Accepting personal responsibility

[someday]

I don't agree with the implication that such a person will never truly understand. People can change. For the specific trait you are talking about, caring about how engaging in an affair with a married person impacts on others, I changed from someone who didn't really care (my own desires and needs came first and I didn't feel compassion toward a wife who I had never met) to someone who does care.

 

On the other hand, when I didn't care, arguing on an anonymous forum was not going to change my mind, and I think that is true for most people who think and feel that way. Nevertheless, one can learn more about how others think, even if you are unlikely to convince them to place a higher value on honesty and compassion toward others when trying to balance these with their own desires.

 

I do see some of my old self in some "unapologetic" OW who post here, but my former mindset doesn't even make much sense to me anymore! People can change, even if they aren't going to change right now. My own experience is that some deep and important real life experience is needed to facilitate real change, hopefully a positive one (like being truly loved) but I suspect a negative crisis can also change one in this way.

 

Oh, people change all the time. I totally believe that...but people must want to change in order to change.

 

Now, don't get me wrong I think OWoman is an ok person (as I don't know her I can't say anything other than ok). I bet she's a nice lady to meet. I'd guess that she's great at conversation as such. So don't think I thinks she's a terrible person. Heck, I'm not even trying to change her mind! She asked a question and I answered. Our thoughts do not match up.

[OWoman]

Not "one person" in most instances it is a whole family.

 

In some cases, sure. In other cases, it is just one person. In my case, a whole family and extended family benefited, and one person suffered a short-term loss with the potential to make a long-term gain. Very advantageous terms, IMO.

 

To compare this with the military is ludicrous .. They are on a mission and under orders.

 

Someone, somewhere, is giving the orders.... They're not all coming from burning bushes

 

Breaking up a marriage is premeditated and with selfish intent of one or two.

 

The only M I broke up was my own. Admittedly, there was selfish intent there - I wasn't about to stay and be miserable my entire life - but it was also altruistic, because I was definitely acting in my kids' best interests at the time. And it was certainly premeditated - I agonised over it for ages before deciding to pull the plug.

[Lauriebell82]

Perhaps to you. To me, I'd rather create the most happiness for the most people - including those dear to me, than pander to the misery of an individual who means nothing (or less) to me.

 

Okay, so it doesn't matter who gets hurt as long as your happy? How would you like it if someone thought of YOU this way? I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but I am just curious how you can be happy knowing someone else is in pain?

[OWoman]

I can see how that would work...but I can't say that I personally agree with it. But thank you for that clarification.

 

No - your values are different.

 

Just as I could never be in the military (any military - not yours in particular!) because taking orders is one thing I just don't get...

 

If everyone was the same, it would be so boring!

[OWoman]

Okay, so it doesn't matter who gets hurt as long as your happy? How would you like it if someone thought of YOU this way? I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but I am just curious how you can be happy knowing someone else is in pain?

 

OTC - it matters very much to me who gets hurt! That's my whole point - I'd rather that those who were dear to me were on the "receiving happiness" side, and that if someone had to get hurt, it was someone who I was happy to "sacrifice" as collateral damage.

[Silly_Girl]

Perhaps to you. To me, I'd rather create the most happiness for the most people - including those dear to me, than pander to the misery of an individual who means nothing (or less) to me.

 

An unhappy, difficult relationship. Difficult for both parties. Out of that (by way of an affair) comes a great relationship and a catalyst from which the impetus to leave the broken relationship can come. Plenty of people stay in broken relationships and then something, an event, (children leaving home, redundancy, illness, affair, important birthday, death of a friend/parent) prompts the parties to re-evaluate and take action.

[someday]

I've never been the kid who talked in class. I've usually been the kid telling the others to shut up, because I didn't want the whole class to have to stay in if the culprits failed to own up (as they so often did).

 

 

Lol...totally opposite here! I was one of the culprits that usually got us all busted!! Ok, so the classroom scenario isn't common ground for us.

 

There are something’s I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy...the pain of betrayal by the one person who you should be able to trust beyond all others is one thing I will never wish on anyone. Never. Not even the xOW in my H's life. I'm one strong chick, I've been thru a lot of bs in my time...and I tell you I'll take physical pain over emotional pain....any day anyway...and that's saying something- huge.

