Who is responsible for the marriage - spouses or society?

[Radagast]

On another thread I saw

 

Is the AP - and any other potential AP - responsible for patrolling the boundaries of the WS's M? Should that not be the responsibility of the MPs?

 

I did not want to derail the thread but thought that posed an interesting question. Some people marry in a church or other religious context and the people present are invited by the presiding marriage officer ("priest", rabbi, whatever) to join in supporting the couple to uphold their vows. Others are married in civil or other ceremonies where the witnesses are simply there to attest that the couple both were present and signed freely.

 

So where do you believe the responsibility to uphold or even police the marriage vows lies, with the couple themselves or with society at large? Whose responsibility is it to prevent a spouse from straying, the spouse themselves, their spouse, or society in general?

[frozensprouts]

hmmm...

 

my answer would depend on what context you mean...

 

on an individual basis, i believe that we have a duty as a human being to not go out of our way to knowing hurt someone else, especially if they have no idea it's going on. Basically, it's the old tenant of treating others the way you would like to be treated yourself. I don't base that on any kind of religious reasoning, as I am agnostic, rather, i just think that avoiding causing hurt to others is a good thing. I also am a big proponent of recognizing that some boundaries are important.

( to those who use the old fallback comparison of " does Johny pass up the promotion because he knows it will hurt bill to not get it" I would have to say the comparison doesn't hold water...one knows there is a level of competition in a job, a marriage is not supposed to men that you are always competing with others)

 

On a societal level, again, i would have to say that society should promote the notion that we don't knowingly hurt others for our own personal gain, and that there are certain boundaries that need to be respected...this does not only apply to marriages, but other areas as well. I really believe that we should treat others with the same dignity and respect that we desire for ourselves.( I think I am a socialist at heart:laugh:)

 

I always find it funny when some people promote the idea of "as long as I am not breaking the law, whatever I do is okay"...these people are often the sames ones who complain the loudest when they feel their "rights" are being trampled on.

 

At some point, don't the feelings of others matter at all?

 

( I know I ma get chided for seeing the world in a very "black and white" way, but you know what? I don' think that is always a bad thing. Maybe somethings are black and white...just my opinion, mind you)

 

Good topic for discussion, BTW...interested to hear what others have to say. Thanks for starting the thread

[woinlove]

I think it depends on how connected to others you feel. As my capacity for love has grown, my feeling of being connected to others has grown. I used to think I didn't owe strangers anything, and had no qualms about getting involved with a MM whose wife I didn't know, whereas I would not if his W was my sister, friend, neighbour (obviously, for some others, these connections don't matter either). I don't think of it as protecting their M, I just think of it as treating others as I would like to be treated and also not encouraging dishonesty in those who I am intimate with. It makes me feel good to behave like this.

 

One sees so much fallout here on LS from affairs, extreme hurt of BS, AP, WS. Often it seems like a roller coaster even for the APs, with some highs of good feelings, but also mixed in with a lot of bad feelings. And some of those highs seem pretty transient, not likely to have enduring positive impact. Compared to what a couple in love can achieve, having babies together, nurturing and raising them together in a loving environment - that is a high that stays with one until death. So, I think, in general, it is a positive choice for oneself to not get involved with MM/MW. In a few cases, they end up together, but still, it would have been better for all concerned if they could have began their R when they were both single and available and no deception was needed. So, even at best, it still has to be a bit bittersweet, even if the positives outweigh the negatives from their perspective.

 

So, ultimately, I would say caring about whether a prospective romantic interest is married, is partly treating others as you want to be treated, but it is also treating yourself well.

Edited May 15, 2012 by woinlove

[frozensprouts]

I think it depends on how connected to others you feel. As my capacity for love has grown, my feeling of being connected to others has grown. I used to think I didn't owe strangers anything, and had no qualms about getting involved with a MM whose wife I didn't know, whereas I would not if his W was my sister, friend, neighbour (obviously, for some others, these connections don't matter either). I don't think of it as protecting their M, I just think of it as treating others as I would like to be treated and also not encouraging dishonesty in those who I am intimate with. It makes me feel good to behave like this.

 

 

 

but everyone is someone's mother, sister, friend, etc. If one say that their boundary is that they won't hurt someone who "matters" to them, why don't other's who may be hurt not matter?

[woinlove]

but everyone is someone's mother, sister, friend, etc. If one say that their boundary is that they won't hurt someone who "matters" to them, why don't other's who may be hurt not matter?

