Involved in the marriage?

[Summer Breeze]

No disrespect taken. I couldn't disagree with you more. The BS is ALWAYS relevant in an affair, otherwise it wouldn't be an affair, would it?

 

No. At least it wasn't the case in mine and believe me it's not to say mine is the same as all. I never called our R an A until I came onto forums like this. It was easier to go with the local lingo so that's when I started calling it an A. She wasn't relevent to me. She was to him. I had an R with him and he had Rs with both of us but they didn't overlap. As I said, the only day it was relevent was the last day when I told him it was over. He never had said he was going to leave and I knew he wouldn't. That was about the only day it caused her to be relevent to me. I left him because he didn't leave her. Before that she wasn't any part of our R. I won't belabor the point because I can't say it any other way and we do have differing opinions that will never meet. I speak of mine from the inside of the R though so it is the truth from my experience and perspective.

[Decorative]

No. At least it wasn't the case in mine and believe me it's not to say mine is the same as all. I never called our R an A until I came onto forums like this. It was easier to go with the local lingo so that's when I started calling it an A. She wasn't relevent to me. She was to him. I had an R with him and he had Rs with both of us but they didn't overlap. As I said, the only day it was relevent was the last day when I told him it was over. He never had said he was going to leave and I knew he wouldn't. That was about the only day it caused her to be relevent to me. I left him because he didn't leave her. Before that she wasn't any part of our R. I won't belabor the point because I can't say it any other way and we do have differing opinions that will never meet. I speak of mine from the inside of the R though so it is the truth from my experience and perspective.

 

I wish you could step outside of your space for a second and read what you wrote with new eyes.

 

Gently- she was very much a part of your relationship. Her existence is what ended it. You said you left him because he would not leave her. She had weight and depth in your relationship, and I am not sure i understand the point of denying that.

[Summer Breeze]

I wish you could step outside of your space for a second and read what you wrote with new eyes.

 

Gently- she was very much a part of your relationship. Her existence is what ended it. You said you left him because he would not leave her. She had weight and depth in your relationship, and I am not sure i understand the point of denying that.

 

And you're so right. On the last day she did. I said that in one post or another. When I wanted more and he chose not to leave then she was absolutely relevent but before that she wasn't part of it. I agree totally that when what I wanted from our R changed and it revolved around something that wouldn't be because of their M then she was totally relevent. Up to that day she hadn't been relevent to me. To him yes but to me no. I'm not saying that as any dis to her. I haven't ever said a bad word about her at any point in our R. I didn't compete with her and I didn't hate her. I'm not saying it to be cruel to or about her. She simply had no bearing on our R till I wanted more and then she did. I'm not denying anything, I'm trying to explain how it was.

[Furious]

It astounds me how an OW can say that the betrayed spouse was irrelevant without an ounce of empathy. It seems so cold, and smacks of bitterness.

 

Just the fact that many OW insist that they were not involved in the marriage, they seem to have a very pronounced distaste for the wife of their MM, and that relegating them as irrelevant is a passive aggressive jab the wife who stood in the way if their MM.

 

And to say that the only time the wife became relevant is when the MM would not leave the marriage, just boggles the mind.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Furious

[Summer Breeze]

It astounds me how an OW can say that the betrayed spouse was irrelevant without an ounce of empathy. It seems so cold, and smacks of bitterness.

 

Just the fact that many OW insist that they were not involved in the marriage, they seem to have a very pronounced distaste for the wife of their MM, and that relegating them as irrelevant is a passive aggressive jab the wife who stood in the way if their MM.

 

And to say that the only time the wife became relevant is when the MM would not leave the marriage, just boggles the mind.

 

No bitterness at all and as I said it wasn't meant to be cold. It just was that way. I didn't have any distaste for his W. In all honesty she was rarely spoken about. We had an R and it didn't involve her. It's not any sort of jab at her at all and he said from the start he wouldn't leave. It was his choice not hers. Why would I put any blame or bad feelings towards her?

