The Bs and The AP are more different tha you may think.

[silktricks]

Personally I think TB has issues with OW and purposefully chose not to disclose the behavior of his exOW in the beginning, thus gaslighting. He posted several times and said nothing to that effect and knew exactly what we were referring to, yet chose to play word games...priddy much stirring the pot and knowing it.

 

I am not sure why his exOW chose to do the "said" offenses, possibly he played games with her too, or it is not the truth.

So either she is/was in the right to engage in this behavior or else it didn't happen???

 

My gawd!! That is so incredibly offensive. According to that "logic" the OW has the right to treat the fBS and family to stalker behavior. Having lived through this situation myself, I'll tell you that there is NO excuse - NONE!! -

For stalking.

[silktricks]

I STILL don't get the hub-bub over TB. He disclosed the OW's behavior very early on in his postings. The posts are in Spark's reconcilliation thread.

 

It's not TB's fault that people haven't read all of his posts.

 

Just goes back to the agenda that I posted about in the other MM's thread on OW; if the MM declares his undying love for the OW, it's sunshine and roses. If he says anything negative about her, he's a jerk or a troll.

 

People believe what they want to believe.

 

Any fWS/MM who has ever posted here who doesn't speak glowingly of the fOW is lambasted by OW. Any fWS/MM who has ever posted here who doesn't speak glowingly of the fBS is lambasted by BS. It's an equal opportunity board . It's almost always hard on the fWS (more so if they are men IMO).

 

This is one of the first times though, that I've ever seen where someone basically comes out and says that stalkerish behavior by the OW is OK because undoubtedly she was treated badly , and it certainly got my back up. The OW in my case did almost EXACTLY what TB was talking about and things still occasionally happen even now - 6 YEARS after it was over.... I have no patience for anyone who thinks there is any excuse for it.

 

I'm glad TB is posting, too.

[thomasb]

Thanks you guys! I have found the conversations to be enlightening. And it has been long enough ago to have reached indifference to insults if I get them.

[BB07]

So either she is/was in the right to engage in this behavior or else it didn't happen???

 

My gawd!! That is so incredibly offensive. According to that "logic" the OW has the right to treat the fBS and family to stalker behavior. Having lived through this situation myself, I'll tell you that there is NO excuse - NONE!! -

For stalking.

 

I might be wrong, but I think you misunderstood PIH's post. I don't think she meant she thought it was OK for the AP to stalk thomas, she was trying to make the point that had thomas disclosed in this thread that his AP was a bunny boiler, he would have caught a lot less flack in this thread. Also she is saying that she had lived through the situation of a bunny boiler and there was no excuse for this sort of behavior.

 

Hopefully she will be along to confirm what I've said or clear it up if it falls the other way.

[BB07]

Thanks you guys! I have found the conversations to be enlightening. And it has been long enough ago to have reached indifference to insults if I get them.

 

If you are calling what I said to you.........insults.

[Spark1111]

I might be wrong, but I think you misunderstood PIH's post. I don't think she meant she thought it was OK for the AP to stalk thomas, she was trying to make the point that had thomas disclosed in this thread that his AP was a bunny boiler, he would have caught a lot less flack in this thread. Also she is saying that she had lived through the situation of a bunny boiler and there was no excuse for this sort of behavior.

 

Hopefully she will be along to confirm what I've said or clear it up if it falls the other way.

 

Sorry Pure and BB if my post implied a lack of understanding.

 

It seems thomasb was taking some heat for first, his opinions of his fOW, then for disclosing why he had those opinions, and then thirdly, for NOT being a gentleman for disclosing those opinions.

 

That's a lose, lose on all fronts for him......

[Spark1111]

I remember you calling your OW a whore in that particular post, but not that you specified any bad behavior on her part.

 

Yes....stalking was alluded to, but everyone reacted to the word "whore."

 

Which seemed an overreaction to me, in the sense that we call xMM or xH lying, cheating, aZZ (fill in the blanks, there are many).

[thomasb]

Spark, sometimes it is just a lose, lose situation. Ironically, kinda like affairs, :rolleyes:huh.

[BB07]

Sorry Pure and BB if my post implied a lack of understanding.

 

It seems thomasb was taking some heat for first, his opinions of his fOW, then for disclosing why he had those opinions, and then thirdly, for NOT being a gentleman for disclosing those opinions.

 

That's a lose, lose on all fronts for him......

 

Spark.......I have immense respect for you and you have more understanding in your little finger than most have all over.

 

Point taken about how fow or ow say some pretty nasty things about MM. Guilty as charged.

