When MP blames A on OP

[White Flower]

In many ways it can be irrelevant whether the MP blames the OW/AP.

 

If the OW has knowingly behaved in a certain way or taken certain actions in her life that she knows have the capacity to cause devastation and destruction in the lives of others (eg BW and family) then she is responsible for the consequences of her actions.

 

That the MM is also responsible, is not relevant to the culpability of the OW.

I would totally agree with the above statement if the OW knows the BW and is involved in her life in a real way.

 

MM's exOW was best friends with his W for 20 years or more. She called and visited daily. She was/is a business partner to this day. She knew MM's schedules and vacay plans sometimes before he did and altered their lives in the process. This woman was very culpable for causing the BW pain because she owed her loyalty since they were friends.

 

I do not owe MM's W loyalty of any kind as we are not friends. MM is the one who took vows with her, so he is the one who owes her loyalty.

I expect most posters understood what I meant.

Yes, but again I believe you want to hold a perfect stranger who owes you nothing accountable when you should be focusing on your H's accountability to you since he took vows with you.

[Summer Breeze]

An OW/OM normally doesn't regard the BS because there is no relationship.

 

A BS normally places blame on the OW/OM because it's easier to blame anyone other than the person who shouldn't have hurt you.

 

Distance and anonymity disguise the truth.

[silktricks]

I would totally agree with the above statement if the OW knows the BW and is involved in her life in a real way.

 

{snip}

 

I do not owe MM's W loyalty of any kind as we are not friends. MM is the one who took vows with her, so he is the one who owes her loyalty.

 

Yes, but again I believe you want to hold a perfect stranger who owes you nothing accountable when you should be focusing on your H's accountability to you since he took vows with you.

 

WF - I think you try very very hard not to feel responsibility for the wife's pain.

 

Some of what you say, is of course true. The MM does owe his wife loyalty, and is not delivering. He is the true source of whatever pain she experiences. However, there is loyalty, and then there is accountability. Those two aren't synonyms.

 

Each person is accountable/responsible for their own actions. When those actions contribute to or cause another person's pain, then the person who made those actions - whether known or unknown to the person experiencing the pain - that person holds responsibility/accountability for their own actions. Is the OW the source of the pain? Well, IMO, no she is not - the MM is. But is she an agent? Yes, she is, and so holds accountability as well. Knowing or not knowing the person being hurt has no bearing.

[Summer Breeze]

WF - I think you try very very hard not to feel responsibility for the wife's pain.

 

Some of what you say, is of course true. The MM does owe his wife loyalty, and is not delivering. He is the true source of whatever pain she experiences. However, there is loyalty, and then there is accountability. Those two aren't synonyms.

 

Each person is accountable/responsible for their own actions. When those actions contribute to or cause another person's pain, then the person who made those actions - whether known or unknown to the person experiencing the pain - that person holds responsibility/accountability for their own actions. Is the OW the source of the pain? Well, IMO, no she is not - the MM is. But is she an agent? Yes, she is, and so holds accountability as well. Knowing or not knowing the person being hurt has no bearing.

 

The cheating partner can say no and there is no pain. That is the accountability. The AP is inconsequential.

[White Flower]

WF - I think you try very very hard not to feel responsibility for the wife's pain.

I am not trying at all; in fact, it comes very, very naturally as I am indifferent to her.

Some of what you say, is of course true. The MM does owe his wife loyalty, and is not delivering. He is the true source of whatever pain she experiences. However, there is loyalty, and then there is accountability. Those two aren't synonyms.

Some may disagree with you!

 

Each person is accountable/responsible for their own actions. When those actions contribute to or cause another person's pain, then the person who made those actions - whether known or unknown to the person experiencing the pain - that person holds responsibility/accountability for their own actions. Is the OW the source of the pain? Well, IMO, no she is not - the MM is. But is she an agent? Yes, she is, and so holds accountability as well. Knowing or not knowing the person being hurt has no bearing.

Silktricks I respectfully disagree with you.

 

When my exH had his EA with a very close family friend I could have taken the stance that you do, but I didn't. Our children were cousins and I still see this woman from time to time. She happened to be unloyal to me as well as my H, but I still did not blame her for their A. He was the only one who took vows with me and when he couldn't keep them I blamed him, not her.