 

I'm sorry it boggles your mind but it was how it was. I'm not writing this as some sort of jab or insult to his W. In posts over the last couple of years I haven't taken jabs at her so why would I now? I'm not saying it to insult his W I'm simply saying it because that is how it was. If you think you know better about what went on in the R I had with him then more power to you. You weren't in the R with us so I question how you can be so sure of all of my underlying feelings and thoughts. Go for it though.

[Furious]

No bitterness at all and as I said it wasn't meant to be cold. It just was that way. I didn't have any distaste for his W. In all honesty she was rarely spoken about. We had an R and it didn't involve her. It's not any sort of jab at her at all and he said from the start he wouldn't leave. It was his choice not hers. Why would I put any blame or bad feelings towards her?

 

I'm sorry it boggles your mind but it was how it was. I'm not writing this as some sort of jab or insult to his W. In posts over the last couple of years I haven't taken jabs at her so why would I now? I'm not saying it to insult his W I'm simply saying it because that is how it was. If you think you know better about what went on in the R I had with him then more power to you. You weren't in the R with us so I question how you can be so sure of all of my underlying feelings and thoughts. Go for it though.

 

 

 

 

Except for the last part of my previous post, it was written in general as relating to what many OW have said about the irrelevance of the betrayed spouse and I should have clarified this.

 

It just struck as mind boggling that you would say the betrayed spouse only became relevant when you broke off with MM when he wouldn't leave her for you. Are you implying that if you were happy to be the OW indefinitely and not wanted something more permanent with your MM would the betrayed spouse remain irrelevant?

[Summer Breeze]

Except for the last part of my previous post, it was written in general as relating to what many OW have said about the irrelevance of the betrayed spouse and I should have clarified this.

 

It just struck as mind boggling that you would say the betrayed spouse only became relevant when you broke off with MM when he wouldn't leave her for you. Are you implying that if you were happy to be the OW indefinitely and not wanted something more permanent with your MM would the betrayed spouse remain irrelevant?

 

I'm sorry about that. I thought it was all in response to me.

 

I was happy to have the R with him till I wasn't. When I wasn't I told him I was done and wished him luck. We both knew that day would come and it did. I wouldn't have stayed in the R indefinitely no. When I wanted more I asked for it. He stayed, which he said from the start he would do, and I ended it. From the day I wanted more and couldn't have it she was relevent. If I had stayed she would have absolutely remained relevent. I can't answer for others but that is absolutely how I felt.

[Got it]

Sorry but the BS was not a defining force in our relationship. The marriage was there but it was more of a nuisance than anything else, something that had to be accommodated at times.

 

For me, saying that his ex wife was not relevant, mean that there was little focus on her. I am sorry if that feels cruel. There wasn't energies put in that direction, either positive or negative. I do not think as a person she is irrelevant or exist, far from it. But her stance in the middle of our relationship.

 

I had no negative feelings towards her. I didn't know her. So I had little opinion. So no bitterness. Nor was there any distastefulness. I am not sure how to convey to get the point across, it is just a neutral non existence. You are aware that there is someone else but unless the perimeters are so constricting it isn't like it is in your face all/most of the time.

 

Ever affair is different but not all have a "sneaking" around component. There wasn't secret email accounts, times I couldn't call, restriction on time to see each other, etc. The only piece was not being involved in all areas of his life.

 

I didn't hate her, I didn't like her, I didn't know her. Like many others who are in my family and friends lives or even SO of friends that I don't frequent with, they are there on the perimeter but they are not forefront. But that doesn't mean that there are negative feelings towards them. She didn't represent, either for me, why he was there, why he was leaving or didn't leave or why he had tacos that night.

 

Even now, while she is the ex wife and mother of his kids, she has those roles but it isn't that she is forefront in our relationship. She is an indirect entity but not one that represents much emotion at least on my end. She factors in at times, and since she is the mother of his kids, I advise towards the positive end with her whether that means more money, assistance, support, etc. But again it is really no different than when it was the affair or now.

[Summer Breeze]

Sorry but the BS was not a defining force in our relationship. The marriage was there but it was more of a nuisance than anything else, something that had to be accommodated at times.

