The wife has control over MM

[White Flower]

Thanks for your response. I realize I was probably much harsher than I needed to be, or even inteded to be. It's just that I've followed your story for a very long time, even before I posted bits of mine, and you seem to deserve so much more. But I can see that you are a very strong and level-headed woman, and will do what is the best thing for you. Peace, and happiness, to you, too.

You are quite welcome twinsmom. Thanks for your concern.

 

Agree with the bolded. That story is pretty far fetched and not something I would repeat if I didn't see it with my own eyes. An almost 40 year old man, so enraged that he is going after someone with a baseball bat is not going to be held back by his wife. And why would MM be scared of being cut off by his sons after these sorts of antics? I love my children more than anything but If one of my sons EVER physically threatened me I would probably cut them off myself.

You can believe what you want, I know what I know and can only live my life according to that.

 

As for your very last statement I couldn't agree more. I can't say that MM's delayed reaction isn't the same;)

[Ellin]

So why didn't he just leave your mom? Why did he stay for 53 years? I completely disagree, atleast he didn't cheat on her. He stayed true to his vows, which these days is basically something some people cannot do. Live up to their vows. Anyway, maybe HE couldn't live with himself if he cheated on her no matter what treatment she gave him.

 

If one is unhappy and can't see the marriage better - LEAVE! Divorce. To stay and cheat, all on the expense of the BS is bs.

This is what confuses me.

 

When people say LEAVE your M at the earliest opportunity, when you're not happy and feel you might end up being unfaithful.

 

And then they say it's because it is so wrong to be unfaithful against the marriage vows.

 

But the marriage vows also include things other than fidelity. They also include the promise to never leave their spouse until death.

 

So how cheating is so unacceptable but leaving is fine? Are some of the parts of M vows more important than others?

[Ellin]

Interesting concept.....Those that lack self-control often do accuse others of being controlling.

Being controlling and having self-control are two completely different things.

 

Being controlling means treating others badly in order to have them under control. It's not a good thing. Self-control obviously is a good thing.

 

But a controlling person does not necessarily have self-control. I think the opposite is true. Controlling behavior is a form or element of abuse. Abusers usually lack self-control or aren't interested in exercising it.

 

You put this concept on its head.

[redcurls]

But a controlling person does not necessarily have self-control. I think the opposite is true. Controlling behavior is a form or element of abuse. Abusers usually lack self-control or aren't interested in exercising it.

 

Absolutely true.

[bentnotbroken]

This is what confuses me.

 

When people say LEAVE your M at the earliest opportunity, when you're not happy and feel you might end up being unfaithful.

 

And then they say it's because it is so wrong to be unfaithful against the marriage vows.

 

But the marriage vows also include things other than fidelity. They also include the promise to never leave their spouse until death.

 

So how cheating is so unacceptable but leaving is fine? Are some of the parts of M vows more important than others?

 

 

The bible says if you right eye offends thee, pluck it out. If your marriage and spouse offend you so much that you can't treat either with respect get rid of them I say.

[bentnotbroken]

Being controlling and having self-control are two completely different things.

 

Being controlling means treating others badly in order to have them under control. It's not a good thing. Self-control obviously is a good thing.

 

But a controlling person does not necessarily have self-control. I think the opposite is true. Controlling behavior is a form or element of abuse. Abusers usually lack self-control or aren't interested in exercising it.

 

You put this concept on its head.

 

 

This I agree with. A cheating person who has not told the BS that they are cheating and gives the BS the option to leave is indeed controlling the options of the BS while having no self control over their own behavior. And it is abusive.

[White Flower]

Being controlling and having self-control are two completely different things.

 

Being controlling means treating others badly in order to have them under control. It's not a good thing. Self-control obviously is a good thing.

 

But a controlling person does not necessarily have self-control. I think the opposite is true. Controlling behavior is a form or element of abuse. Abusers usually lack self-control or aren't interested in exercising it.

 

You put this concept on its head.

 

This I agree with. A cheating person who has not told the BS that they are cheating and gives the BS the option to leave is indeed controlling the options of the BS while having no self control over their own behavior. And it is abusive.

Sounds like a co-dependent, win/win sitch to me. They feed off of each other.

[bentnotbroken]

Sounds like a co-dependent, win/win sitch to me. They feed off of each other.

 

 

Who? I'm confused.

[awkward]

White Flower I don't know you well enough to PM you so I'm going to post my question here. I'm curious how you feel about you making your MM end his other affairs? Do you consider that controlling? Does he? I'm wondering if some MM actually seek out this type behavior. Does that make sense? Would he have ended them if you didn't make him? Would he have ended with you if his wife made him?

