Marriage and Ownership

[NoIDidn't]

Yes, exactly! The clear lack of understanding demonstrated by using phrases such as 'individuality' when describing a relationship other than a marriage, is also a clear indication of a lack of respect for marriage.

 

There also seems to be an assumption that its the wife who feels she owns her husband and not vice versa. Well on the contrary, my exH very much felt a sense of ownership, and not just of me as his wife but also of our marriage. He still refers to me as his wife - we're divorced and I've remarried!

 

See, now you've touched on the part that few OPs ever want to acknowledge: The fact that their MP feels that they own their spouse.

 

I've read stories where the cheating MM found out that "his" W was also having an affair and it devastated him. It was "his" W. It was okay that he cheated on her because it was for him, but some other man touching what he felt was "his" was unacceptable. It threw the OW for a loop too. She couldn't believe what was happening. But I think she made the mistake of thinking his sense of ownership over his W was evidence of love. I don't think it was.

 

The BS and OP aren't the only ones with a sense of ownership in these situations. My serial cheat dad would have had a fit if another man touched my step mom. He felt his being married to her entitled him to ALL of her, but someone how felt that he was his own independent person without encumbrance of any type. But her time was his to decide how to use. Same with his numerous OW. They were to be available when he wanted and not to see others, since they were single.

 

Its so interesting pondering how the affair partners try to remove any sense of belonging and implied ownership from the betrayed, but aim to keep it for themselves.

[pkn06002]

So what life is a competition why not a relationship as well? Use or lose it.

[donnamaybe]

So what life is a competition why not a relationship as well? Use or lose it.

 

That is the point. No one is saying people shouldn't divorce or split up a R. They are saying you shouldn't lie your way through the R.

[OldOnTheInside]

They are saying you shouldn't lie your way through the R.

 

Ahh...a very good point.

 

But the question is: why shouldn't we lie? Yes it is disrespectful, nasty, immoral ect. but if you have read many of the posts here, deception seems to be a common theme.

 

Many people are either willing to accept the brunt of the guilt, justify lies with half-*ssed ideology, or simply don't give a sh*t.

 

As with everything else, it is a choice. In fact, the manipulation of truth could be compared with playing God. And God has very large shoes to fill.

 

Note that I am neither condemning nor condoning deceit.

[NoIDidn't]

So what life is a competition why not a relationship as well? Use or lose it.

 

Are you suggestion that your W compete to keep what she already "owns"?

[Summer Breeze]

Exactly. Its also considered bribery, and manipulation.

 

I think the people that don't understand the "ownership" implied by marriage just don't respect marriage to begin with. They will expect others to respect them and theirs, but they oddly reserve the right to disrespect you and yours...and then blame YOU for it.

I expected my exH to respect our marriage. If he had had full respect for our marriage he wouldn't have cheated and anyone elses thoughts about our marriage would have been moot.

 

OPs are receiving stolen goods. And most of them know it, that's why they glory in it so much here. "He spent Valentine's Day with ME and not with HER (the wife)". "He loves ME and not HER". "He calls ME all the time and only calls HER for household stuff".

A persons time is their own to do with what they want. There are things they should do and things they shouldn't do but the time belongs to them. If a married person makes the choice to spend their time outside the marriage that is a decision that is down to them. They are spending something somewhere they know darned well they shouldn't be. An AP isn't receiving stolen property they are with someone who has made a conscious choice to be with them.

 

They know he's not supposed to offer those things to them and they know it comes at a cost to another. Call them interloper, thief, or whatever, but they know they are interfering and want it just that way. They wish to remove the implied ownership of the spouse and make it theirs. Theirs. Another level of ownership....

Most do because the MP has made promises that lead to that conclusion. Again if the WS did not make the decision to go outside the M it would be moot.

 

What's that old song about how everybody wants to be somebody's somebody?

 

Responses in bold.

[wheelwright]

Ahh...a very good point.

 

But the question is: why shouldn't we lie? Yes it is disrespectful, nasty, immoral ect. but if you have read many of the posts here, deception seems to be a common theme.

