Who’s responsible?

[someday]

Ok, so I was advised to start my own thread. I’m pretty sure it’s been discussed to death…and then some, but here goes.

 

I believe that we are all responsible and accountable for our own actions. The MP is responsible for their actions, the AP is responsible for their actions and the BS is responsible for their actions. No one holds a gun to anyones head (hopefully!) and makes the choice for them to either cheat, become involved or to leave/stay. We ALL make choices.

 

I don’t see how the MPs choice negates the APs choice to become involved nor how the APs choice to become involved negates the MPs choice to cheat. Personally, I think it’s a bit ridiculous to blame others for one’s own choices.

[BB07]

I do believe it is exactly as you stated about responsibility, but yet I also believe that being an AP is also enabling.

 

I know that sounds like I'm talking out of both sides of my mouth, but that is my belief.

[herenow]

Ok, so I was advised to start my own thread. I’m pretty sure it’s been discussed to death…and then some, but here goes.

 

I believe that we are all responsible and accountable for our own actions. The MP is responsible for their actions, the AP is responsible for their actions and the BS is responsible for their actions. No one holds a gun to anyones head (hopefully!) and makes the choice for them to either cheat, become involved or to leave/stay. We ALL make choices.

 

I don’t see how the MPs choice negates the APs choice to become involved nor how the APs choice to become involved negates the MPs choice to cheat. Personally, I think it’s a bit ridiculous to blame others for one’s own choices.

 

I agree, we all make choices and we are accountable for our choices. But, when the BS isn't aware of the affair, he or she can't really make a choice based on fact, can they? And, as long as they are being kept in the dark, others are making choices for them. They are being robbed of the choice you speak about.

[Silly_Girl]

I agree, we all make choices and we are accountable for our choices. But, when the BS isn't aware of the affair, he or she can't really make a choice based on fact, can they? And, as long as they are being kept in the dark, others are making choices for them. They are being robbed of the choice you speak about.

 

Totally agree with this. Yes. But that's not strictly what the OP was about. The OP talked of one of the affair partner's choice negating the other. That's where the whole post fell down for me.

 

Each makes their own, standalone choice to act as they do. An MM may be a cheater, but the OW can bin him off if she doesn't want to be an OW. He may find someone else to fill that vacancy. Irrelevant. If the OW does not wish to get involved, that decision stands on its own two feet.

 

And likewise the MM. Just because there's someone who WILL cheat with him absolutely does not mean he has to. And if he's determined to he'll find someone eventually.

[herenow]

Totally agree with this. Yes. But that's not strictly what the OP was about. The OP talked of one of the affair partner's choice negating the other. That's where the whole post fell down for me.

 

Each makes their own, standalone choice to act as they do. An MM may be a cheater, but the OW can bin him off if she doesn't want to be an OW. He may find someone else to fill that vacancy. Irrelevant. If the OW does not wish to get involved, that decision stands on its own two feet.

 

And likewise the MM. Just because there's someone who WILL cheat with him absolutely does not mean he has to. And if he's determined to he'll find someone eventually.

 

Yes, I agree with this. Each is responsible for their choice and each is also responsible for what ever happens because of that choice.

 

The only person (OW/OM or BW/BH) that doesn't hold responsibility is the person who doesn't have the truth to base their actions on. If an OW was lied to about the man being married, then she shouldn't be held responsible for engaging in an affair. She didn't know. But, no matter what a MM tells an OW, as long as she knows he is married, she holds responsibility for her own actions and whatever happens because of those actions.

 

When it comes to the BS. I believe the BS should blame the person they are married to. The OW/OM isn't a factor to the BS and irrelevant to the fact that their spouse broke the marriage vows. JMO

[Spark1111]

Ok, so I was advised to start my own thread. I’m pretty sure it’s been discussed to death…and then some, but here goes.

 

I believe that we are all responsible and accountable for our own actions. The MP is responsible for their actions, the AP is responsible for their actions and the BS is responsible for their actions. No one holds a gun to anyones head (hopefully!) and makes the choice for them to either cheat, become involved or to leave/stay. We ALL make choices.

 

I don’t see how the MPs choice negates the APs choice to become involved nor how the APs choice to become involved negates the MPs choice to cheat. Personally, I think it’s a bit ridiculous to blame others for one’s own choices.