 

I did not like that she was sneaking in to my business every time I drove away. I did not like that she helped herself to my cash register, served my customers, and brought in other business contacts that persuaded our business in a different direction. I did not like that she cozied up to my employees and tried to make them like her more than me (which did not work:)). These were actions of a disloyalty to me as a friend and family member and in conjunction with my then H to push me out of my own M as well as my business. But guess what? It was my H that I held completely accountable, not the OW. She owed me loyalty as a friend and even then I forgave her. Had she not been my friend, there would have been nothing to forgive as she owed me nothing.

[silktricks]

The cheating partner can say no and there is no pain. That is the accountability. The AP is inconsequential.

 

:lmao: of course he/she can, and the spouse is the source of the pain (IMO). But when two people are involved, both have accountability for their actions. Either could choose to say no.

[silktricks]

Some may disagree with you!

Well, they can disagree all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that they are not synonyms.

 

 

Silktricks I respectfully disagree with you.

 

When my exH had his EA with a very close family friend I could have taken the stance that you do, but I didn't. Our children were cousins and I still see this woman from time to time. She happened to be unloyal to me as well as my H, but I still did not blame her for their A. He was the only one who took vows with me and when he couldn't keep them I blamed him, not her.

 

I did not like that she was sneaking in to my business every time I drove away. I did not like that she helped herself to my cash register, served my customers, and brought in other business contacts that persuaded our business in a different direction. I did not like that she cozied up to my employees and tried to make them like her more than me (which did not work:)). These were actions of a disloyalty to me as a friend and family member and in conjunction with my then H to push me out of my own M as well as my business. But guess what? It was my H that I held completely accountable, not the OW. She owed me loyalty as a friend and even then I forgave her. Had she not been my friend, there would have been nothing to forgive as she owed me nothing.

 

WF, I respect that you don't attempt to apply one set of rules towards yourself and another set towards others.

 

I do, however, completely and utterly disagree with you, and I also do not apply one set of rules toward myself and another towards others. If my actions contribute towards the pain of others, I do attempt to take responsibility for those actions. You note I use the word attempt, because, of course, some of my actions do undoubtedly cause pain and I don't even know it.

 

I understand that many people believe they are not culpable in an affair if they are not the person who is married. I don't agree. I will never agree. When I had an affair, it was not me who initiated it, but I did go along with it... I was culpable. I didn't know the wife, never met her before or after, but if she ever experienced any pain over what happened (I doubt she ever knew, but still...) I would share responsibility for that pain, as my actions contributed to it. He could not have had an affair with me had I not agreed. It takes two people to have an affair. Either one can say no.

 

I am not saying that you or anyone else is a bad person because you are having an affair. Please let me be clear on that. But unless you are completely mesmerized by the gentleman and he has taken your will away like a modern-day Rasputin, you are responsible for your own actions. Taking responsibility for our own actions is important, and altogether too rare.

[Spark1111]

This I have never denied. I have always felt indifference toward her - except when her behaviour has prompted me to feel something stronger, like anger, but because she means nothing to me, that is transient and soon returns to indifference.

 

Why should it be different? I don't go around feeling compassion for other abusers I have never met, why should she be different?

 

That is exactly how my H now feels about his OW! Indifference, except when examining some of her behavior, both to him and subsequently to me, has prompted him to feel something stronger, like anger.

 

During the affair he felt compassion, possibly love.

 

I hope he returns to indifference. That would be healing for him.

[Spark1111]

Good post, Spark. As the OW I knew the potential consequences of my actions, but I continued regardless. In all honesty, I didn't have any guilt towards his wife for a long time (but then I was in a relationship myself at the start). Towards the end the guilt crept in. She became more real as a person the more I knew about her. And now... I harbour more feelings of sorrow towards her than I do towards him... if that makes sense.