[OWoman]

Oh, and on this:

 

Okay, so it doesn't matter who gets hurt as long as your happy? How would you like it if someone thought of YOU this way? I'm probably beating a dead horse here, but I am just curious how you can be happy knowing someone else is in pain?

 

Uh - that's life! I imagine that's exactly what's happening every minute of the day! I'm sure I'm the disposable collateral damage in many people's programmes, because I mean nothing (or less than nothing) to them, or because they don't like me, or because what they want is worth sacrificing a few bodies for. I'm not naive enough to take it personally.

[OWoman]

Lol...totally opposite here! I was one of the culprits that usually got us all busted!! Ok, so the classroom scenario isn't common ground for us.

 

so if I asked you to be quiet because I was reading... would you?

 

There are something’s I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy...the pain of betrayal by the one person who you should be able to trust beyond all others is one thing I will never wish on anyone. Never. Not even the xOW in my H's life. I'm one strong chick, I've been thru a lot of bs in my time...and I tell you I'll take physical pain over emotional pain....any day anyway...and that's saying something- huge.

 

I've not been betrayed - and, reflecting on the response I just posted, it's perhaps because I don't expect the kind of loyalty from "the world" that some others seem to give and expect in return. But your comment about "the one person you should be able to trust" I suppose does get to the heart of it - if you do let someone in, and you do set up that loyalty exchange, you do make yourself vulnerable to betrayal in a way you wouldn't otherwise be.

 

And yes, I can imagine that would suck wet dogs.

[someday]

OTC - it matters very much to me who gets hurt! That's my whole point - I'd rather that those who were dear to me were on the "receiving happiness" side, and that if someone had to get hurt, it was someone who I was happy to "sacrifice" as collateral damage.

 

The BS is someone's daughter or son or mother or brother or...they have people who care if they get hurt- just like you don't want your people to get hurt. The MP's kids, they have feelings, too. It gets pretty sticky sometimes, hm? The slicing and dicing of morals/ethics...

[Lauriebell82]

Oh, and on this:

Uh - that's life! I imagine that's exactly what's happening every minute of the day! I'm sure I'm the disposable collateral damage in many people's programmes, because I mean nothing (or less than nothing) to them, or because they don't like me, or because what they want is worth sacrificing a few bodies for. I'm not naive enough to take it personally.

 

Ohh, so others do the same to you, so you can do it to them. Like a tit for tat. Kind of a twist on the whole "do onto other's" concept. Maybe there will be some point in your life where your thinking will change and you will realize that people matter and don't deserve to be referred to as "collateral damage." Maybe I'm just more empathetic then the next guy, or maybe I just have different morals. But going through life with this kind of thinking is a shame, IMO.

[someday]

so if I asked you to be quiet because I was reading... would you? .

 

I would have tried very, very hard to whisper as quietly as I could and reported to detention at the end of the day.

 

I've not been betrayed - and, reflecting on the response I just posted, it's perhaps because I don't expect the kind of loyalty from "the world" that some others seem to give and expect in return. But your comment about "the one person you should be able to trust" I suppose does get to the heart of it - if you do let someone in, and you do set up that loyalty exchange, you do make yourself vulnerable to betrayal in a way you wouldn't otherwise be.

 

And yes, I can imagine that would suck wet dogs.

 

Yes, opening myself to him made me vulnerable to his betrayal. That did suck, but it's in the past. We've moved on- I've moved on. I've decided that I will be open with him, I've decided that I trust him. Most importantly I've decided that I trust myself more.

[OWoman]

The BS is someone's daughter or son or mother or brother or...they have people who care if they get hurt- just like you don't want your people to get hurt. The MP's kids, they have feelings, too. It gets pretty sticky sometimes, hm? The slicing and dicing of morals/ethics...

 

Her parents are dead, she doesn't talk to any of her siblings and her "friends" all jumped ship to her xH when they split... But the kids were onboard once we decided to be together, and are far happier now. So, while I take your general point - there really was no extended fall-out in this case. It really was just her.

 

And she has allegedly begun IC as a result of the split (and related matters), so it seems she will finally get the help she needs to get her life together. So perhaps even win-win all round? Dare one hope?