 

For me, saying that his ex wife was not relevant, mean that there was little focus on her. I am sorry if that feels cruel. There wasn't energies put in that direction, either positive or negative. I do not think as a person she is irrelevant or exist, far from it. But her stance in the middle of our relationship.

 

I had no negative feelings towards her. I didn't know her. So I had little opinion. So no bitterness. Nor was there any distastefulness. I am not sure how to convey to get the point across, it is just a neutral non existence. You are aware that there is someone else but unless the perimeters are so constricting it isn't like it is in your face all/most of the time.

 

Ever affair is different but not all have a "sneaking" around component. There wasn't secret email accounts, times I couldn't call, restriction on time to see each other, etc. The only piece was not being involved in all areas of his life.

 

I didn't hate her, I didn't like her, I didn't know her. Like many others who are in my family and friends lives or even SO of friends that I don't frequent with, they are there on the perimeter but they are not forefront. But that doesn't mean that there are negative feelings towards them. She didn't represent, either for me, why he was there, why he was leaving or didn't leave or why he had tacos that night.

 

Even now, while she is the ex wife and mother of his kids, she has those roles but it isn't that she is forefront in our relationship. She is an indirect entity but not one that represents much emotion at least on my end. She factors in at times, and since she is the mother of his kids, I advise towards the positive end with her whether that means more money, assistance, support, etc. But again it is really no different than when it was the affair or now.

 

I think the bolded is key. I didn't sneak around and I did get to know his relatives. We had a full R. I think if I'd felt hidden or that the R was lacking at all it may well have been different. But we had a strong R till the end and I actually ended it when it was at its strongest. She was fully relevent in his life from the start but she wasn't in mine, or ours together. It's not said to be horrible, it's just how it was.

[Furious]

I'm sorry about that. I thought it was all in response to me.

 

I was happy to have the R with him till I wasn't. When I wasn't I told him I was done and wished him luck. We both knew that day would come and it did. I wouldn't have stayed in the R indefinitely no. When I wanted more I asked for it. He stayed, which he said from the start he would do, and I ended it. From the day I wanted more and couldn't have it she was relevent. If I had stayed she would have absolutely remained relevent. I can't answer for others but that is absolutely how I felt.

 

Thank you SB

 

 

I think you did the right thing though, by putting the ball in his court. It's too bad that he wasn't honest with his wife. I don't believe that every marriage is meant to last, that people change or won't change. I believe in divorce as the opposed to the option of living a life that is not authentic.

 

I guess what is relevant is that deception is not in any way helpful to either the marriage or to finding the courage to end the marriage.

[Summer Breeze]

Thank you SB

 

 

I think you did the right thing though, by putting the ball in his court. It's too bad that he wasn't honest with his wife. I don't believe that every marriage is meant to last, that people change or won't change. I believe in divorce as the opposed to the option of living a life that is not authentic.

 

I guess what is relevant is that deception is not in any way helpful to either the marriage or to finding the courage to end the marriage.

 

You're right Furious.

 

He's now D from her and we're starting to see each other. We're having some pretty frank discussions now and oddly enough, she's more relevent in my life now than she was before. Now I'm asking questions that had no importance to me when I knew we'd never be together.

[eleanorrigby]

You're right Furious.

 

He's now D from her and we're starting to see each other. We're having some pretty frank discussions now and oddly enough, she's more relevent in my life now than she was before. Now I'm asking questions that had no importance to me when I knew we'd never be together.

 

So I wonder if that is the key to not being quite as involved. That is kind of like the difference I pointed out earlier in the thread. A prostitute, ONS, PSO, Camgirl, or OW that never expects things to progress are not involved in the marriage in the same way that an OW that is hoping/expecting a divorce will occur will get involved and interfere.

 

The OW in my sitch was absolutely involved in my marriage, but she apparently thought he was going to divorce me.

[Summer Breeze]

So I wonder if that is the key to not being quite as involved. That is kind of like the difference I pointed out earlier in the thread. A prostitute, ONS, PSO, Camgirl, or OW that never expects things to progress are not involved in the marriage in the same way that an OW that is hoping/expecting a divorce will occur will get involved and interfere.