 

Anyways, I know you don't want to take the thread OT so if you are comfortable PM'ing me or even opening another thread I think this could make a great discussion not just about you and your MM but about men in general.

[White Flower]

Sounds like a co-dependent, win/win sitch to me. They feed off of each other.

When you said...

 

This I agree with. A cheating person who has not told the BS that they are cheating and gives the BS the option to leave is indeed controlling the options of the BS while having no self control over their own behavior. And it is abusive.

It reminded me of MM's co-dependent R with his W. She controls him, he cheats, she finds out, makes him end it (or makes her think he has anyway but he still caves on some level) and the cycle continues. Always has and as long as he stays always will. Their behavior feeds off of each other.

[White Flower]

White Flower I don't know you well enough to PM you so I'm going to post my question here. I'm curious how you feel about you making your MM end his other affairs? Do you consider that controlling? Does he? I'm wondering if some MM actually seek out this type behavior. Does that make sense? Would he have ended them if you didn't make him? Would he have ended with you if his wife made him?

 

Anyways, I know you don't want to take the thread OT so if you are comfortable PM'ing me or even opening another thread I think this could make a great discussion not just about you and your MM but about men in general.

I suppose I exaggerated in order to save time. I don't make anybody do anything, it just isn't my style. Even my OW cohorts here give me a hard time about it.

 

And I suppose it IS on topic if we are discussing control issues.

 

When I discovered exMM had other As before me I was livid. He made me believe I was his first A and I found out it couldn't be further from the truth. I could not prove he was still sleeping with them, but could prove he was still talking to at least 3 of them. I let him know that I wanted no part in a game like that, I didn't sign up for that, and I was going to bow out now. He then asked what kind of ground rules I wanted in place to make me comfortable. He asked me, I didn't force him.

 

I told him I didn't like the fact that he talked to them because he was keeping the door open to future hook-ups. If I didn't rock his world, then fine...so be it. But if I did, then I wanted to be the only one doing so. I had no doubt in my mind that his W didn't rock his world for various reasons including seeing her picture. I'm sorry if that sounds cruel, but it is what it is. And trust me, I may be confident, but I am not conceited.

 

I've gotten to know exMM inside and out. Sometimes I know what he is thinking before he thinks it. It's just what happens when you develop a close intimacy with someone. Anyway, I figured that he didn't close doors because he was afraid of them retaliating, then exposing him. When I questioned him about it he confirmed this. I showed him how to call their bluff and close doors. It worked and now all doors are firmly shut.

 

I kept asking him how comfortable he was doing this, after all, he knew them about six times longer than he knew me! But he claimed to love me like no other and he was happy that I showed him how to say goodbye to them. With that, I knew that my own goodbye could come at any moment since he had a good grasp on how to do it successfully and I accepted that. I still accept that. I do not push men into staying with me. Again, it just isn't my style.

 

Funny, we just joked about one of those exOWs yesterday. He said he just got off the phone with her and I said I hope he told her hello for me. He loves that I can joke about these things.

 

I felt sorry for them. I'm sure they loved him in their own way and even if they didn't have the deep intimacy we have it still must have hurt to lose what they shared. I never let him speak ill of them, in fact I defended them when I felt I had to because never wanted him to speak ill about me. He claims he hasn't after D-day number 4 but who really knows. I get the feeling, and of course it is a feeling, that his W enjoys it when he puts OWs down. I never did though.

 

And I never let him put his W down either, FWIW.

 

Hope that answers your question. PM me any time.

[Spices]

A woman has every right to have a little control over her husband... or at least have the upper hand.

Edited December 29, 2010 by Spices

[Summer Breeze]

A woman has every right to have at least a little control over her husband... or have the upper hand, at least.

 

Why? I wanted control over my child until he was ready to venture forth and make his own way. As a toddler that meant allowing him to fall. As a teenager that meant allowing him to make friends that I knew wouldn't stand by him. As an adult that meant watching him fall in love with someone I suspected would hurt him. I controlled him as he learned and grew. My xH was an adult and as such shouldn't have had to be controlled.

 

There isn't a person on this earth I want to have the 'upper hand' on. Especially not a SO.

[woinlove]

This is what confuses me.

 

When people say LEAVE your M at the earliest opportunity, when you're not happy and feel you might end up being unfaithful.

 

And then they say it's because it is so wrong to be unfaithful against the marriage vows.

