blueeyes11 Posted September 9, 2011 Posted September 9, 2011 I completely agree with morningcoffee and would like to add on if I may. An A stops you from expressing emotions that you would in a normal relationship. You are forced to "stuff" them because in many cases the MP will not allow you to go there because they won't - they are not planning to leave. They are happy where they are and only want the A to fill the gaps of what they aren't getting at home. So, you have to hold them in, all of the good bad and ugly feelings, which over time, begins to build up and chip away at the core of who you are. It begins to create bad messages in your head that play over and over that you are sacrificing your own needs and wants to be in the relationship. You feel slighted or cheated in a sense. Over time, as morning coffee said, you begin to feel like you're lowering your standards and eventually, it makes you feel like your not worthy or good enough. Emotions are normal and need to be expressed, that's the law of nature. What goes in must come out to stay healthy and balanced. If you can't express your emotions, they start creating their form of expression (usually negative) and it chips away at your self esteem. I am beginning to realize also, that holding in emotions during an A, is the biggest contributor to the fog we experience. The fog is emotions not expressed. It can make you depressed too...severly depressed! That was me in a nutshell. I cannot believe the things I put up with that I would not have had I been in a "normal" relationship.
SoMovinOn Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 There are many other ways to present this... Nice post. I reminds me of politicians or some other group sitting around debating all the different ways to spin something. One can always take factual information and change it around by slanting it in one direction or another. One thing that I see here that bugs me is how a few people seem to try very hard to weave their negative attitudes into as many posts and threads as possible, even when it is completely irrelevant. There is a recent new thread here in which the very first paragraph of the very first response is along the lines of "This doesn't apply to you or you situation, but thank god you're not..." How is something like that supportive in any way?
White Flower Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Interesting how it's deemed "silly" the moment the accusation is extended beyond the "outcasts". Interesting how this is characterised as "support" but this is characterised as "hero-worship" (which I've never seen) and this is characterised as "looking down smugly" (which I've never seen). It could equally be characterised as "the betrayed can continue to provide conditional support to the disappointed. The hopeful can continue to hope for a favourable outcome, in defiance of the conditional support offered only to the disappointed by the betrayed. And those currently with their (f)MPs can continue to provide role encouragement to the hopeful and support to the disappointed". (Betrayed being used to mean betrayed spouses or fOPs who felt betrayed by not being chosen by their fMPs) Or "the disappointed in their outcome can poison the minds of the hopeful. The hopeful can claim disappointment in order to elicit support from the disappointed, and can receive less conditional support from others via PM. Those currently with their (f)MPs can continue to provide a reminder of the possibility of positive outcomes to the hopeful and a reminder of the future they were denied to the disappointed". There are many other ways to present this that don't speak so blatantly to the hostility some disappointed posters feel towards those whose situations worked out for them.Thank you, especially for the last paragraph.
donnamaybe Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 I believe it is up to the mods to decide who is dispensing "poison."
Silly_Girl Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 I believe it is up to the mods to decide who is dispensing "poison." Only if those on the receiving end are indignant enough - or so inclined - to report it. Love your post, Kilmeny!
SoMovinOn Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 I believe it is up to the mods to decide who is dispensing "poison." I believe that would be a huge task for anyone. The forum members can be a huge help by reporting posts that are out of line. The forum members can be an even bigger help by stopping and thinking before they post - asking themselves if they are adding something helpful, useful or productive. That doesn't mean the points need be in agreement with the OP, or to whomever the response is addressed, only that they provide something more than name calling, derogatory comments, intentionally inflammatory questions, or points which are completely irrelevant to the thread. There is no reason one cannot make a point or counterpoint while maintaining a degree of respect.
donnamaybe Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Only if those on the receiving end are indignant enough - or so inclined - to report it. Yeah. I'm sure you don't ever do that.