[OWoman]

Ohh, so others do the same to you, so you can do it to them. Like a tit for tat. Kind of a twist on the whole "do onto other's" concept. Maybe there will be some point in your life where your thinking will change and you will realize that people matter and don't deserve to be referred to as "collateral damage." Maybe I'm just more empathetic then the next guy, or maybe I just have different morals. But going through life with this kind of thinking is a shame, IMO.

 

It did. I started out thinking one should be "nice", but realised that people's needs and interests conflict, and by making someone happy, you will make someone else unhappy, no matter how hard you try. So I learned that my first loyalty has to be to myself and my loved ones, and once that has been met, I can worry about others - provided that their happiness does not come at the expense of those dear to me. I learned that life wasn't a warm, fuzzy group hug, but a struggle for scarce resources, and that someone's gain was necessarily someone else's loss. And I decided not to be a doormat, but to stand up for myself, my loved ones and my principles, to seize my agency and take control of my destiny, rather than smiling sweetly and hoping life would hand it to me on a plate if I was nice enough. You may not like it, but it works for me.

[Lauriebell82]

Her parents are dead, she doesn't talk to any of her siblings and her "friends" all jumped ship to her xH when they split... But the kids were onboard once we decided to be together, and are far happier now. So, while I take your general point - there really was no extended fall-out in this case. It really was just her.

 

And she has allegedly begun IC as a result of the split (and related matters), so it seems she will finally get the help she needs to get her life together. So perhaps even win-win all round? Dare one hope?

 

Doesn't sound to me like she won...in fact she pretty much lost everything and now has to go to therapy. I guess I just can't understand-maybe never will-how someone can be happy about hurting someone else...regardless of who "benefited" from it.

[OWoman]

I would have tried very, very hard to whisper as quietly as I could and reported to detention at the end of the day.

 

... and I'd have loaned you my very exciting book (once I was finished!)

 

Yes, opening myself to him made me vulnerable to his betrayal. That did suck, but it's in the past. We've moved on- I've moved on. I've decided that I will be open with him, I've decided that I trust him. Most importantly I've decided that I trust myself more.

 

Hard lessons - but it sounds like valuable ones. (((hugs)))

[OWoman]

Doesn't sound to me like she won...in fact she pretty much lost everything and now has to go to therapy. I guess I just can't understand-maybe never will-how someone can be happy about hurting someone else...regardless of who "benefited" from it.

 

She can't "lose" something she never had.

 

She is - or was - a very broken person who used other people to try to make herself feel better about her brokenness. She lost jobs and friends because of her abusiveness. The kids were damaged. My H was damaged. After their previous separation, he took her back on condition she'd agree to MC - she went once, and when the MC challenged her on her unreasonable behaviour in the session, she stormed out and refused to return to any form of MC or IC ever again. She drank dangerously, her weight ballooned to morbid obesity levels and she shopped compulsively. Her life was way out of control.

 

Then my H started the A, started IC (and family therapy with the kids - she refused to go) and got his life together. And left. The kids changed - they laugh now, they talk and hang about instead of hiding in their rooms, they have friends, hobbies, SOs... They're no longer failing academically, they have plans, dreams, ambitions... opinions, which they argue lucidly, instead of just repeating back the opinion of whoever they're talking to at the time. They've reconnected with their extended family, connected with my kids, have a sense of their place and belonging in the universe. They're happy.

 

I'm not "happy" about hurting her - I don't care either way, TBH. I view her as acceptable collateral damage, in the bigger scheme of things - but I am happy that she's finally facing her demons and might yet be able to form, and sustain, "normal" Rs. I would love for the kids to go and stay with her not because of the convenience of the location of her house, using it as a crash pad from which to conduct their excursions - but because they wanted to spend time with her. I would love for her to be able to find a BF / GF and chill, so that both homes could be happy for the kids. I would love her to gain control over her life, so that she wasn't someone friends and colleagues had to go to extreme lengths to avoid in the village, so that everyone could move on. And if the "hurt" had to be the "crisis" that provided that opportunity, then yes, I'd see that as a good thing.