 

But the marriage vows also include things other than fidelity. They also include the promise to never leave their spouse until death.

 

So how cheating is so unacceptable but leaving is fine? Are some of the parts of M vows more important than others?

]

 

It's all about the golden rule and treating others with respect and kindness.

 

Obviously the level of deception and betrayal involved in cheating is the opposite of treating others with respect and kindness and inflicts enormous pain on others. There is no way to betray and deceive (ie. cheat) kindly and respectfully, but one can leave kindly and respectfully. One can't always avoid hurting others, but one can do what you can to lessen the depth and length of the hurt by acting with kindness and respect. One can be open, honest and generous in doing what one can to help your spouse and family start a life apart from you.

[desertIslandCactus]

Why? I wanted control over my child until he was ready to venture forth and make his own way. As a toddler that meant allowing him to fall. As a teenager that meant allowing him to make friends that I knew wouldn't stand by him. As an adult that meant watching him fall in love with someone I suspected would hurt him. I controlled him as he learned and grew. My xH was an adult and as such shouldn't have had to be controlled.

 

There isn't a person on this earth I want to have the 'upper hand' on. Especially not a SO.

 

Never the less, it's no one's business what goes on in a closed marriage.

 

The outsider uses 'controlling' or 'passive' or whatever, looking for weakness - so that they can find a way or reason - to be In.

 

How does a rodent find their way into your house, it digs or looks for easy (weakened) access.

 

It seems part of the pain the OW/OM suffer is that of keeping themselves aware of the activities of the spouses, within their Own M/home.

[donnamaybe]

]

 

It's all about the golden rule and treating others with respect and kindness.

 

Obviously the level of deception and betrayal involved in cheating is the opposite of treating others with respect and kindness and inflicts enormous pain on others. There is no way to betray and deceive (ie. cheat) kindly and respectfully, but one can leave kindly and respectfully. One can't always avoid hurting others, but one can do what you can to lessen the depth and length of the hurt by acting with kindness and respect. One can be open, honest and generous in doing what one can to help your spouse and family start a life apart from you.

NAILED IT!!!

[bentnotbroken]

When you said...

 

It reminded me of MM's co-dependent R with his W. She controls him, he cheats, she finds out, makes him end it (or makes her think he has anyway but he still caves on some level) and the cycle continues. Always has and as long as he stays always will. Their behavior feeds off of each other.

 

 

I guess I was speaking from the point of view of a BS who is in the dark. No chance at forgiving or taking them back. What you speak of is definately co-dependent.

[NoIDidn't]

Being controlling and having self-control are two completely different things.

 

Being controlling means treating others badly in order to have them under control. It's not a good thing. Self-control obviously is a good thing.

 

But a controlling person does not necessarily have self-control. I think the opposite is true. Controlling behavior is a form or element of abuse. Abusers usually lack self-control or aren't interested in exercising it.

 

You put this concept on its head.

 

Actually, all I did was make an observation that the people that complain the most about being controlled often seem to lack self-control.

 

I have no idea of what you are talking about. I didn't call anyone controlling. You did that.

 

Maybe you should re-read what I posted before you jump to conclusions that weren't made.

[NoIDidn't]

...And then they say it's because it is so wrong to be unfaithful against the marriage vows.

 

But the marriage vows also include things other than fidelity. They also include the promise to never leave their spouse until death.

 

So how cheating is so unacceptable but leaving is fine? Are some of the parts of M vows more important than others?

 

This is a canard. A very common one.

 

Usually used by the "other" to help the married person justify their cheating.

 

Oh, yeah, honey, you're not cheating on her. I mean, look, she didn't cherish you FIRST. You're totally justified in breaking a different vow. Look at all the ones she broke towards YOU.

 

No need to behave respectfully towards a person that doesn't do so towards you, babes. The Golden Rule doesn't apply the second the other person breaks it. Yeah, that's it.

 

LOL.

 

Generally the people that will use this as an excuse to cheat neglect to be honest about the myriad of vows, or implied vows, that they too have broken.

 

Seriously, though.

 

To equate divorcing to breaking a vow while trying to stay married AND CHEAT is a stretch. Divorcing ends the marriage, no more vows to break. And even Christianity makes allowances for dissolving marriages. But to cheat means one stays married and CONTINUALLY BREAKS several marital vows, REPEATEDLY.

 

Divorce is an honorable action when compared in this way to cheating. It doesn't involve lying when done right. It doesn't involve emotional abuse when done the right way either. Cheating involves those two things. I don't see how anyone can be confused about which is better or "right".

