Define rOW...good or bad?

[BB07]

I guess I am silly then for trying to find a way to solve what I perceived to be an issue on the forum.

 

I guess I'm not understanding why it's important to you to need more labels. Want to expound on it?

[trinity1]

I guess I'm not understanding why it's important to you to need more labels. Want to expound on it?

 

I thought I had made myself clear already? I was suggesting replacing a label which is considered by many to be derogatory by a label which can be accepted by all, or at least most, posters as not being derogatory.

 

My suggestion was repentant former other woman. Do any posters find the word repentant derogatory?

[tami-chan]

Also, it is a secret list. The posters who use this label for other posters have declined requests to say who they put on their "reformed" list.

 

There is a list? Wow...I didn't know that. how did you know that? That's amusingly interesting. I think when we participate in a discussion you will find that there are people who are "reformed and repentant", people who are still sad or bitter, people who are totally accepting about their past and are ok with it and then there are people who own their decisions and do not apologize for it. So I do not think it is necessarily a list, but then again, it's been awhile since I have posted here regularly.

 

Labels are important because they make us more organized and efficient. It works very well especially in the pantry. But obviously, people are much more complicated than a bag of flour. Labels do not capture the whole "essence" of the individual. Labels carry with them bias, prejudice and/or stereotypes(therefore, tend to be unfair)-even the more accepted labels, like BS or OW or WS, etc. Of course those are meant as starting points, not as something that should define the person forever.

 

Labels also make it a lot easier to dismiss a person's opinion/advice. Sounds awful, but sometimes, when all you read from one person is a lot of "static" then you wonder where that person is coming from and where is she now in her life and then you find out, then there is this "eureka" moment. So you get to choose what to do: a) continue to engage b) put her on ignore c) patronize.

[tami-chan]

I guess I am silly then for trying to find a way to solve what I perceived to be an issue on the forum.

 

Trying to find a solution is never silly, silly! But I do believe that the "label" or term "repentant former other woman" or RFOW if too long..lol.

[BB07]

I thought I had made myself clear already? I was suggesting replacing a label which is considered by many to be derogatory by a label which can be accepted by all, or at least most, posters as not being derogatory.

 

My suggestion was repentant former other woman. Do any posters find the word repentant derogatory?

 

The word itself is not......but then again it's opening pandora's box.

 

Let's pretend for a moment that LS has a rule in place that your history/status must be in your signature. So given what you've posted about your history, would you be comfortable with that?

[trinity1]

Trying to find a solution is never silly, silly! But I do believe that the "label" or term "repentant former other woman" or RFOW if too long..lol.

 

Well, let's just call it "repentant other woman" or "rOW" then. Better?

[trinity1]

The word itself is not......but then again it's opening pandora's box.

 

Let's pretend for a moment that LS has a rule in place that your history/status must be in your signature. So given what you've posted about your history, would you be comfortable with that?

 

repentant wayward spouse and betrayed spouse - yes. It is because I have been in these roles that I choose to post here, so what reason would I possibly have for not disclosing that?

[anne1707]

Labels carry with them bias, prejudice and/or stereotypes(therefore, tend to be unfair)-even the more accepted labels, like BS or OW or WS, etc. Of course those are meant as starting points, not as something that should define the person forever.

 

Labels also make it a lot easier to dismiss a person's opinion/advice. Sounds awful, but sometimes, when all you read from one person is a lot of "static" then you wonder where that person is coming from and where is she now in her life and then you find out, then there is this "eureka" moment. So you get to choose what to do: a) continue to engage b) put her on ignore c) patronize.

 

Exactly - especially the bolded.

 

The standard accepted LS are just a starting point. Anything beyond that such as reformed, unapologetic etc are open to so much (mis)interpretation that their use causes fighting on these forums way too often.

[BB07]

Labels are important because they make us more organized and efficient. It works very well especially in the pantry. But obviously, people are much more complicated than a bag of flour. Labels do not capture the whole "essence" of the individual. Labels carry with them bias, prejudice and/or stereotypes(therefore, tend to be unfair)-even the more accepted labels, like BS or OW or WS, etc. Of course those are meant as starting points, not as something that should define the person forever.