 

Could not agree more, someday!

 

And as I have stated on these threads numerous times, my choice was denied me by the affair partners, my fWS and his OW.

 

Why was I denied that choice?

 

Why didn't he tell me he had developed feelings for another? We could have separated, gone to MC to see if there was a marriage worth saving while he explored his feelings for his paramour and I, too, could have dated others.

 

It is the lying and sneeking around that just kills! I can't imagine any excuse in the world to justify that betrayal of another's trust.

 

But yes, after DDAY, the choice to stay or leave, or throw him out and tell him to go live with his "soulmate" was mine alone.

[someday]

When it comes to the BS. I believe the BS should blame the person they are married to. The OW/OM isn't a factor to the BS and irrelevant to the fact that their spouse broke the marriage vows. JMO

 

IMO, if the OW/OM knows that the MP is M'ed then they are choosing to partake in a situation that will surly cause the BS pain. The OW/OM is accountable for thier part in that pain. Not the MP's part, just thier own.

[Silly_Girl]

IMO, if the OW/OM knows that the MP is M'ed then they are choosing to partake in a situation that will surly cause the BS pain. The OW/OM is accountable for thier part in that pain. Not the MP's part, just thier own.

 

I was married. My then husband vowed to be faithful to me. HE vowed. I sent invites to the entire rest of the world, but they couldn't fit in the venue. So I was not able to get every person alive to vow to me they would not betray me.

 

My husband owed me honesty and faithfulness. No one else, in my opinion.

[Spark1111]

IMO, if the OW/OM knows that the MP is M'ed then they are choosing to partake in a situation that will surly cause the BS pain. The OW/OM is accountable for thier part in that pain. Not the MP's part, just thier own.

 

I agree with accountability. I agree with at least the enabling of betrayal.

 

I think the script goes something like, "My wife doesn't love me, we never have sex, she's only here for the paycheck," blah, blah, blah...

 

And that scenario is to invoke pity and sympathy from the AP and allows reasons to justify the betrayal of another.

 

But, the actions are still a betrayal. IMHO.

[donnamaybe]

I was married. My then husband vowed to be faithful to me. HE vowed. I sent invites to the entire rest of the world, but they couldn't fit in the venue. So I was not able to get every person alive to vow to me they would not betray me.

 

My husband owed me honesty and faithfulness. No one else, in my opinion.

By the same token, every Tom, Dick, and Harry who cuts you off in traffic or butts in line ahead of you doesn't owe you anything either; has made you no promises. But what happened to the notion of common courtesy?

[Spark1111]

I was married. My then husband vowed to be faithful to me. HE vowed. I sent invites to the entire rest of the world, but they couldn't fit in the venue. So I was not able to get every person alive to vow to me they would not betray me.

 

My husband owed me honesty and faithfulness. No one else, in my opinion.

 

I "get" the argument, and I like you a lot Silly Girl.

 

But to me, it is still participating in a betrayal of an innocent and unknowing person, whether I took the vow or not. I still helped to betray you if I got involved with your spouse.

[someday]

I was married. My then husband vowed to be faithful to me. HE vowed. I sent invites to the entire rest of the world, but they couldn't fit in the venue. So I was not able to get every person alive to vow to me they would not betray me.

 

My husband owed me honesty and faithfulness. No one else, in my opinion.

 

IMO, I deserve to be respected by anyone and everyone. To knowingly sleep with my H is very disrespectful to me, to my family. But, yes, the MP has the most accountablity to thier spouses.

 

Fyi- I don't believe in vows.

[Silly_Girl]

By the same token, every Tom, Dick, and Harry who cuts you off in traffic or butts in line ahead of you doesn't owe you anything either; has made you no promises. But what happened to the notion of common courtesy?

 

I see what you're saying. I think I split it in to two, personally. There's the principle of the action, and then the individuals involved. Affairs are wrong, morally. I would never argue to the contrary. By being involved in one, I am letting MYSELF down.

 

However, for it to become a personal issue between myself and a stranger, and for it to be said I owe Mrs X something, no I don't buy that.

[Silly_Girl]

But to me, it is still participating in a betrayal of an innocent and unknowing person, whether I took the vow or not. I still helped to betray you if I got involved with your spouse.

