhaps we are long past this, but I just wanted to comment on the legal issues being thrown around. A *minority* of states are community property states... not all or even most of them. I'm a lawyer in a community property state, and, even in community property states, "community property" doesn't mean that one spouse has to *approve* of everything the other spouse spends... it just means they are responsible for it. For instance, if I was married, and I went on a spending spree and racked up $2,000 in shoes, in a community property state my husband would be jointly responsible for the bill. It doesn't mean he could *sue* me to get his $1,000 back. I'm not sure what cases people are talking about... sure, if we were in the middle of a divorce and I took money out of a joint account to buy shoes or pay for my lover's rent or dinner, etc., he could sue me because there is a freeze on assets after one person files for divorce and the court or the couple figures out what to do with what money. But in a regular old marriage my husband could legally spend money on a mistress just like I could legally spend money on a ton of unnecessary shoes, and I couldn't do a thing about it, except divorce him, and vice versa. Community property means that whatever the person had in her own name before she went into the marriage (assets and debts) stays in her name - her husband takes no responsibility for that debt and gets no right to the assets (and vice versa). But whatever she has after they get married (debts and assets) is legally looked at as belonging to both of them -- so that he can take half of her assets and he is responsible for half of her debts, and vice versa. That's all it means. It doesn't mean that she has to check with her husband before she spends money on her lover or her shoes etc. Now that's the legal position. My own opinion is that a woman should take care of herself financially and never rely on a man to do that-- whether it be her boyfriend, lover, husband, whatever. And vice versa. But there is no law that says one can't. Does this mean that if the husband pays for a diamond ring for his OW or the hotel and plane tickets for their week away with his charge card, then the wife is equally responsible for paying this debt?
Silly_Girl Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 Does this mean that if the husband pays for a diamond ring for his OW or the hotel and plane tickets for their week away with his charge card, then the wife is equally responsible for paying this debt? Do you know, I think it does. It's so awful when you put it that way.
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 Does this mean that if the husband pays for a diamond ring for his OW or the hotel and plane tickets for their week away with his charge card, then the wife is equally responsible for paying this debt? This is not a laughing matter. Its actually true. That's why its considered THEFT to accept his money knowing his W is paying for it too. But, this is also why some states allow for the W to go after the OW to get half of what is hers back. A W was awarded over $400K from an OW who had the nerve to brag about how much her MM spent on her during their affair. At the hearing, and after the ruling the OW had the nerve to claim she was broke. She showed up wearing some horrible lace outfit too. Never heard anything else on this case. But since she was awarded it, the W can now go after the OWs assets to satisfy her claim. The MM was dead. There was no divorce settlement going on. It saddens me to think there are people out there that laugh at the very real misfortune of others. All the while claiming that the same others should then care about their misfortune and pain (or humiliation or other inflamatory word meant to evoke sympathy/pity).
NoIDidn't Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 Do you know, I think it does. It's so awful when you put it that way. It is awful to put it that way. But notice the ":p"? That's not funny. AT ALL.
White Dove Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 That has got me thinking. What kind of a woman would want to accept a diamond ring from MM knowing that he's still married? It's bad enough that you're having an affair with him and you're accepting a diamond ring as well? Just wow!
Fallen Angel Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 FA, I think you misinterpret what they said. Just like I said before. First you say no one is complaining that you are sleeping with someone's husband. Then you come back and say they likened you taking his money AND sleeping with him to prostitution. Which is it, hun? Seems to me then, that people are both appalled by the cheating AND the taking of the money. Why are you trying to imply that Wives/people care more about his money than anything else (who he's sleeping with)? That is straight outta the MM Handbook. Its ALWAYS the MM that first complains that HIS W only cares about his money. Even my H said he felt like a paycheck (after realizing that was what he himself set up by escaping the hard work of family) while in MC. You have revealed that you shouldn't have the complaint that you raise about people caring only about the money, IMO. Its pretty obvious that someone bringing prostitution into it has problems with BOTH (the money and the outside sex). My sweetheart has never said anything like this. I am basing my opinions on the value of the money spent on the OW vs. the value of the emotional investment spent on the OW as percieved by the BS, on the responses on this thread, and i stand by what I say I see, that for some Posters the money seems to be a higher priority. I stand by the fact that I, for one, am shocked to see that. Prior to this thread, I did not for a moment believe that so many BS placed such a high value on the monetary expendetures over the emotional expendetures in their spouses affairs.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 That has got me thinking. What kind of a woman would want to accept a diamond ring from MM knowing that he's still married? It's bad enough that you're having an affair with him and you're accepting a diamond ring as well? Just wow! A woman who likes diamonds. Just kidding. A woman who is accepting a gift of love from her lover. You seem to not understand that in the mind of the OW their relationship is like any other relationship she has had.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 A friend to me suggested something interesting. She stated that her belief is that the BS never really believe they have lost the love of the WS. But the money gone they can not deny. So that hurts... more...
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 (edited) That has got me thinking. What kind of a woman would want to accept a diamond ring from MM knowing that he's still married? It's bad enough that you're having an affair with him and you're accepting a diamond ring as well? Just wow! What is the difference by the way between accepting a diamond ring and accepting the man's penis in your body? Which is more intimate? This kind of response is exactly what FA was talking about. If my MM isn't giving me any jewelry for our fifth anniversary, I am going to be pissed. Edited June 20, 2010 by jennie-jennie
anne1707 Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 A friend to me suggested something interesting. She stated that her belief is that the BS never really believe they have lost the love of the WS. But the money gone they can not deny. So that hurts... more... Oh please! Do you seriously believe that! I know when my H had an affair, I never asked him about how much he spent on her, my concern was how he felt about her.
anne1707 Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 If my MM isn't giving me any jewelry for our fifth anniversary, I am going to be pissed. That suggests a sense of expectation and entitlement. I do not feel that way in my marriage and not because of any issues between my H and I but because I am not in it for material gain.
jennie-jennie Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 This is not a laughing matter. Its actually true. That's why its considered THEFT to accept his money knowing his W is paying for it too. But, this is also why some states allow for the W to go after the OW to get half of what is hers back. A W was awarded over $400K from an OW who had the nerve to brag about how much her MM spent on her during their affair. At the hearing, and after the ruling the OW had the nerve to claim she was broke. She showed up wearing some horrible lace outfit too. Never heard anything else on this case. But since she was awarded it, the W can now go after the OWs assets to satisfy her claim. The MM was dead. There was no divorce settlement going on. It saddens me to think there are people out there that laugh at the very real misfortune of others. All the while claiming that the same others should then care about their misfortune and pain (or humiliation or other inflamatory word meant to evoke sympathy/pity). I wasn't laughing. I was sticking out my tongue at the absurdity of the thought. But twist away. Who considers it theft? Not the law apparently according to Nadia.
Recommended Posts