 

Many people are either willing to accept the brunt of the guilt, justify lies with half-*ssed ideology, or simply don't give a sh*t.

 

As with everything else, it is a choice. In fact, the manipulation of truth could be compared with playing God. And God has very large shoes to fill.

 

Note that I am neither condemning nor condoning deceit.

 

I am not sure about bolded. I think most APs are far from this. They are just playing out that old chestnut that we lie to protect. I am not thinking this is the same as playing God, who surely would not be lying at all?!!

 

I take it you are not that religious, but am willing to stand corrected.

[OldOnTheInside]

I am not sure about bolded. I think most APs are far from this. They are just playing out that old chestnut that we lie to protect. I am not thinking this is the same as playing God, who surely would not be lying at all?!!

 

I take it you are not that religious, but am willing to stand corrected.

 

Merely an expression.

 

But my point is, a grandiose lie is basically akin to controlling aspects of another person's life without their knowledge or consent.

 

The liar does the thinking for somebody else. Which is quite God-like.

[NoIDidn't]

Responses in bold.

 

Why were your responses in bold? I don't recall speaking directly to you or your situation.

 

Maybe you shouldn't take the opinions of others so personally?

[carhill]

OP, I saw the marital vows I and my exW made more as a pledge of joint interdependence; reliance; cleaving to one another through the joys and challenges and sorrows of life. Ownership, in the classic sense of the word, never occurred to me.

 

Since slavery is outlawed, owning people is a part of our past. We do own things and animals. Human fidelity and partnership is voluntary. The actions and perspective of one's spouse are outside of the other's control. Control is the essence of ownership and, without it, there is no possibility of 'owning' someone. A classic example of a person attempting to 'own' another is the use of fear, violence and/or psychological manipulation to try to control the other, with the emphasis on 'try'.

 

Recalling my years as an OM, I , along with the respective H's, had no control whatsoever over the perspectives or actions of the MW's who approached, engaged and voluntarily became intimate with me. I did have total control over myself, and any actions I performed were my responsibility.

 

FWIW, I've never seen a woman I've dated, been intimate with or married to as 'mine'. She is a human whom I've chosen to give of myself and my love to. If there is healthy synergy, she feels the same way and we proceed. If not, not. If change occurs, it does. If that change includes one or both of us betraying our pledge of interdependence, then either or both of us own the responsibility for those actions. Infidelity is one breach of that pledge. I 'own' that.

[silktricks]

I think these thoughts are worthwhile, especially for someone contemplating M.

 

I wonder sometimes about the bond that is deeper than any verbal promise, the bond of love you see in another's eyes, of knowing they have your back, and you theirs. That you act in union both during sex and as you interface with the world. I think about that bond as the one that must be kept.

 

Now if someone stole from such a bond - but they couldn't, could they?

 

Ahhhhh - but life is fluid. There are ebbs and flows to everything. No couple will always act in union, both during sex and interfacing with the world. Every couple has ups and downs. Good times and bad. The idea that people can consistently have closeness at all times is a really nice idea, but it's not real life.

[OWoman]

Since slavery is outlawed, owning people is a part of our past. We do own things and animals. Human fidelity and partnership is voluntary. The actions and perspective of one's spouse are outside of the other's control. Control is the essence of ownership and, without it, there is no possibility of 'owning' someone. A classic example of a person attempting to 'own' another is the use of fear, violence and/or psychological manipulation to try to control the other, with the emphasis on 'try'.

 

Agree. When my H tells me he is mine, and only mine, I value the gesture, but I do not consider that I own him. He is free to withdraw his love, his loyalty, his fidelity and his commitment at any stage. He gives it voluntarily, and I receive it with thankfulness and reciprocity - but it is his to give, not mine to take.

[donnamaybe]

Agree. When my H tells me he is mine, and only mine, I value the gesture, but I do not consider that I own him. He is free to withdraw his love, his loyalty, his fidelity and his commitment at any stage. He gives it voluntarily, and I receive it with thankfulness and reciprocity - but it is his to give, not mine to take.

And providing a partner doesn't keep it a secret that they've withdrawn from the R, it's all good.