 

The OW in my sitch was absolutely involved in my marriage, but she apparently thought he was going to divorce me.

 

I appreciate what you're saying but it's at the point I'm quite happy to do the hard work to try and figure out what we have, if anything. If we're ever going to progress these things have to be gone over to move forward.

 

I have read enough examples to see how some OWs involve themselves in the M. I think a lot of it is invited by the MM promising things to string them along but nonetheless they are actively going after the M. I'm a really competitive person in a lot of ways but I wasn't at all when I was the BS, nor when I was the OW. I bowed out and moved on from both.

[Owl]

Simple couple of questions.

 

1. Would your relationship with the WS have proceeded differently had he/she been single or divorced, instead of married?

 

2. Would the marital relationship be different had he/she not gotten involved in the affair?

 

If the answer is yes to either of these questions...well...not thinking this is a mathmatical problem involving the resolution of spatial differences dependent upon relative velocities and accelerations.

[Summer Breeze]

Simple couple of questions.

 

1. Would your relationship with the WS have proceeded differently had he/she been single or divorced, instead of married?

 

2. Would the marital relationship be different had he/she not gotten involved in the affair?

 

If the answer is yes to either of these questions...well...not thinking this is a mathmatical problem involving the resolution of spatial differences dependent upon relative velocities and accelerations.

 

In my situation

 

1. We probably would have started the R much sooner and without as much thought and getting to know you time. With that in mind we probably would have gone into it without a lot of things out on the table and knowing less about each other.

 

2. I doubt they would have been D but I don't necessarily know if it would have been any better now than it was when we started if we hadn't had the A. Of course one of the 3 of us could have been hit by a bus or a bolt of lightning if things hadn't happened as they did.

 

It's tough to do what ifs but that's my shot at it.

[MsDecember]

For myself as a BS, I can only tell my story. My XH and his OW did impact and interfere in my marriage and my family. She knew he was married as did he and believe me I didn't only have anger towards the OW. However, I wasn't aware of his affair until it was a couple of years in. He traveled a lot for business and after the fact I had a lot of revelations.

 

I most definitely believe in my situation that the OW hurt my marriage beyond repair. She did it without any care or worries of myself and my children. She only knows one side however and I wish she knew my side. She only knows the lies that my XH spewed. I did find an email account that wasn't known to myself, and I read email after email between them. She monopolized his time and demanded it. Guess she didn't think children needed a dad at home. He lied about being out of town, and he is the one who suffers the loss of time with his precious babies now. He can thank himself and His nasty OW for that. She thinks he lived in the basement and that we didn't have sex! LIES, Lies, lies

 

Things I wished she knew:

The kids suffered and missed their dad. I was alone and did EVERYTHING by myself. That absolutely interefered in my marriage. I never saw my husband and when I did he was distant and maybe I was resentful at all the work he left on MY plate. When I found out about the affair, he admitted that it was over and he wanted to be with me. We tried counseling, but that's not effective when he is still in the affair and lying about it. I kicked him out, and he begged me to stay. I know she doesn't know that. He continiued his relationship with The OW, and I separated myself from him. He texted me, emailed me and she doesn't know that. His kids cried for him, and he had zero time for them. He lacked patience and was angry. I'm sure he regretted his decisions, but the impact on the marriage and the family caused by the OW and the XH had done incredibly damage. I am still trying to pick up the pieces and I know my XH and his OW have no idea the pain they put me and my children thru. They don't care either, just as long as they are happy. The only solace I have is I Escaped and the OW doesn't know that she is involved with a serial cheater and UT OH... It's happening to you know.

 

Sorry for the rant, Today is my first post!

[Summer Breeze]

For myself as a BS, I can only tell my story. My XH and his OW did impact and interfere in my marriage and my family. She knew he was married as did he and believe me I didn't only have anger towards the OW. However, I wasn't aware of his affair until it was a couple of years in. He traveled a lot for business and after the fact I had a lot of revelations.