[silktricks]

I might be wrong, but I think you misunderstood PIH's post. I don't think she meant she thought it was OK for the AP to stalk thomas, she was trying to make the point that had thomas disclosed in this thread that his AP was a bunny boiler, he would have caught a lot less flack in this thread. Also she is saying that she had lived through the situation of a bunny boiler and there was no excuse for this sort of behavior.

 

Hopefully she will be along to confirm what I've said or clear it up if it falls the other way.

 

It's possible that her intention was not to imply permission or acceptance, but when one says "I am not sure why his exOW chose to do the "said" offenses, possibly he played games with her too, or it is not the truth." It implies that because he "played games" with the OW then it's understandable that she exhibits boiler bunny behavior. IT IS NOT OK.

[Owl]

Owl, I trust that you do consider your wife to be a lady?

 

edited: meaning to say that she, at that point in time, was guilty of unladylike behavior? I would be surprised to believe that you do not consider her a lady.

 

Excellent question!

 

My wife was NOT acting as a lady during her affair, nor was she doing so for several weeks afterwards.

 

I did not consider her a "lady" during that timeframe BECAUSE of her behavior and actions at the time.

 

And if you asked her today, I'd bet that SHE would tell you that she was not acting as a lady at that time either.

 

She deeply regrets her attitude and actions during that timeframe.

 

Interestingly enough, she's getting a unique opportunity to see this whole thing from yet a different angle now. One of my son's recently ended a relationship with his fiancee...who engaged in an EA turned PA with a mutual friend of theirs. He was devestated...considered suicide...and we've been helping him cope with this whole thing ever since. Having gone through this from the ex-fiance's viewpoint before, my wife is LIVID with what this woman has done...and this has been even more of an eye-opener for my wife as she's realized more and more what HER affair put me through.

 

So I would consider my wife a lady now, surely. And she was one for most of our marriage...but there was indeed a time when she engaged in very unlady-like behavior that she now deeply regrets.

[BB07]

It's possible that her intention was not to imply permission or acceptance, but when one says "I am not sure why his exOW chose to do the "said" offenses, possibly he played games with her too, or it is not the truth." It implies that because he "played games" with the OW then it's understandable that she exhibits boiler bunny behavior. IT IS NOT OK.

 

Since everyone is understanding on how crazy the bs can get on or after dday, it's also understandable why the OW can to, right? After all, most MM/MW are lying to both about what the future holds.

 

Criminal, dangerous, or destructive behavior is never OK regardless of who commits such acts, but I think we all have a understanding of why it happens. Understanding why is not the same as condoning it.

[jennie-jennie]

Yes....stalking was alluded to, but everyone reacted to the word "whore."

 

Which seemed an overreaction to me, in the sense that we call xMM or xH lying, cheating, aZZ (fill in the blanks, there are many).

 

Who is "we"? I, like many other posters on LS, do not use that kind of words about anyone, be it a WS, AP or BS.

[silktricks]

Since everyone is understanding on how crazy the bs can get on or after dday, it's also understandable why the OW can to, right? After all, most MM/MW are lying to both about what the future holds.

 

Criminal, dangerous, or destructive behavior is never OK regardless of who commits such acts, but I think we all have a understanding of why it happens. Understanding why is not the same as condoning it.

 

I'm certain that you would not think it "understandable" for your fMM's BS to harass you for years after you had terminated the relationship. To say it is understandable implies condoning or forgiving those actions. I wouldn't think this would be a BS vs OW discussion and I'm a little disapointed that you imply it is.

[BB07]

I'm certain that you would not think it "understandable" for your fMM's BS to harass you for years after you had terminated the relationship. To say it is understandable implies condoning or forgiving those actions. I wouldn't think this would be a BS vs OW discussion and I'm a little disapointed that you imply it is.

 

Ahhh silktricks......I'm sorry you are disappointed in me:)but I don't think you are understanding what I'm saying. I must not be making myself clear. In my view......understanding does NOT imply condoning it. It just means that I understand WHY. To me understanding and condoning something are totally opposite ends of the spectrum.

 

I like to think of myself as pretty fair minded and I think I'm pretty good at seeing both sides of the equation, but yet I'm also pretty good at biting the bullet and saying......point taken if someone calls me out on something, but in this case.......see above bolded part.

[Owl]

I get what you're saying, BB.

 

It's the same as someone UNDERSTANDING why a BS would consider violence against the AP.

 

They may UNDERSTAND why the BS would consider it, but that doesn't mean that they would condone the BS actually doing it, nor would they go out and do said violence themselves.

 

I think that's the kind of distinction you're trying to make?

[silktricks]

Ok, fair enough - and I'm probably being nit picky -

 

To me, when someone says "it's understandable" that's significantly different than "I understand".

 

So, I understand. you see it differently than I do.