[silktricks]

and providing a partner doesn't keep it a secret that they've withdrawn from the r, it's all good.

 

tis true

[Summer Breeze]

Why were your responses in bold? I don't recall speaking directly to you or your situation.

 

Maybe you shouldn't take the opinions of others so personally?

 

Youch. Ok so I should have said comments and not responses. I didn't take it personally, I responded to what I read. This is a forum isn't it? Public and all that.

[silktricks]

Most do because the MP has made promises that lead to that conclusion. Again if the WS did not make the decision to go outside the M it would be moot. .

 

Yup it would.

 

I've got to say that I've found the responses here interesting.

 

As I said in the beginning, in my marriage I do think of us as "owning" each other. But as OWoman said, I certainly wouldn't be interested in him being there if he didn't WANT to be there. So I obviously don't think of it as ownership in the sense that slavery was ownership . And if he thought he could sell me off he'd be in for a big surprise !!

 

I guess that in reality the implied "ownership" of the marriage vows (for me at least) are the care taking part of "have and hold". When I have something I take care of it, treat it well and expect to keep it for as long as possible.

 

Whoops, gotta run. I'll think further on this and see if there's anything else I want to add...

[fooled once]

I've often read here on LS that spouses do not "own" each other, and many seem to use this argument as a fundamental reason why an affair is not really wrong. The argument is mostly used when a BS compares the OW/OM to a thief.

 

I guess I'll never really understand that thought process, as when I said my vows, they included the words "to have and hold". The phrase to me does imply a type of joint ownership, me of him and him of me.

 

I understand and agree that this is not ownership in the sense of purchase, as in the past when a prospective groom had to pay the parents for the girls hand in marriage (or in some countries, vice versa), but it is, to my mind nonetheless an ownership of sorts.

 

He is my husband, and I am his wife. I'm not no one's wife. I am his. Possessive personal pronoun. We together formed a union and agreed to belong to each other. So, he owns me, and I him. If another man should make advances towards me he would be encroaching on my husband's territory. Of course, it is my job to make it clear that the advance is out of bounds...

 

I know the argument is that we are fully knowledgeable adult people able to come or go as we will, therefore the third party is neither a thief nor an enabler, but simply someone in love. I do (I guess) sort of understand the thought process, but to my mind it leaves out of the equation all of the promises that were made. I do think that the third person in the triad takes on a position of thief, and when/if the affair is discovered need to understand why the BS may view them in that light.

 

Thoughts?

 

Silk, I own him and he owns me I have no problems with that.

 

I think some use the whole "you don't own him" when they have no other reason or excuse that makes sense. It is usually said by OW / mistress when they try to demean a wife or excuse their decision to sleep with a MM.

 

Its a shame how so many OW/mistresses will willingly lie down with a MM and play the affair game for so long. I know if I saw someone "steal" something, I would let the owner know; but rarely do you see a OW/mistress do this prior to the affair or during the affair, except to get the MM to choose them. Some decide after the affair to spill the truth, but usually that is done to get revenge on the MM or to take a swipe at the wife. Pretty sad

 

But, I am happily owned and so is my H

[fooled once]

I honestly don't veiw AP as thieves. I view them as interlopers, squaters even.

 

We didn't marry for money(neither of us had a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of), we didn't marry for status (his family was poor, mine po) and we didn't marry as a business arrangement. We married because I believed we were in love(not ownership). The right to own my own decisions were removed from me...hell she could have had him washed and delivered if he had been honest. Then I could have found someone who knew what commitment meant.

 

Great post Bent!!! Should have read the whole thread before responding because you nailed my thoughts with the above first paragraph.

 

Your second paragraph made me spit my ice tea out :laugh::laugh:

[fooled once]

...the affair partner is NOT innocent, simply because they didn't "make vows to the betrayed spouse." That's a ridiculous argument and you see it said all the time by OW.

 

Sorry to say, but anytime you engage in any activity that you KNOW will be devastating for another human being, you're doing wrong. Morally and ethically, you're in the wrong. Affair partners would love to believe they have 'clean hands' when it comes to affairs, but their hands are NOT clean. Not by a long shot. And just because they don't KNOW the betrayed spouse personally doesn't make them even MORE innocent, as they'd like to believe.

