mortensorchid Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 I am in the middle of reading the latest Tess Gerrison book, some of you may have read her as well. THis is part of the Jane Rizzoli and Maura Isles saga, a crime fighting team (Rizzoli is a policewoman, Maura is a medical examiner). These are fictional characters, I would like to point out, but Isles has been involved in a a situation which I find shocking to say the least. For the past few books, Maura has been having an affair with a priest. *SPOILER ALERT FOR THOSE WHO ARE ALSO READING THESE BOOKS* THe affair in this latest book is now over, but I have not gotten to the part where we find out what did/didn't go down between the two of them. It just made me wonder what kind of a woman would have an affair with a priest? This goes along with women who have affairs with other unavailable men (married, for example). Some people have said that it's morally wrong to do so, going into said situation fully knowning that the person is married or unavailable (as you would have to agree a priest is). It is another thing if one party was lied to, believing that the man / woman was single or available. And yet others have said the reason such things go down is because the world is full of lonely people and we have to take our happiness where we can get it. Maybe the world is full of lonely people. What do others think on this? I was only curious.
january2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 I think that there's a certain attraction to men in uniform as well as unavailable men. And I do see a lot of people trying to justify their 'right to happiness' on the fora, especially in the cheating and OW/OM threads. I believe that everyone has a 'right to be happy' but I don't think that it's justified when it tramples over other people's happiness and/or moral and legal boundaries. Though I'm willing to concede that there are exceptions and it's problematic to generalise. 1
Feelsgoodman Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 In a similar vein, I was watching an action movie from the 80's...you may have heard of it, it's called The Terminator. In that movie, the female protagonist, Sarah Connor, had an affair with a man named Kyle Reese, a time traveller from the future who also happened to be a virgin. As a result of their unholy union, a bastard child was born who would forever change the course of human history. Incidentally, this made Kyle Reese the only man ever to lose his virginity before he was even born. Do you guys think it was ethical for Sarah Connor to have an affair with a time travelling virgin from the future?
Ruby Slippers Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 And yet others have said the reason such things go down is because the world is full of lonely people and we have to take our happiness where we can get it. Maybe the world is full of lonely people. What do others think on this? I was only curious. I think it's this for a lot of people. I've met some guys over the past couple of years who told me they have NO problem sleeping with women with husbands or boyfriends. Their justification was that if the man wasn't meeting the woman's needs, it was her business to look elsewhere, and they were happy to provide. I asked each one of them if they were doing this because they doubted they had what it takes to be a good partner to a woman on all levels, and almost all of them admitted I had a point there. I can also see how a woman who hasn't had the best luck with men would get bitter and decide to start something with a guy with a wife or girlfriend. A woman like this feels screwed over by the world, so what's one more person getting screwed over (the wife/girlfriend)? When people get pushed far enough, they get desperate, and for most, morals fly out the window.
somedude81 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 A lot of men will take sex whenever they can get it. It doesn't matter if the woman is taken or not. But sex isn't exactly hard to get for a woman, so I simply can't see the appeal of an unavailable man.
january2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 But sex isn't exactly hard to get for a woman, so I simply can't see the appeal of an unavailable man. Some women have no impulse control (there I go using that phrase again) and like the extra challenge of an unavailable man - they don't want any man, a taken man is much more of a prize to satisfy their ego and need to feel that they have power over someone.
Ruby Slippers Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Some women have no impulse control (there I go using that phrase again) and like the extra challenge of an unavailable man - they don't want any man, a taken man is much more of a prize to satisfy their ego and need to feel that they have power over someone. Also, married men are the ones who pass women's muster - and they are often the most desiring of outside female attention. I have single and married male clients who are high rollers - and there is often this strong sexual tension with the married men. They seem especially susceptible to the attention of another woman. And unfortunately, a lot of them seem to have nagging wives who can never be satisfied, so that makes easy-going single ladies like me look all the more appealing. In some animal species, the single dominant male mates with ALL the females.
january2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Also, married men are the ones who pass women's muster - and they are often the most desiring of outside female attention. I think I read somewhere the reasoning is that married men have already been 'vetted' by another female (wife) and their evolutionary superiority has already been 'proven', particularly if they've got kids. Some male friends told me that they had more approaches when they wore their wedding ring compared to when they weren't wearing it.