 

Labels also make it a lot easier to dismiss a person's opinion/advice. Sounds awful, but sometimes, when all you read from one person is a lot of "static" then you wonder where that person is coming from and where is she now in her life and then you find out, then there is this "eureka" moment. So you get to choose what to do: a) continue to engage b) put her on ignore c) patronize.

 

 

Great post Tami! This explains it very well.

 

PS>>>>>>>>>wish I had wrote it.

[findingnemo]

Back to rOW???

 

trinity, I have come to the conclusion that:

 

1) The word "reformed" lost its original meaning on LS at some point

2) Labels are like minefields here and could be used in both negative and positive ways

3) rOW has already been tainted and the sooner it is dropped the better

4) Labels presume that posters will always follow a hardline opinion regardless of individual problems. Most posters don't.

 

So we should just stick with fOW, xOW, OW no more...etc.

[woinlove]

There is a list? Wow...I didn't know that. how did you know that? That's amusingly interesting.

 

Yes, it is amusingly interesting (in a perverse sort of way) that the people who label others this way don't just use the labels for some hypothetical group of people, but for some specific posters on LS.

 

Yet when some OWs warn new OPs that most of the nastiness being flung at them is coming from BBSs and ROWs, some people in those categories take offence...

 

But, I couldn't get her, or others, to tell us who they put into "those categories" - I recall she said it was against LS rules to tell!

[trinity1]

Back to rOW???

 

trinity, I have come to the conclusion that:

 

1) The word "reformed" lost its original meaning on LS at some point

2) Labels are like minefields here and could be used in both negative and positive ways

3) rOW has already been tainted and the sooner it is dropped the better

4) Labels presume that posters will always follow a hardline opinion regardless of individual problems. Most posters don't.

 

So we should just stick with fOW, xOW, OW no more...etc.

 

Except it is not likely to happen since the term has been around since 2005.

[tami-chan]

Yes, it is amusingly interesting (in a perverse sort of way) that the people who label others this way don't just use the labels for some hypothetical group of people, but for some specific posters on LS.

 

But, I couldn't get her, or others, to tell us who they put into "those categories" - I recall she said it was against LS rules to tell!

 

Like I said, it is not difficult to tell where a person is coming from when you read(or have read) her (past) posts. But newbies do not know that, and sometimes are taken aback by how vitriolic some of the responses are. You cannot deny that there are former affair partners who do not stop doling out advice or criticism even when the member already said something contrary to their advice. It becomes personal to them and they can't seem to separate their own experiences from the other member's.

 

These are people who are supposed to have learned to recognize "boundaries"(in relationships), yet seem to fore go recognizing boundaries on the forums because "it is a public forum and I can say whatever I want". Ridiculous and juvenile.

[OWoman]

Yes, it is amusingly interesting (in a perverse sort of way) that the people who label others this way don't just use the labels for some hypothetical group of people, but for some specific posters on LS.

 

 

 

But, I couldn't get her, or others, to tell us who they put into "those categories" - I recall she said it was against LS rules to tell!

 

Is this an accidental error of concord, or was the second paragraph above aimed at a specific, unnamed member?

[desertIslandCactus]

What about repentant former OW? Is that a better term?

 

Repentant, or apologetic, or reformed .. works for me

 

(Although I do see and respect where Anne is coming from, where opinions or life's lessons should matter more than labels.)

[Silly_Girl]

Repentant, or apologetic, or reformed .. works for me

 

(Although I do see and respect where Anne is coming from, where opinions or life's lessons should matter more than labels.)

 

And kindness should rank over arrogance and sometimes it doesn't IMHO

[OWoman]

And kindness should rank over arrogance and sometimes it doesn't IMHO

 

Prejudice gets in the way.

[desertIslandCactus]

I don't know which of my acquaintances are democrats and which are republicans. I still know what it means to be a democrat or a republican. And at times I can make a qualified guess based on how each person expresses themselves.