 

I most definitely believe in my situation that the OW hurt my marriage beyond repair. She did it without any care or worries of myself and my children. She only knows one side however and I wish she knew my side. She only knows the lies that my XH spewed. I did find an email account that wasn't known to myself, and I read email after email between them. She monopolized his time and demanded it. Guess she didn't think children needed a dad at home. He lied about being out of town, and he is the one who suffers the loss of time with his precious babies now. He can thank himself and His nasty OW for that. She thinks he lived in the basement and that we didn't have sex! LIES, Lies, lies

 

Things I wished she knew:

The kids suffered and missed their dad. I was alone and did EVERYTHING by myself. That absolutely interefered in my marriage. I never saw my husband and when I did he was distant and maybe I was resentful at all the work he left on MY plate. When I found out about the affair, he admitted that it was over and he wanted to be with me. We tried counseling, but that's not effective when he is still in the affair and lying about it. I kicked him out, and he begged me to stay. I know she doesn't know that. He continiued his relationship with The OW, and I separated myself from him. He texted me, emailed me and she doesn't know that. His kids cried for him, and he had zero time for them. He lacked patience and was angry. I'm sure he regretted his decisions, but the impact on the marriage and the family caused by the OW and the XH had done incredibly damage. I am still trying to pick up the pieces and I know my XH and his OW have no idea the pain they put me and my children thru. They don't care either, just as long as they are happy. The only solace I have is I Escaped and the OW doesn't know that she is involved with a serial cheater and UT OH... It's happening to you know.

 

Sorry for the rant, Today is my first post!

 

Rant away and I'm glad you found this place. I was a BS and though I put the blame right at my WS feet the pain is the same. He changed my life so it was beyond recognition. That was a lot of years ago and my child grew into a beautiful young woman, and I've had a wonderful and full life. When I was in the pain of his betrayal I never would have believed I'd make it out. But I did.

 

You might like to start a thread with your story so people can welcome you without having this thread go OT.

[MissBee]

There is a thread running in the other man/woman section , and one of the points that caught my eye was the idea that an other man/woman shouldn't tell a betrayed spouse about the affair because they shouldn't get involved in the marriage. I find this onset pretty disingenuous, as it's other woman that say this...how on earth can an other woman feel they are not involved in the marriage? Seems sort of hypocritical to me...

 

I know that when my husband way having and affair, it most certainly had an impact on our marriage

 

I think this line of reasoning is incredibly weak and frankly not worth engaging as a serious position...that's really how I feel.

 

I may not always agree with some stances but understand them...this however seems very absurd to me and I have to wonder, is one being facetious or actually dead serious when thinking this.

 

Let me try...

 

Perhaps they are not involved as in not making decisions about the marriage with the two married people, together. However this still doesn't explain how having an A is any "less involved" than admitting to it....

 

I can't try any longer, I gave it a go. It makes no sense. Plain and simple.

[MissBee]

It's ironic that some OW may think they're not involved in the marriage, when it's the marriage that becomes the juggling block for scheduling their time with the MM.

 

The OW is an invisible affect in the marriage, with the advantage of knowing the wife exists and with the benefit that the wife doesn't know of her existence.

If anything it's the wife that's not involved in the affair and the OW is definitely involved in the "marriage"

 

Until D-day, that's when the playing field levels, and all three in the triangle are equally involved.

 

This is a good point!

[MissBee]

I'm not a betrayed wife (not married) but it doesn't take a MENSA member to see how the OW on most message boards always try to claim that their hands are clean and they're innocent of any wrongdoing simply because THEY weren't the ones who made any vows to the BS.

 

What a complete crock of horse sh*it.

 

Do they call their married man any time - day or night - to talk to him when they want? Do they call him on his house phone and ask the wife if they can talk to him because they miss him? Do they show up on his front porch at dinner time to come into the house and have dinner with he and his family? Do they come over with a homemade pumpkin pie and share the Thanksgiving holiday with his family and in-laws? Do they go to his house on Christmas with a gift for him and little gifts for his kids?

 

If the answer to all these questions is "NO," then that means the OW is very much actively aiding her married boyfriend in deceiving his wife, and is therefore just as guilty as HE is in the deception towards her. It's not that hard to deduct that if an OW is doing everything in her power NOT to make her presence known to the BW, then it stands to reason HER deceptive behavior does NOT keep her hands "clean" in the affair.