 

Jesus, does ANYONE ever own their shi*t anymore?

 

 

Great post WiB! Great great post!

[wheelwright]

Ahhhhh - but life is fluid. There are ebbs and flows to everything. No couple will always act in union, both during sex and interfacing with the world. Every couple has ups and downs. Good times and bad. The idea that people can consistently have closeness at all times is a really nice idea, but it's not real life.

 

Yes, but the covenant which I am talking about demands that they do so enough, or have done so enough to forgive an awol thing.

 

We all know there are downs in certain Rs which are dead horse material. These can be events or erosion or just sheer not moving or growing up.

 

I find you easy to talk to STs and I am in a fluid state myself.

 

I found in my M, first the lies, then the not having my back, then realising the long expressed disdain that was part of my H's ego problems.

 

So then I had an A. Well actually, I fell in love first.

 

I understand ebbs and flows, but a M cannot cope with one deal breaker after another.

 

And I didn't know how to cope with this.

 

And I'm not sure, despite the pain, that it was the wrong way. Perhaps it was the only way I knew how.

 

Crikey I'm a sorry soul tonight. I'm listening to Nina Simone as I write - Please don't let me be misunderstood.

[wheelwright]

Originally Posted by Woman In Blue

...the affair partner is NOT innocent, simply because they didn't "make vows to the betrayed spouse." That's a ridiculous argument and you see it said all the time by OW.

 

Sorry to say, but anytime you engage in any activity that you KNOW will be devastating for another human being, you're doing wrong. Morally and ethically, you're in the wrong. Affair partners would love to believe they have 'clean hands' when it comes to affairs, but their hands are NOT clean. Not by a long shot. And just because they don't KNOW the betrayed spouse personally doesn't make them even MORE innocent, as they'd like to believe.

 

Jesus, does ANYONE ever own their shi*t anymore?

 

Originally Posted by Woman In Blue

...the affair partner is NOT innocent, simply because they didn't "make vows to the betrayed spouse." That's a ridiculous argument and you see it said all the time by OW.

 

Sorry to say, but anytime you engage in any activity that you KNOW will be devastating for another human being, you're doing wrong. Morally and ethically, you're in the wrong. Affair partners would love to believe they have 'clean hands' when it comes to affairs, but their hands are NOT clean. Not by a long shot. And just because they don't KNOW the betrayed spouse personally doesn't make them even MORE innocent, as they'd like to believe.

 

Jesus, does ANYONE ever own their shi*t anymore?

 

 

I wonder if we have lost our way.

 

For sure to argue about who loves who instead of just saying 'let's love' seems somewhat remiss.

 

I think people should follow their hearts. More than they tend to.

 

I think someone who learns to love another to doubt themself is sad.

 

I don't like jealousy or ownership.

 

Jealousy is only bitterness, and ownership is not in my remit of love.

 

Follow your heart is not that bad an advice

[wheelwright]

Oh, and I wanted to say -

 

We all do it all the time. Hurt others. The child labourers, the homeless we walk past. Every time you eat a piece of chocolate or have a cup of coffee.

 

I don't have as much time for this argument as I used to.

 

The small person hurting behind your desire is capitaslism anyway.

 

I am reminded again of my best friend's joke. The mouse mounted the elephant. The mouse was angry, and decided to rape the elephant. The big grey creature felt something:

 

'What's that tickle?'

 

The mouse said, 'Suffer bitc*'.

[eleanorrigby]

Yes, I see marriage as a partnership. Joint ownership. It is not the same as owning a thing. One partner is not free to give away their body or their mind to another. They are not free to act singly. They have a partnership.

 

You have it right. There will be folks who want to argue this. Haters.

 

My wife and I indeed do have joint ownership for one another. I don;t really care whether other folks have a problem with this. They have their own issues. Life has gotten way too PC I guess. Folks just can't deal with two folks joinging together too tightly for their tastes. I am my wife's husband. She is my wife. Period.