 

As for the original post, you'll have to excuse me as I have not the whole thread yet, but my xMM put a lot more blame towards me than he did himself. I think he believed that if they were to have a chance of reconciliation in the future then this was necessary as I was not his first affair. I don't know. However, it makes/made no difference to me what he says because there will never be anything between us again, therefore, I took that blame. I do feel sorry for her though, if she believes him, as I think she will face the same trauma further down the line when he repeats his behaviour. And yet again... it will have been at the hands of the 'manipulative femme fatale'. If I had a do-over, I would not have been as submissively sorry - taking more responsibility for their marriage than I should have done.

 

I appreciate this HH!

 

Remember, all you know is what MM told you he told her!

 

My husband never spun his OW to me. I would not have believed him had he tried to.

 

I certainly would not have respected him.

 

I think I threw him out again when he claimed they "were just friends.":rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

I mean, not an idiot here.

 

And you know what, if he had to throw ME under the bus, make ME the bad guy to his OW to reconcile with the ME he was pursuing like crazy, well that conflict avoidance is par for the course, no?

 

She could then HATE me (she does) and not so much him, her great love who returned for familial obligation.

 

See....the us against them ploy...keeps the OW and the BS from ever speaking honestly to each other.

 

MM wins....It is a brilliant tactic, IMHO.

[jennie-jennie]

:lmao: of course he/she can, and the spouse is the source of the pain (IMO). But when two people are involved, both have accountability for their actions. Either could choose to say no.

 

And why would the OW say no? I find no reason.

[jennie-jennie]

That is exactly how my H now feels about his OW! Indifference, except when examining some of her behavior, both to him and subsequently to me, has prompted him to feel something stronger, like anger.

 

During the affair he felt compassion, possibly love.

 

I hope he returns to indifference. That would be healing for him.

 

Not until all he feels is indifference is he over her.

[BB07]

And why would the OW say no? I find no reason.

 

The reason that you don't have a reason is because you don't feel as if you are doing anything wrong. It's a difference of opinion, simply put.

 

It comes down to individual personal values and beliefs and what we each think is wrong or right.

 

I'm not knocking your values and beliefs JJ because they are yours, but for silktricks she is speaking from her belief system.

[jennie-jennie]

The reason that you don't have a reason is because you don't feel as if you are doing anything wrong. It's a difference of opinion, simply put.

 

It comes down to individual personal values and beliefs and what we each think is wrong or right.

 

I'm not knocking your values and beliefs JJ because they are yours, but for silktricks she is speaking from her belief system.

 

Well put. It is what is called moral relativism.

[Spark1111]

Not until all he feels is indifference is he over her.

 

Maybe....maybe not.

 

This OW just kept shooting herself in the foot...or putting her foot in her mouth...or not acting as graciously and compassionately as she pretended to be.

 

It depends on the OW, IMHO.

[jj33]

Spark without making this about your H and his situation because as I recall it was very convoluted, I think its not unusual for an OW to lash out in various situations.

 

We read many many stories on this forum where OWs are told I love you, I want to be with you, Im going to leave etc etc etc and the OW believes.

 

In many of those situations, resentment starts to set in over time. Thats human nature, no one likes feeling strung along.

 

And then (again human nature) the OW may start to say but you said xyz or you arent happy in your M (parroting back what they have been told all along). At a certain point when someone loses patience with the promises and feels jerked around they start calling the MM on the things he said that made the OW think he was leaving in the first place.

 

In hindsight an MM may say oh she wasnt as lovely as he thought she was. No shock there. People usually arent when they feel massively jerked around.

 

Again Spark Im not posting about your situation, just the general scenario.

 

The thing with many (I would even venture to guess most) affairs is noone but the WS ever really knows all the facts and what the BS or OW may have been told y may have been told to make them react in a particular way.

 

I know in my own situation where no promises were made to me at all nor did I expect any, I was pushed and prodded so much after it was over that I "changed" in his eyes. I am no longer the sweet kind lovely woman he knew. No sh*t sherlock. None of it involved his W and he was clever enough to cloak much of it with plausible denialbility (up to a point) but nonetheless he still grabs the moral high ground and says why do you get so angry with me? Simple answer, you jerked me around so many times.