Silly_Girl Posted September 10, 2011 Posted September 10, 2011 Yeah. I'm sure you don't ever do that. Not sure why you're laughing. It is rare I report. And rarer still that it's someone having a pop at me.
NoIDidn't Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Interesting how it's deemed "silly" the moment the accusation is extended beyond the "outcasts". Interesting how this is characterised as "support" but this is characterised as "hero-worship" (which I've never seen) and this is characterised as "looking down smugly" (which I've never seen). It could equally be characterised as "the betrayed can continue to provide conditional support to the disappointed. The hopeful can continue to hope for a favourable outcome, in defiance of the conditional support offered only to the disappointed by the betrayed. And those currently with their (f)MPs can continue to provide role encouragement to the hopeful and support to the disappointed". (Betrayed being used to mean betrayed spouses or fOPs who felt betrayed by not being chosen by their fMPs) Or "the disappointed in their outcome can poison the minds of the hopeful. The hopeful can claim disappointment in order to elicit support from the disappointed, and can receive less conditional support from others via PM. Those currently with their (f)MPs can continue to provide a reminder of the possibility of positive outcomes to the hopeful and a reminder of the future they were denied to the disappointed". There are many other ways to present this that don't speak so blatantly to the hostility some disappointed posters feel towards those whose situations worked out for them. I take it you disagree with me. It happens. I'll live. I've seen the "possibility of positive outcomes" for the hopeful hovering around a 3 - 10% chance of happening. But I guess pointing that out is "poison".
SidLyon Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 This thread. Sorry I'm not American. Can someone enlighten me please. Are these men who have been robbed of their self esteem from being in affairs?
NoIDidn't Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Sorry I'm not American. Can someone enlighten me please. Are these men who have been robbed of their self esteem from being in affairs? Its a picture of President Obama and Vice President Biden "shaking their heads". LOL
SidLyon Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Its a picture of President Obama and Vice President Biden "shaking their heads". LOL LOL indeed. I confess I was fairly sure that was Mr Obama but had no idea who the other guy was or their relevance to this thread. Do you know why they were shaking their heads? Does SU know something that we don't?
donnamaybe Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 LOL indeed. I confess I was fairly sure that was Mr Obama but had no idea who the other guy was or their relevance to this thread. Do you know why they were shaking their heads? Does SU know something that we don't? I think it's a case of severe unamusement.
Severely Unamused Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Sorry I'm not American. What a coincidence! Neither am I. I think it's a case of severe unamusement. That's it.
LifesontheUp Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 And there are even some who are honest enough to post about how their new R with their fAP is all they'd hoped for, and more! But they don't get the ra-ra responses from those whose As didn't work out the way they'd hoped, perhaps because the possiblity that it can, and does, sometimes work out well for the APs together threatens the fragility of their revisionist worldview? Though I'm sure that those fAPs for whom everything worked out well have enough real life happiness not to need the cheerleading of the disappointed to help them get through the day. Gosh you write like one of the regulars around here. So come on, be honest, whats your other screen name?
MissBee Posted September 11, 2011 Posted September 11, 2011 Gosh you write like one of the regulars around here. So come on, be honest, whats your other screen name? It's interesting. I have been on several forums and have witnessed people attempting to be in cognito, but one's posting style is so natural, that it is very difficult to completely take on a different written tone with a screen name change. Most don't have that much time (or insanity) on their hands to concoct a whole new persona and "voice" so what you get is a different name but the same energy, writing style, opinions being espoused. Lots of people here share similar views and even IRL people I know remind me of others, but they are still very distinct and no two people have the same writing voice. I think one's writing voice is like an intellectual fingerprint that is very hard for someone else to coincidentally duplicate.
White Flower Posted September 13, 2011 Posted September 13, 2011 ...and I would say that's sadly a perfect example of a low self esteem. Why is this woman allowed to judge whether I have low self-esteem. I would say it's at an all time high! Would you please delete this? Thanks.
Recommended Posts