[Lauriebell82]

It did. I started out thinking one should be "nice", but realised that people's needs and interests conflict, and by making someone happy, you will make someone else unhappy, no matter how hard you try. So I learned that my first loyalty has to be to myself and my loved ones, and once that has been met, I can worry about others - provided that their happiness does not come at the expense of those dear to me. I learned that life wasn't a warm, fuzzy group hug, but a struggle for scarce resources, and that someone's gain was necessarily someone else's loss. And I decided not to be a doormat, but to stand up for myself, my loved ones and my principles, to seize my agency and take control of my destiny, rather than smiling sweetly and hoping life would hand it to me on a plate if I was nice enough. You may not like it, but it works for me.

 

I am unsure if you are referring to me in that I think life is a warm fuzzy group hug, but I definately don't. Life has been very very hard on me, and what I have taken from it is that by being a good person, by caring about other people, life has rewarded me by giving me a career that I love and a wonderful and happy marriage (both of which were received BECAUSE of being a sweet and understanding person). Not only that, but I get a good sense of satisfaction that I care about people and that gives me strength and confidence.

 

So you may not like that either, but it works for me.

[OWoman]

I am unsure if you are referring to me

 

I wasn't.

 

I'm glad that works for you, though. Didn't work for me since I was 5.

[Lauriebell82]

She can't "lose" something she never had.

 

She is - or was - a very broken person who used other people to try to make herself feel better about her brokenness. She lost jobs and friends because of her abusiveness. The kids were damaged. My H was damaged. After their previous separation, he took her back on condition she'd agree to MC - she went once, and when the MC challenged her on her unreasonable behaviour in the session, she stormed out and refused to return to any form of MC or IC ever again. She drank dangerously, her weight ballooned to morbid obesity levels and she shopped compulsively. Her life was way out of control.

 

Then my H started the A, started IC (and family therapy with the kids - she refused to go) and got his life together. And left. The kids changed - they laugh now, they talk and hang about instead of hiding in their rooms, they have friends, hobbies, SOs... They're no longer failing academically, they have plans, dreams, ambitions... opinions, which they argue lucidly, instead of just repeating back the opinion of whoever they're talking to at the time. They've reconnected with their extended family, connected with my kids, have a sense of their place and belonging in the universe. They're happy.

 

That is extremely sad. But even with all of those problems, he could have divorced her, he didn't have to start the A before he left. That was his choice...and your's. If she had all these issues then why did he marry her? She probably didn't start having them until after they married, I'm sure.

 

As someone with a mother with huge issues, I can say that distancing one's self from a mother with problems does help with improving the quality of life. They all benefited from the fact that your H decided to leave his M, not because of your A.

[OWoman]

That is extremely sad. But even with all of those problems, he could have divorced her, he didn't have to start the A before he left. That was his choice...and your's. If she had all these issues then why did he marry her? She probably didn't start having them until after they married, I'm sure.

 

As someone with a mother with huge issues, I can say that distancing one's self from a mother with problems does help with improving the quality of life. They all benefited from the fact that your H decided to leave his M, not because of your A.

 

He married her because... she seduced him (she's older) while she was M (to someone else) and he was still a lad. He found it all terribly exciting, ignored everyone's advice - and she progressively alienated him from his family, most of his friends, and even colleagues (they used to work in the same organisation) so that he had no outside support system. She eroded his self-esteem, convinced him he was worthless, that no one could possibly love him, and that she was only with him because she took pity on him.

 

It was only through the A that those internalised messages got challenged - when he realised that others (or at least, someone) could, and did love him; that someone listened to him, challenged him, debated with him - but allowed him an opinion and certainly didn't scream at him, attack him physically or lock themselves in their room with bottles of spirits if he didn't agree with them. That someone could bear to touch his body - loved touching his body - and was happy to hold his hand in public, to kiss and cuddle and be close and show the world; that love didn't demean, hurt, belittle, deny, gaslight, snipe, mock, taunt, scream or threaten. He got a glimpse of other possibilities, and realised that what he'd been told was "normal" wasn't - and sought IC to fix what inside himself had allowed that to continue for so long. And then, when he was stronger, he made the break.

 

Now, he can't think why or how he allowed that to happen. He shares the shock and disbelief his family had felt watching him slide into that, and counts his blessings each day that he escaped. He watches his kids adapt to "normal" life and counts his blessings that they aren't being cursed with only that model of adult relationships against which to plot their own courses.