 

Ive never been in that position but a lack of compassion after a certain amount of time and a string of broken promises is not surprising to me. Some people are able to maintain their grace and compassion no matter what they face. I think White Flower is one of those people. But those people are rare. And the majority of humanity may aspire to but doesnt always meet that standard.

Edited August 24, 2010 by jj33

[silktricks]

And why would the OW say no? I find no reason.

 

 

Ahhh - I don't say the OW would choose to say no. I say she could choose to say no. I'm not saying she is a bad person for not saying no. Simply that her actions also contribute to the pain of the BS.

 

Tobe clear, I am not discussing moral relativism, as I am not judging any person, or saying their actions are "bad" or "immoral". I only say what I have always said - the OW also has responsibility/accountability for the pain of the wife. It doesn't matter whether the wife knows the OW personally or not. The joint actions of the WS and the OW create pain. Either person could have chosen to say no. This isn't about morality IMO, it's about responsibility, which is (again IMO) a totally different thing.

[jj33]

Silk while that may be true isnt a WS still passing the buck when the WS is caught or confesses and assigns blame to someone other than him/herself?

 

I go back to my earlier analogy of the child who gets in trouble for fighting at recess. Yes I did break his nose in the fight but he was fighting too.

 

Regardless of the moral issue, or the fact that it takes two, as between teh BS and the WS its blame shifting in my view pure and simple. If every man and woman said no to an A, there would be no As. But that is not the way the world works so its up to the WS not to wander. Again the things you learn in kindergarten, keep it zipped.

 

But as I said earlier, clever blame shifting because it is a way of bonding with the BS as against the AP.

[MorningCoffee]

This isn't about morality IMO, it's about responsibility, which is (again IMO) a totally different thing.

 

Thank you for that statement. I find it to be very insightful and a useful concept.

[silktricks]

Silk while that may be true isnt a WS still passing the buck when the WS is caught or confesses and assigns blame to someone other than him/herself?

{Snip}

But as I said earlier, clever blame shifting because it is a way of bonding with the BS as against the AP.

 

oh yeah!! if the WS is saying "I would never have - it's all HER fault" that is obviously not only blame-shifting, but an out and out lie .

 

My saying that IMO the OW carries responsibilities for her actions in no way relieves him of his responsibility for his actions.

 

Of course, as you say, if everyone said "no" there would be no affairs - as if . But if everyone took responsibility for their own actions, there would at least be a lot less anger and blaming. It is so refreshing to see/hear people say "I shouldn't have done such-and-so because it brought me pain (or caused someone else pain)" instead of "he did this to me" or "he did it and I had/have no part in it" when obvious it does take 2 .

 

The idea somewhere, somehow took hold that being a victim (or at least a non-participant) is better than acknowledging that we have power, and acknowledging our own power in changing our lives is not a bad thing!

Edited August 25, 2010 by silktricks

[jj33]

Totally agree with you Silk. Taking responsibility for our actions is a good and empowering thing.

[bentnotbroken]

I would totally agree with the above statement if the OW knows the BW and is involved in her life in a real way.

 

MM's exOW was best friends with his W for 20 years or more. She called and visited daily. She was/is a business partner to this day. She knew MM's schedules and vacay plans sometimes before he did and altered their lives in the process. This woman was very culpable for causing the BW pain because she owed her loyalty since they were friends.

 

I do not owe MM's W loyalty of any kind as we are not friends. MM is the one who took vows with her, so he is the one who owes her loyalty.

 

Yes, but again I believe you want to hold a perfect stranger who owes you nothing accountable when you should be focusing on your H's accountability to you since he took vows with you.

 

 

He did indeed take the vows. I guess my question is why does it seem that BS don't hold the WS accountable? I would think that the WS is the first to catch hell(they seem to think it too since they mostly continue to lie and deny).

 

I wouldn't say that the OW owed me anything either, but that doesn't absolve her of her actions. If it were only me affected, I might understand your point of view a bit more clearly. But since her actions, in unison with his actions caused pain and possible long standing reactions to all..why shouldn't she be looked at as a particpant instead of a bystander that accidentally got caught up. Just curious.

[White Flower]

Well, they can disagree all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that they are not synonyms.