 

*clicks invisible Like button*

[mzdolphin]

I don't see OW as "husband stealers," or "interlopers," or any of those things. First and foremost, the spouse who seeks out an affair partner is 100% at fault. It's the spouse that ALLOWS someone else to be an interloper in their marriage.

 

HOWEVER, the affair partner is NOT innocent, simply because they didn't "make vows to the betrayed spouse." That's a ridiculous argument and you see it said all the time by OW.

 

Sorry to say, but anytime you engage in any activity that you KNOW will be devastating for another human being, you're doing wrong. Morally and ethically, you're in the wrong. Affair partners would love to believe they have 'clean hands' when it comes to affairs, but their hands are NOT clean. Not by a long shot. And just because they don't KNOW the betrayed spouse personally doesn't make them even MORE innocent, as they'd like to believe.

 

Jesus, does ANYONE ever own their shi*t anymore?

 

Depends. If the AP didn't know the guy was married, them yes they have clean hands. I've been there. Yes, some guys do lie about their marital status. Also it depends on what your vows were. Not everyone uses the "to have and to hold". I do believe that the AP, if aware that the spouse is still married, even if it's just legally (meaning the person lives separate from the spouse) must take responsibility for the fallout that is sure to happen. But the WS is the person most at fault. They are breaking the marriage vows. They are breaking the contract. If you had a contract with a company to provide you with new sofas and you would pay it back. Let's say you give one to a friend. If you default on the payment, it's YOUR CREDIT, YOUR LEGAL woes. The company would try to get the sofa from the friend, but only you are responsible because YOU entered the contract.

[silktricks]

Yes, but the covenant which I am talking about demands that they do so enough, or have done so enough to forgive an awol thing.

 

We all know there are downs in certain Rs which are dead horse material. These can be events or erosion or just sheer not moving or growing up.

 

I find you easy to talk to STs and I am in a fluid state myself.

 

I found in my M, first the lies, then the not having my back, then realising the long expressed disdain that was part of my H's ego problems.

 

So then I had an A. Well actually, I fell in love first.

 

I understand ebbs and flows, but a M cannot cope with one deal breaker after another.

 

And I didn't know how to cope with this.

 

And I'm not sure, despite the pain, that it was the wrong way. Perhaps it was the only way I knew how.

 

Crikey I'm a sorry soul tonight. I'm listening to Nina Simone as I write - Please don't let me be misunderstood.

Some marriages simply should not continue. Just because people said vows together does not (in my mind) mean they must spend the rest of their life together - especially if one person is in misery. The person who is in misery (that would be you in this case) should be able to step out of the marriage with their honor intact instead of cheat their way out. But what should happen and what we are actually capable of doing are often not the same thing .

 

You, for some reason were simply not able to tell your husband what was happening to you. Neither I nor my husband were able to do so - at least not in a manner the other partner could take in. A lot of times people talk about what should happen, as if it's the only way. I'm certain I've done the same thing. The thing is that sometimes people just cannot step outside of themselves enough to see what IS happening. Sometimes we can't bust loose of our own bindings without blowing up the entire ship - I get that - I just don't like it .

 

Nonetheless, I have an issue with OW/OM who say they have no fault in an affair because they didn't make the vows, or they were invited, or whatever. I have an issue, frankly, with the idea that everything is all right to do if it is done for love. No, it's not.

 

 

I wonder if we have lost our way.

 

For sure to argue about who loves who instead of just saying 'let's love' seems somewhat remiss.

 

I think people should follow their hearts. More than they tend to.

 

I think someone who learns to love another to doubt themself is sad.

 

I don't like jealousy or ownership.

 

Jealousy is only bitterness, and ownership is not in my remit of love.

 

Follow your heart is not that bad an advice

 

 

And in some circumstances, the advice to "follow your heart" can be VERY bad. It's important to know what your heart wants, but if you only follow your heart and never listen to your head it can take you down some very strange and hurtful paths. Balance is important. If you only follow your head you'll not find yourself in healthy situations, but neither will you if you follow only your heart.

Edited June 29, 2011 by silktricks