 

Well as pathetic as it sounds, when I was an OW I really just did not care about strangers, particularly if caring about them interfered with my own desires and wants. Intellectually one knows they are someone's sister, friend, mother, but that intellectual thought didn't do anything for me at the time.

[xxoo]

It is the responsibility of each married individual to be faithful to their promises.

 

An affair partner is not responsible for the marriage, but is responsible for any harm that his or her actions cause--as we all are, married or not.

[carhill]

IMO, the M is an entity created by the partnership of two ostensibly loving people and they are solely responsible for its inception, continuation and maintenance. They are the beneficiaries and trustees and trustors.

[Danie]

Radagast,

 

That is a tired worn out excuse used to justify an OPs actions in being the OP.

 

I’m not an OW and I’m not a WW, I highly doubt I’ll ever be an OW or WW so take my thoughts with the knowledge that my direct experience comes from 1) the values that I learned from my family and 2) being a BW.

 

Of course we are all responsible for our actions. That’s a no-brainer. We should all ‘own our ****’ so to speak. If a MP chooses to engage in an affair- OWN it. If an OP chooses to engage in an affair- OWN it. Don’t hide behind the bull**** excuses to try to make yourself feel better or look better to society. Just stand up and say “YES, I am an OW (or MP). I do what I do because I want to do it.” And whatever else one may want to share about their choices.

 

It’s my thoughts that the MP, the BS, and the OP are responsible for their actions. All are responsible and accountable for their actions. Not one of us lives in a vacuum or a bubble and that means that our actions will and do impact others around us. This to me is a fact. My actions impact those around me. I choose to act in ways to will (hopefully) bring goodness to those around me. Therefore, to my way of thinking being an OP or a MP is not a good thing because I understand the hurt that infidelity causes and I will not be part of that. Religion has nothing to do with my ideas. Basic human decency has everything to do with it.

 

Society is only the way it is because WE all have decided that this is the way it is. It’s not just some people deciding and it’s been decided (over and over again) throughout history. There will always been outcasts from the collective society that do not fit into the accepted picture.

[woinlove]

Radagast,

 

That is a tired worn out excuse used to justify an OPs actions in being the OP.

 

I’m not an OW and I’m not a WW, I highly doubt I’ll ever be an OW or WW so take my thoughts with the knowledge that my direct experience comes from 1) the values that I learned from my family and 2) being a BW.

 

Of course we are all responsible for our actions. That’s a no-brainer. We should all ‘own our ****’ so to speak. If a MP chooses to engage in an affair- OWN it. If an OP chooses to engage in an affair- OWN it. Don’t hide behind the bull**** excuses to try to make yourself feel better or look better to society. Just stand up and say “YES, I am an OW (or MP). I do what I do because I want to do it.” And whatever else one may want to share about their choices.

 

It’s my thoughts that the MP, the BS, and the OP are responsible for their actions. All are responsible and accountable for their actions. Not one of us lives in a vacuum or a bubble and that means that our actions will and do impact others around us. This to me is a fact. My actions impact those around me. I choose to act in ways to will (hopefully) bring goodness to those around me. Therefore, to my way of thinking being an OP or a MP is not a good thing because I understand the hurt that infidelity causes and I will not be part of that. Religion has nothing to do with my ideas. Basic human decency has everything to do with it.

 

Society is only the way it is because WE all have decided that this is the way it is. It’s not just some people deciding and it’s been decided (over and over again) throughout history. There will always been outcasts from the collective society that do not fit into the accepted picture.

 

Good post. RE the bolded, I completely agree. There are people who took this attitude, they saw nothing wrong with As and gave their reasons (e.g. my needs trump everyone else's or whatever). I didn't agree with them, but I knew where they were coming from as I used to feel like that myself as an OW. Then I changed and now I would not choose to treat others that way and I understand my reasons for that too.

 

What is more difficult to understand is people who straddle both sides, on one hand, advocating for or supporting affairs and, on the other hand, appear to need to look like someone who doesn't treat others in that way, needing to make affairs look positive, attributing all the negatives to someone else, often to the BS. Maybe they are in a transitional state, feeling guilt but denying it. I don't know.

 

Everyone should take responsibility for their choices and actions and how they impact on others.

Edited May 15, 2012 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[xxoo]

I'm not religious, but this moral code makes sense to me:

 

An' it harm none, do what ye will.

 

Having an affair with someone in a struggling marriage rarely harms none. In the rare cases where it harms none, I have no problem with it.