 

You assisted SOMEONE ELSE to betray me. That's how I see it.

[OWoman]

By the same token, every Tom, Dick, and Harry who cuts you off in traffic or butts in line ahead of you doesn't owe you anything either; has made you no promises.

 

OTC - by taking their car on the road, they "promised" to obey the rules of the road, which includes driving safely with due caution. Cutting someone off might not be breaking a promise to them, but it's breaking a rule of the road that you agreed to in taking your driver's licence test, originally, and in taking your car on the road, daily. So yes, that is breaking an undertaking.

 

The Pushing in analogy works better. Pushing in in line is another matter - that's simply breaking a social norm. Lines only work because (and if) everyone agrees to them. People will form a line for any excuse here in the UK - they even queue at the kerb to cross the street at the pedestrian crossing (in my home country, we jay-walk, so there's never a need to wait, never mind queue!). In countries where forming a line is not a social norm, anyone who does so will find themselves never getting served. It works if everyone does it, or it works if nobody does it. If some do and some don't, then it will work better for those that don't observe it than for those who do, especially if those that do expect everyone to share their view!

 

Like marital fidelity - if everyone observes it, it works. If no one does, it works too. If some do and some don't, and there's some expectation of those that do observe it that others ought to too, then those that do will be pissed off at those who don't, while those who don't will shrug and carry on reaping the benefits at the expense of the others, with the continued facilitation of the others.

[donnamaybe]

I see what you're saying. I think I split it in to two, personally. There's the principle of the action, and then the individuals involved. Affairs are wrong, morally. I would never argue to the contrary. By being involved in one, I am letting MYSELF down.

 

However, for it to become a personal issue between myself and a stranger, and for it to be said I owe Mrs X something, no I don't buy that.

IDK. When someone, whether I know them or not, treats me like 5h!t - as if they have a COMPLETE lack of regard for how I feel - I take it VERY personally.

[donnamaybe]

OTC - by taking their car on the road, they "promised" to obey the rules of the road, which includes driving safely with due caution. Cutting someone off might not be breaking a promise to them, but it's breaking a rule of the road that you agreed to in taking your driver's licence test, originally, and in taking your car on the road, daily. So yes, that is breaking an undertaking.

No, it's not. You can be an a55hole on the road without breaking ONE SINGLE LAW. I work in criminal law. I've seen it in action. Cutting ahead of someone in line isn't breaking any laws either, but it's a 5h!tty thing to do.

[silktricks]

I believe that we are all responsible and accountable for our own actions. The MP is responsible for their actions, the AP is responsible for their actions and the BS is responsible for their actions. No one holds a gun to anyones head (hopefully!) and makes the choice for them to either cheat, become involved or to leave/stay. We ALL make choices.

 

I don’t see how the MPs choice negates the APs choice to become involved nor how the APs choice to become involved negates the MPs choice to cheat. Personally, I think it’s a bit ridiculous to blame others for one’s own choices.

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

I see what you're saying. I think I split it in to two, personally. There's the principle of the action, and then the individuals involved. Affairs are wrong, morally. I would never argue to the contrary. By being involved in one, I am letting MYSELF down.

 

However, for it to become a personal issue between myself and a stranger, and for it to be said I owe Mrs X something, no I don't buy that.

I think each of us "owes" every other person a degree of courtesy and honesty - even people we do not know, those are some of the mores of our society. Since our society does not approve of people sleeping with those who are married to other people, I feel that when we do, we injure ourselves (if we go against our own moral code), the BS (who we have not treated in a manner we would wish to be treated ourselves) and society as a whole (for not keeping up the mores of our society).

 

You assisted SOMEONE ELSE to betray me. That's how I see it.

Yes. The OW (unless a friend of the BS) does not betray the BS. She assists (or as Spark put it, participates) in the betrayal.

 

But the issue for the BS should not be with the OW/OM, it should be with the MP, as that is where the problem actually lies (no pun intended ).

[jthorne]

But what happened to the notion of common courtesy?

Or human decency?

[OWoman]

No, it's not. You can be an a55hole on the road without breaking ONE SINGLE LAW. I work in criminal law. I've seen it in action. Cutting ahead of someone in line isn't breaking any laws either, but it's a 5h!tty thing to do.