[Ellin]

Actually, all I did was make an observation that the people that complain the most about being controlled often seem to lack self-control.

 

I have no idea of what you are talking about. I didn't call anyone controlling. You did that.

 

Maybe you should re-read what I posted before you jump to conclusions that weren't made.

Huh??!?

 

Who do you think I called controlling?

 

I understand what you said in your earlier post, but you clearly didn't understand what I said in mine.

 

Nevermind..

[Ellin]

This is a canard. A very common one.

 

Usually used by the "other" to help the married person justify their cheating.

 

Oh, yeah, honey, you're not cheating on her. I mean, look, she didn't cherish you FIRST. You're totally justified in breaking a different vow. Look at all the ones she broke towards YOU.

 

No need to behave respectfully towards a person that doesn't do so towards you, babes. The Golden Rule doesn't apply the second the other person breaks it. Yeah, that's it.

 

LOL.

 

Generally the people that will use this as an excuse to cheat neglect to be honest about the myriad of vows, or implied vows, that they too have broken.

 

Seriously, though.

 

To equate divorcing to breaking a vow while trying to stay married AND CHEAT is a stretch. Divorcing ends the marriage, no more vows to break. And even Christianity makes allowances for dissolving marriages. But to cheat means one stays married and CONTINUALLY BREAKS several marital vows, REPEATEDLY.

 

Divorce is an honorable action when compared in this way to cheating. It doesn't involve lying when done right. It doesn't involve emotional abuse when done the right way either. Cheating involves those two things. I don't see how anyone can be confused about which is better or "right".

Gosh. It's really hard to follow your "logic".

 

Where did I mentioned in my post justifying cheating and especially justifying it by saying that the other person did something wrong first????:confused:

 

I doubt that usually OP would use marriage vows to help MP justify their cheating, saying that it's ok to cheat as long as they stay with their spouse. AFAIK most OP want the opposite - they want their MP to leave the spouse!

 

And anyway, my post had nothing to do with justifying anything. I am genuinely surprised by the ease with which so many people here encourage divorces as a remedy for everything but in the same sentence they mention the importance of the marriage vows.

 

In Christianity marriage is for life and it can only be dissolved in a few very specific and exceptional circumstances, for example mental illness at the time of marriage, not consummating the marriage or being infertile but keeping it secret and maybe a couple more things like that. Infidelity definitely isn't one.

 

So if you are M in church and then get a civil D, from the Christian POV you are still M and if you get together with someone else, you're committing adultery.

 

Even in civil M ceremony you promise to stay together for life, not until you get a D. If D erases the validity of this, then what is the point promising it in the first place? This sort of thinking makes a mockery of it. The vows mean nothing. This sort of marriage is just a piece of paper. And if it's so, then using the importance of the vows selectively, the way it suits, is rather pointless.

 

And that doesn't mean - if you haven't realised it yet - that cheating is ok or something.

[donnamaybe]

I am genuinely surprised by the ease with which so many people here encourage divorces

Sure. SO much easier to just lie, cheat, and sneak around.

[White Flower]

Never the less, it's no one's business what goes on in a closed marriage.

 

The outsider uses 'controlling' or 'passive' or whatever, looking for weakness - so that they can find a way or reason - to be In.

 

How does a rodent find their way into your house, it digs or looks for easy (weakened) access.

 

It seems part of the pain the OW/OM suffer is that of keeping themselves aware of the activities of the spouses, within their Own M/home.

1. The M is not closed if one of the spouses wanders.

 

2. The 'outsider' is very much an insider of the heart and mind of the wanderer. He/she doesn't 'use' anything; he/she observes and learns everything about his/her lover. He/she is dealing with the same person in every way. Give us credit for knowing who we're sleeping with, lol.

 

3. OPs are not rodents. Rodents are never sought and never put on pedestals. Rodents are not loved.

 

4. Keeping aware of the spouse's activities? Pullease.

 

Give OP credit for understanding the heart and mind of our lover.

[donnamaybe]

1. The M is not closed if one of the spouses wanders.

No. But one of them is led to believe it's closed, and that's just sick and disgusting behavior. It's not "open" either if they haven't mutually declared it so. So what is it then? Oh, let me guess. The WS's plaything.

[White Flower]

No. But one of them is led to believe it's closed, and that's just sick and disgusting behavior. It's not "open" either if they haven't mutually declared it so. So what is it then? Oh, let me guess. The WS's plaything.

What is what? You lost me.