 

Perhaps he would have gotten to that point without an A, who knows? But it needed some kind of intervention, something radical and disruptive and challenging, to shake that certainty and offer a glimpse of something else. And, frankly, I don't know what else would have offered that - other than serious physical injury (either directly from the abuse, or from him defending himself or - god forbid - the kids against her abuse) or possibly death. Not a pleasant prospect, either way... (

[Lauriebell82]

He married her because... she seduced him (she's older) while she was M (to someone else) and he was still a lad. He found it all terribly exciting, ignored everyone's advice - and she progressively alienated him from his family, most of his friends, and even colleagues (they used to work in the same organisation) so that he had no outside support system. She eroded his self-esteem, convinced him he was worthless, that no one could possibly love him, and that she was only with him because she took pity on him.

 

HE made the choice to get involved with her and marry her. Are you really trying to say he's the victim here? Are you getting all this from him?

 

It was only through the A that those internalised messages got challenged - when he realised that others (or at least, someone) could, and did love him; that someone listened to him, challenged him, debated with him - but allowed him an opinion and certainly didn't scream at him, attack him physically or lock themselves in their room with bottles of spirits if he didn't agree with them. That someone could bear to touch his body - loved touching his body - and was happy to hold his hand in public, to kiss and cuddle and be close and show the world; that love didn't demean, hurt, belittle, deny, gaslight, snipe, mock, taunt, scream or threaten. He got a glimpse of other possibilities, and realised that what he'd been told was "normal" wasn't - and sought IC to fix what inside himself had allowed that to continue for so long. And then, when he was stronger, he made the break.

 

Now, he can't think why or how he allowed that to happen. He shares the shock and disbelief his family had felt watching him slide into that, and counts his blessings each day that he escaped. He watches his kids adapt to "normal" life and counts his blessings that they aren't being cursed with only that model of adult relationships against which to plot their own courses.

 

Perhaps he would have gotten to that point without an A, who knows? But it needed some kind of intervention, something radical and disruptive and challenging, to shake that certainty and offer a glimpse of something else. And, frankly, I don't know what else would have offered that - other than serious physical injury (either directly from the abuse, or from him defending himself or - god forbid - the kids against her abuse) or possibly death. Not a pleasant prospect, either way... (

 

So what happens if YOU ever go through some issues like his exW did? Maybe it won't be to the extent, but what if you suffer from depression. I mean your H doesn't really take marriage vows seriously, what is to stop him from betraying you as he did his exW?

[desertIslandCactus]

Her parents are dead, she doesn't talk to any of her siblings and her "friends" all jumped ship to her xH when they split... But the kids were onboard once we decided to be together, and are far happier now. So, while I take your general point - there really was no extended fall-out in this case. It really was just her.

 

And she has allegedly begun IC as a result of the split (and related matters), so it seems she will finally get the help she needs to get her life together. So perhaps even win-win all round? Dare one hope?

 

How does it matter how troubled those are in the lives that we finalize or destroy.

 

At the end of the day, we are the ones of responsibility. Isn't that what this thread's about.

[jennie-jennie]

Here's where I struggle...

 

 

...it's hard for me to understand having no remorse when you're engaging in actions that you're completely aware (as part of that accepting responsibility) are likely to result in emotionally devestating someone else.

 

I absolutely see the point you make about the difference between the two...and it even makes sense that they ARE different.

 

But it's difficult for me to wrap around the idea of not regretting or feeling remorse if I know what I'm doing is likely to eventually end up hurting someone in that fashion.

 

Because the alternative is emotionally devastating yourself.

 

It is a choice between two people, yourself and someone you do not know. And the WS has already made the choice for you. Why on earth would you want to emotionally devastate yourself? I struggle to understand what is so hard to understand about that.

[Silly_Girl]

How does it matter how troubled those are in the lives that we finalize or destroy.

 

At the end of the day, we are the ones of responsibility. Isn't that what this thread's about.

 

Why is the responsibility on OWoman to respect her H's destructive marriage greater than the responsibility to help her H and in turn help him to help his children? Why does one 'win'? Because of a legal document, a marriage certificate? Being married is not a licence to abuse one's spouse, just speak to your local DV unit for clarification... OWoman took her responsibility to her H more seriously than her responsibility to his W. I don't think it's hard to grasp, unless you take the 'everything being relayed here must be lies' route, in which case there's no point in participating