 

Unfortunately, I'm doing this on an i-phone and my finger is wearing out (cuz I really have a lot more to say... ).

[BB07]

I get what you're saying, BB.

 

It's the same as someone UNDERSTANDING why a BS would consider violence against the AP.

 

They may UNDERSTAND why the BS would consider it, but that doesn't mean that they would condone the BS actually doing it, nor would they go out and do said violence themselves.

 

I think that's the kind of distinction you're trying to make?

 

OOOOO, thank you OWL......why couldn't I say that???

[thomasb]

Well I for one am glad that the prosecuting attorney didn't find her actions "understandable". Neither did the judge. In fact I think his word for it was "deplorable."

[HappyAtLast]

OK, Thomas. From one former MM to another - you DID sleep with this woman. You made a conscious choice to sleep with someone other than your spouse. I did also.

 

Can you honestly say that you did absolutely nothing to lead your affair partner on? Never let her believe (not necessarily TOLD her, but allowed her to believe) that you affair was more than sex?

 

I do not in any way condone bad behavior, by either a betrayed spouse (I was also one of those), married man or affair partner. But, people do tend to go a bit crazy when their emotions are played with.

 

So is your story that your affair was just about sex, your affair partner knew that she was just a sex thing for you and still willingly engaged?

 

edited: and then she went completely crazy when you ended it to repair things with your wife?

Edited September 28, 2010 by HappyAtLast
add last paragraph

[donnamaybe]

Oh for Gawds sake you actually are worrying about the speed of information from then to now as to what was actually being said? No wonder I always feel like I'm pounding my head against a wall.

Here. I'll refresh your memory since you seem to have forgotten why you brought up Hitler in the first place:

Sometimes what's REALLY going on is so incredibly obvious that it positively boggles the mind to think that anyone could be so naive.

 

Hitler used Europe as a playground and killed millions before anyone raised a finger against him. He was as obvious as a person could be but the world couldn't believe he could do what he was really doing. People see what they want to see and they believe what they want to believe. Only when they are either hit with it directly or there is some sort of confrontation to force the change will it change.

 

I'm not comparing any party in an A to Hitler. I'm using the situation as a representation as to what humans are willing to accept and see. I agree with you that sometimes the mind boggles about what people will accept and what they won't, what they see and what they don't.

The bolded is what I was talking about. An AP refusing to leave his/her marriage is RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PERSON IN QUESTION watching them lying, watching them sneaking around, WATCHING them NOT make a choice because - ahem - they simply want a second man/woman at their beck and call. Hitler was doing what he was doing oceans and continents away in an age when news moved a LOT more slowly. Therefore, yes - it took awhile "before anyone raised a finger against him." Had our troops gone over there and simply watched him do what he was doing for years and years and years and said, "Oh, surely he couldn't REALLY be doing what we're seeing before our very eyes," (like AP's often do) then you could make the comparison. Otherwise, not a snowballs's chance.

 

Now, go ahead and get back to the head pounding.

[HappyAtLast]

Owl, thanks for the clarification.

 

I will own up to not acting as a gentleman whilst in my affair, by definition.

 

I am glad to hear that you still consider your wife to be a lady. And, quite an interesting perspective she is getting at this point from your son's situation, sadly.

[donnamaybe]

I spit soda all over my screen. :lmao:

I know, huh? I'm thinking, "Hmmm... What do they have? One commandment?"

[Summer Breeze]

Here. I'll refresh your memory since you seem to have forgotten why you brought up Hitler in the first place:

The bolded is what I was talking about. An AP refusing to leave his/her marriage is RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE PERSON IN QUESTION watching them lying, watching them sneaking around, WATCHING them NOT make a choice because - ahem - they simply want a second man/woman at their beck and call. Hitler was doing what he was doing oceans and continents away in an age when news moved a LOT more slowly. Therefore, yes - it took awhile "before anyone raised a finger against him." Had our troops gone over there and simply watched him do what he was doing for years and years and years and said, "Oh, surely he couldn't REALLY be doing what we're seeing before our very eyes," (like AP's often do) then you could make the comparison. Otherwise, not a snowballs's chance.

 

Now, go ahead and get back to the head pounding.

 

Pounding has now commenced again...you're not getting my point. The world watched. Stood by and saw what was going on. It may not have been as quick as if we'd had the internet but the world saw it and turned a blind eye. I've got no other way to say it and we won't agree so I'll pound my head for a minute longer, take an aspirin and move on.

[jennie-jennie]

I know, huh? I'm thinking, "Hmmm... What do they have? One commandment?"

 

Well, since my MM does not believe in God any longer (or at least is an agnostic), it is all for show, the marriage and religion alike. He has been trained well, to do what is expected of him, on the outside.