 

 

 

 

WF, I respect that you don't attempt to apply one set of rules towards yourself and another set towards others.

 

I do, however, completely and utterly disagree with you, and I also do not apply one set of rules toward myself and another towards others. If my actions contribute towards the pain of others, I do attempt to take responsibility for those actions. You note I use the word attempt, because, of course, some of my actions do undoubtedly cause pain and I don't even know it.

 

I understand that many people believe they are not culpable in an affair if they are not the person who is married. I don't agree. I will never agree. When I had an affair, it was not me who initiated it, but I did go along with it... I was culpable. I didn't know the wife, never met her before or after, but if she ever experienced any pain over what happened (I doubt she ever knew, but still...) I would share responsibility for that pain, as my actions contributed to it. He could not have had an affair with me had I not agreed. It takes two people to have an affair. Either one can say no.

 

I am not saying that you or anyone else is a bad person because you are having an affair. Please let me be clear on that. But unless you are completely mesmerized by the gentleman and he has taken your will away like a modern-day Rasputin, you are responsible for your own actions. Taking responsibility for our own actions is important, and altogether too rare.

I respect your post and your stance and I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't feel any more culpable than a porn flick would feel had he been addicted to that. Just because his addiction, EMR, whatever you may call it involved a human being does not make HIS source of joy/pleasure/whatever culpable to his W. She really only needs to deal with him.

 

Had she only dealt with him instead of put the blame on the OW she may actually have been successful in ending the A. But she didn't.

[White Flower]

Maybe....maybe not.

 

This OW just kept shooting herself in the foot...or putting her foot in her mouth...or not acting as graciously and compassionately as she pretended to be.

 

It depends on the OW, IMHO.

I'm not arguing with you on this point but I do find it very interesting.

 

Sometimes acting graciously IS pretending. Just sayin...

 

This is something I struggle with, with regard to MM's W. He is so used to hearing what a self-proclaimed saint she is but her actions bely her words. Many people do this, but they can't see the forest for the trees.

 

And I will admit that I have behaved, at times, with an air of dignity when I wasn't feeling very dignified in order to save face. Behaving in a dignified manner doesn't always equal being dignified.

[White Flower]

Some people are able to maintain their grace and compassion no matter what they face. I think White Flower is one of those people. But those people are rare. And the majority of humanity may aspire to but doesnt always meet that standard.

Aww, jj, thank you. I am humbled.

[White Flower]

He did indeed take the vows. I guess my question is why does it seem that BS don't hold the WS accountable? I would think that the WS is the first to catch hell(they seem to think it too since they mostly continue to lie and deny).

 

I wouldn't say that the OW owed me anything either, but that doesn't absolve her of her actions. If it were only me affected, I might understand your point of view a bit more clearly. But since her actions, in unison with his actions caused pain and possible long standing reactions to all..why shouldn't she be looked at as a particpant instead of a bystander that accidentally got caught up. Just curious.

My guess BBM Bent is that they want things to go back to normal as quickly as possible without really dealing with the issues that got them there on D-day.

 

For example, and this is where I think MM's W went all wrong. She asked for MC, he said no I'll go to IC, it's my problem.

 

She let him.

 

He stayed home like a little lost puppy so she could see how 'transparent' he'd become. Eventually she let him out, HER idea, and told him he could go to the local pub to watch a game. I met him there.

 

Her idea.

 

After 10 days of throwing verbal fireballs at him she wondered how is libido was holding up. She seduced him (he admitted this to me) and he succumbed. He told me it was horrible (I know, he could have lied).

 

She gave in way too quickly.

 

This BS was in such a hurry to get everything back on track that she overlooked doing it right.

 

After 40 years she still doesn't know when he is lying.

I figured him out in only a couple of years. I know exactly when he is lying. Her desire to have the perfect M and the perfect life and have the outside world see that it that way is more important to her than truly holding him accountable and really getting the M she wants. Or I should say could have. I think she has what she wants, the appearance of perfection.

 

 

As for your second question BBM, again, refer to my porn flick analogy. If he'd been having an affair with porn, gambling, or with a ham sandwich you wouldn't be holding those things accountable.

Edited August 25, 2010 by White Flower