 

Their delusion is a powerful thing, but they seriously need to own their sh*it.

 

Ditto!

 

I find it a very silly line of reasoning...it's not very sophisticated at all. As you said, it doesn't take a MENSA member to see this.

 

It reminds me of an SNL skit where the man asks "Would you prefer to be a leading scientist in your field or have mad cow disease?" as if this was a real question and choice

 

I read the notion "Is an OW involved in a MM's marriage by being his OW?" to be a no brainer just like that one.

 

If a bar tender continues to serve a consenting, but drunk adult drinks and said adult runs the red light and kills 4 people...that bartender is culpable. Albeit he doesn't know the man personally or any of those people, although this man is an adult who should be able to make his own choices about drinking etc. All the reasons an OW can cite as to why this other person is "free to make their own choice so she is scotch free" would apply even more so to a bar tender whose job it is to just serve drinks and not be "moral police or conscience" police to drunk people...yet he/she would be culpable.

 

So it is not very convincing to me when an OW claims non-involvement in a M when she willfully choosing this role every day, every month, every year and it makes less sense how she can see the act of telling as more of an involvement than the INVOLVEMENT itself. That is the part that especially doesn't make sense...if anything would be considered involvement why simply the ONE TIME ACT of telling?? And not the 4 years prior of sleeping with this person's spouse?

[MissBee]

The OP asked about OW/OM claiming not to have any involvement in the M. I simply put forward that involvement is hands on in the M and I never had experience of my xHs OW doing that or myself doing it. The A obviously impacted but there was never any involvement in the M itself. To me it's a clear difference and if an OW/OM decides to go tell the BS, at any given time, that is involvement. That's why I brought up the difference. To me it's two very different things but I'm sure not everyone will agree with that.

 

What's an example of hands-on involvement?

 

I do recall one OW saying she picked out gifts for the wife and booked trips for the MM and his wife. LOL...I suppose that is as hands-on as it gets.

 

In one of my classes we were discussing the bombing of Hiroshima and the introduction of certain kinds of technology and how that changes how people feel about culpability. We talked about how dropping the bomb for some of these soldiers was not "hands on" as they simply had to press a button. Later, when some of them had to confront these Japanese people face to face, who were disfigured because of the bomb, they started weeping because that is when they realized that while they were thousands of feet in the air, in an airplane and pressed a button...what happened to these people was a DIRECT RESULT of their actions and involvement. Before that, they felt far removed from it and had no real faces to put to it.

 

Perhaps some OW feel this way, which is understandable to an extent. Some soldiers could probably argue that they were just following orders from superiors...while this is true, they still make choices. We all do. An OW cannot control what a MM does...but her choice to be his OW definitely comes at a price and it has an impact on the M. When we choose a certain course of actions, often things we do not intend become part of the choice, so maybe that is also what some are missing. That while you may not choose to actively be "involved with the M", your choice to be in a triangulated affair joins your life with that of a woman you don't know and who doesn't know you, like it or not. Then some OW, like the ones who seem to know down to what sex acts the BS doesn't like, to those who plan trips, take involvement to a very tangible level...but others who do no such thing are also involved.

 

The involvement/impact dichotomy can be misleading...I think the two overlap and aren't clearly distinct.

Edited November 14, 2012 by MissBee

[MissBee]

I think it is just too hard for the BSs to accept that they were irrelevant to the EMR. They didn't matter. Zilch. Nothing. If anything at all, a small nuisance.

 

How come we know so much about Neo's wife then?

 

In fact a part from SB...I can tell you about most other MM's wives based on what their OW come here ans share about these nonentities.

[seren]

I hope with all that I have that during the A I was irrelevant to the EMR. I understand that, in the same way I understand that after D Day the OW and A was totally irrelevant to our marriage. Much the same thing I think.