 

Ah. this is probably a "national difference" thing, then. Cutting someone off will definitely get you a fine back home - or even worse, a criminal conviction for "driving without due regard" or "reckless endangerment" if it was witnessed by a police officer who considered it to be sufficiently dangerous.

 

Cutting ahead of someone in line is a ****ty thing to do if queuing is the norm there, sure. (And someone will spit in your drink if you do - particularly if the pub is very crowded!) But if some do and some don't, then those that queue at the ice-cream stand are never going to get their ice-creams, and those that bunch up in the front will.

 

I hate my H driving when we're in my home country, because he drives like an Englishman there, so polite, letting people in and expecting, in turn, to be let in by others... It doesn't work that way there! You see a gap, you grab it! Waiting politely will get you nowhere, and will piss off every single driver behind you (and we use our hooters, not like here where you only ever use it to alert a possible oncoming driver when taking a bend in thick fog on a single-width lane!), but here it's the done thing and anybody who takes the gap provokes much head-shaking and tut-tutting and "how rude!"ing.

 

It only works if it's a shared norm. Otherwise it only benefits some - those who choose to operate outside of the norm.

[donnamaybe]

It only works if it's a shared norm.

Isn't it generally considered a "shared norm" to just, plain try to be kind towards others, even if we don't know them? People who've never done us any wrong?

 

It is in MY little corner of the world. Those who have a different viewpoint quickly find themselves on the receiving end of the toe of my pointy boot.

[Spark1111]

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

 

I think each of us "owes" every other person a degree of courtesy and honesty - even people we do not know, those are some of the mores of our society. Since our society does not approve of people sleeping with those who are married to other people, I feel that when we do, we injure ourselves (if we go against our own moral code), the BS (who we have not treated in a manner we would wish to be treated ourselves) and society as a whole (for not keeping up the mores of our society).

 

 

Yes. The OW (unless a friend of the BS) does not betray the BS. She assists (or as Spark put it, participates) in the betrayal.

 

But the issue for the BS should not be with the OW/OM, it should be with the MP, as that is where the problem actually lies (no pun intended ).

 

Ahhhh, assist (sounds helpful) or participates (sounds lively), or car/road scenarios are all semantics, splitting cognitivies and makes my head hurt.

 

I am not talking of morality and who is MORE wrong or LESS wrong.

 

This argument makes my head hurt.

 

This thread is about accountability of actions.

 

We are ALL accountable for our OWN actions and our OWN choices.

 

HE BETRAYED ME.

 

His OW HELPED? (too kind a connotation, as if she helped him fix a flat tire) ENABLED? (better word choice) Him to do so.

 

She did not take the vows with me, but she is no innocent in the devastating pain that resulted from this scenario.

 

And it is all well and good to tell yourself that the vows were taken by the MP and their spouse, until someone calls you up hysterical crying asking you how you did what you did.....

 

The spouse....the kids....a sibling or parent or close friend....and then you realize your actions and your choices had consequences that hurt many, many people.

 

What are you going to tell the sobbing or raging spouse, child, parent, friend, sibling of your MP? That you are not responsible for their pain because it was the MP that took the vows? That will make you feel better if confronted by someone in pain...devasted by your affair????????

 

Pulleaze!

 

Tell yourself whatever you want to make it work for you.....but....

 

We all have to OWN the consequences of our actions and our choices. We have to be accountable for our actions.

 

Period.

[pureinheart]

Ok, so I was advised to start my own thread. I’m pretty sure it’s been discussed to death…and then some, but here goes.

 

I believe that we are all responsible and accountable for our own actions. The MP is responsible for their actions, the AP is responsible for their actions and the BS is responsible for their actions. No one holds a gun to anyones head (hopefully!) and makes the choice for them to either cheat, become involved or to leave/stay. We ALL make choices.

 

I don’t see how the MPs choice negates the APs choice to become involved nor how the APs choice to become involved negates the MPs choice to cheat. Personally, I think it’s a bit ridiculous to blame others for one’s own choices.

 

Completely agree. Every case is different and the degrees of responsibility is different also...although when all is said and done, we stand on our own either in denial or acceptance:)

[tami-chan]

So if the BS stays after D-day, would that be enabling?

[GreenEyedLady]

so if the bs stays after d-day, would that be enabling?

 

omg-love it!!!