 

Yes, many times you can tell by talking to someone if they are conservative or liberal.

 

But there are some who try to minister on this forum, who have said they haven't been a part of an illicit relationship.

 

So back to the thought of it being unhelpful to try to distinguish posts by life's experiences.

[desertIslandCactus]

And kindness should rank over arrogance and sometimes it doesn't IMHO

 

We're just trying to have a discussion, not get digs in?

[OWoman]

Yes, many times you can tell by talking to someone if they are conservative or liberal.

 

But there are some who try to minister on this forum, who have said they haven't been a part of an illicit relationship.

 

So back to the thought of it being unhelpful to try to distinguish posts by life's experiences.

 

Forcing one's religious viewpoint on another is against the TOS, which is probably why their attempts get thwarted.

[desertIslandCactus]

repentant wayward spouse and betrayed spouse - yes. It is because I have been in these roles that I choose to post here, so what reason would I possibly have for not disclosing that?

 

Labels are the least of our worries on here.

[Viscious Vendetta]

I think the concept of rOW is misleading. If you make decisions you regret then make amends with your life and move on.

 

I think here on LS it's used as a derogatory term because there are some posters who are labelled (by themselves or others) as rOW and seem to castigate those in a position they were previously in, and can sometimes show remarkably little empathy or compassion and sometimes even seem nasty.

 

That attitude concerns me and often advice is not as balanced as it might be. In fact, often the BSs here offer a more rounded and empathetic viewpoint than those with first-hand experience of the OPs predicament.

 

I don't think the term rOW is used accurately on the board.

I don't know what a rOW is and I don't care. You are sleeping with a married man so do not deserve empathy or compassion. I wouldn't call you the names that most people might, compassion is asking too much. If a gal or guy like me was lied to, and leaves when they find out, I feel bad for them. I don't feel bad for people who go into it with their eyes wide open.

 

And kindness should rank over arrogance and sometimes it doesn't IMHO

You are arrogant to expect compassion, IMHO. Arrogance seems a common denominator in people who cheat, so I see why you think that way.

[pureinheart]

There is a list? Wow...I didn't know that. how did you know that? That's amusingly interesting. I think when we participate in a discussion you will find that there are people who are "reformed and repentant", people who are still sad or bitter, people who are totally accepting about their past and are ok with it and then there are people who own their decisions and do not apologize for it. So I do not think it is necessarily a list, but then again, it's been awhile since I have posted here regularly.

 

Labels are important because they make us more organized and efficient. It works very well especially in the pantry. But obviously, people are much more complicated than a bag of flour. Labels do not capture the whole "essence" of the individual. Labels carry with them bias, prejudice and/or stereotypes(therefore, tend to be unfair)-even the more accepted labels, like BS or OW or WS, etc. Of course those are meant as starting points, not as something that should define the person forever.

 

Labels also make it a lot easier to dismiss a person's opinion/advice. Sounds awful, but sometimes, when all you read from one person is a lot of "static" then you wonder where that person is coming from and where is she now in her life and then you find out, then there is this "eureka" moment. So you get to choose what to do: a) continue to engage b) put her on ignore c) patronize.

 

Awesome Tami...labels, or "titles" help us define where we stand and what we think. A quick description to personality basically cutting to the chase...no big deal really.

[pureinheart]

I don't know what a rOW is and I don't care. You are sleeping with a married man so do not deserve empathy or compassion. I wouldn't call you the names that most people might, compassion is asking too much. If a gal or guy like me was lied to, and leaves when they find out, I feel bad for them. I don't feel bad for people who go into it with their eyes wide open.

 

You are arrogant to expect compassion, IMHO. Arrogance seems a common denominator in people who cheat, so I see why you think that way.

So are you...also the "humble" IMO doesn't fit.

[Silly_Girl]

We're just trying to have a discussion, not get digs in?

 

It's not a dig. It's a sincere opinion pertinent to the thread.