somedude81 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Also, married men are the ones who pass women's muster - and they are often the most desiring of outside female attention. I have single and married male clients who are high rollers - and there is often this strong sexual tension with the married men. They seem especially susceptible to the attention of another woman. And unfortunately, a lot of them seem to have nagging wives who can never be satisfied, so that makes easy-going single ladies like me look all the more appealing. In some animal species, the single dominant male mates with ALL the females. I think I read somewhere the reasoning is that married men have already been 'vetted' by another female (wife) and their evolutionary superiority has already been 'proven', particularly if they've got kids. Some male friends told me that they had more approaches when they wore their wedding ring compared to when they weren't wearing it. Anybody want to be my LS wife? Just until other women start to take notice
Jane2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 I’m somewhat in this position now (liking a guy who is taken; I got together with him when he was available, though). Occasionally my mind does wander to the dark side, wherein I think I should prioritize what I want and need over what the right thing to do is. Fortunately, that’s only a minor part of my thinking. Maybe 20% of me thinks that I should go after I want, with the idea that I must “take happiness where I can get it, principles and fair-play be damned,” but 80% of me knows the right thing to do and will adhere to it. It helps that I’ve had a pretty balanced love/relationships/dating life. I’ve enjoyed boyfriends, sex, relationships, etc, plenty; I’ve also had stretches of time where I just had to suck it up and be alone. So I’m no stranger to the latter – and can fill the role without too much depression -- and I’ve always had the comfort of knowing that a happy situation is likely right around the corner if I am just patient. I think people do, however, go for their own happiness no matter what because they are that lonely and desperate. And I say those two adjectives not in a disparaging way. I’ve come to be less judgmental of people even when they do messed up things. One of my friends, for instance, has been in a friends with benefits situation since 2005. It’s an unusual thing because they share a professional bond (they’re lawyers who really respect each other). But she’s been in love with him for nearly seven years, and he will never give in to them being an actual couple, but they have sex with each other, work together, and just live a very integrated life without her ever getting the full thing she wants. I think she’s crazy for staying around, but I don’t tell her what to do. I think she’s just taking happiness where she can get it and being dysfunctional because she feels like being so. Making mistakes and doing stupid things because you have feelings for a person doesn’t make you a bad person. It just makes you human.
Woggle Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Any man will tell you they get more attention from women when they are taken. I don't know what it is but many women have a want what you can't have kind of syndrome. Just look at all the threads on here from women who dumped their husbands and boyfriends only to want them back when they finally move on and find new women. As for me I would rather take a vow of celibacy than ever be with a married woman. How would men feel one day if a man sleeps with their wife or girlfriend?
Jane2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 (edited) I disagree, though, with the blanket notion that women have a thing for taken men. I do think it's true that women will feel like a taken guy "probably has something worthy" because another woman has 'vetted' him already (as january mentioned), but that's different from active interest in him just because he is taken. Amongst my women friends and me, the vast majority (like 95%) of our romantic interests have been single guys. Even my current situation of liking a taken guy (who was and still is in some variation of an open relationship, as it is, meaning he's semi-available depending on where his and his gf's heads are that month) is a huge anomaly. Given that every other guy I've wanted and/or dallied with, whatever, has been purely single, I'd hardly say I have a thing for taken men. Edited April 19, 2012 by Jane2011
Jane2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 Also, I don't have the belief that "there must be something wrong" with a single guy because he's single, nor necessarily that "there must be something right" about an attached guy because a woman likes him. People in general are always moving in and out of relationships. Any given single guy I meet might have been (and often was) in a relationship for a while before I met him. In the same vein, a taken guy likely spent some time single (and just hanging around friends) before he became taken. Being taken or not isn't an indicator, to me, of a person's worthiness.
FitChick Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 With a priest, I think there is the allure of the forbidden and feeling special. I actually met a woman who who married a Catholic priest and they later wrote a book about it. She was very pretty and very sweet. I wonder whatever happened to them and if they are still married.
Ruby Slippers Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 I think I read somewhere the reasoning is that married men have already been 'vetted' by another female (wife) and their evolutionary superiority has already been 'proven', particularly if they've got kids. Some male friends told me that they had more approaches when they wore their wedding ring compared to when they weren't wearing it. I think it works both ways. When I'm out with a guy, I get WAY more attention from other men than when I'm out alone. They just stare! I like it, though, because the guy I'm with always notices, which has a positive effect on how he interacts with me.
january2011 Posted April 19, 2012 Posted April 19, 2012 I think it works both ways. When I'm out with a guy, I get WAY more attention from other men than when I'm out alone. They just stare! I like it, though, because the guy I'm with always notices, which has a positive effect on how he interacts with me. That's interesting, Ruby. My ex used to say something similar when we were together - can't say I gave it much thought though. I think you're right, it does work both ways. I guess that having an opposite-sex wingman or wingwoman would work for some people to create that aura of unavailability and potentially increase the number of approaches.
Recommended Posts