 

 

Seren, a very kind and thoughtful post as always. But I don't understand the part above which is key to the idea that the BS is irrelevant and, so, there isn't any involvement in the M. I can understand why the OW is irrelevant to your M, because you can and do have exactly what you want, a strong, loving M and it doesn't involve the OW.

 

I will try to explain my reasoning, it might not make sense to most, but maybe it is because of the nature of my H's A. H had PTSD after a number of very nasty incidents during back to back tours in Iraq, he was a very broken man. This manifested in him becoming totally alien to me, I didn't recognise my lovely H in the nasty, self absorbed man he appeared to be during the A. Had the A happened for no other reason than he could or for sex, I was going to say for love, but I would have understand if he had loved (not an A though).

 

Had I been relevant during the A, it would have meant, to me at least, that his actions were calculated, self seeking and with total disregard for me, so not my H in usual circumstances. I understand the OW feeling I was irrelevant, in her world there was her marriage, which was dreadful and the escapism of her relationship with my H. Compartmentalising enables dissasociation, it enables people who would usually be caring people to become very self centred and to dismiss other's feelings or make excuses - it is why BS are often almost demonised IMHO, or the marriage seen as a loveless wasteland with both WS and AP feeding the illusion to justify the hurting of another or others. Not all are like this, but the A I am describing was.

 

That H was so screwed up with self loathing at that time saw him push, push, push me, our child, his family away, he truly was a grade A horror, but I thought it was all down to me (gaslighting, the gift that keeps giving) despite asking why he was so changed. I don't want to have been relevant to the truly sordid nature of the A, I want to have not been in his head at all while they did what they did, there was no love from him, TBH I wonder what the hell she stuck around for. Of course at times I saw glimpses of my H, but in the main he would verbally lash out and it is that, that the A involved itself in my marriage - the trying to provoke a reaction to justify his actions. So, in that respect I can see that the OW enabled this, but the blame sat on H's shoulders.

 

Had there been love, had it been about us then maybe I would think differently, but I don't think so. I do understand OW who view their relationship as separate from the marriage, I may not have that mindset, but I get it. I don't expect my H to love me just because we are married, I expect him to love me because I am so dammed worth it! If he didn't then I would want him to leave. Not sure if I have explained myself very well and have rambled, the OW and the A is irrelevant to us because we don't allow it to have more importance than it has/had, much the same I think as some OW have tried to explain. Maybe if I was a fly on the wall and could see into the dynamics of a romantic A I would feel different and maybe if the tables were turned and a AP could see inside a marriage that still had love, like and togetherness going on they too might understand why the BS is always relevant to the WS, otherwise they wouldn't give a stuff about hurting them or keeping them in the dark. IDK

[ComingInHot]

After reading all the "yes ow is involved" and "no ow isn't"

 

The reasoning for "yes they are" clearly out numbers & more importantly, out Supports the opposing view that comes across (to me) as mere justification & manipulation of a morally & ethically poor decision.

 

Minus the one who literally compartmentalized the entire A to a point where she had zero feelings of empathy or compassion for another as even a human being. (There are times I wish I could be this way as it would definitely allow me to not feel, well.. anything about others as I make decisions to hire & fire in order to grow a stronger company)*

[Summer Breeze]

What's an example of hands-on involvement?

 

I do recall one OW saying she picked out gifts for the wife and booked trips for the MM and his wife. LOL...I suppose that is as hands-on as it gets.

 

In one of my classes we were discussing the bombing of Hiroshima and the introduction of certain kinds of technology and how that changes how people feel about culpability. We talked about how dropping the bomb for some of these soldiers was not "hands on" as they simply had to press a button. Later, when some of them had to confront these Japanese people face to face, who were disfigured because of the bomb, they started weeping because that is when they realized that while they were thousands of feet in the air, in an airplane and pressed a button...what happened to these people was a DIRECT RESULT of their actions and involvement. Before that, they felt far removed from it and had no real faces to put to it.

 

Perhaps some OW feel this way, which is understandable to an extent. Some soldiers could probably argue that they were just following orders from superiors...while this is true, they still make choices. We all do. An OW cannot control what a MM does...but her choice to be his OW definitely comes at a price and it has an impact on the M. When we choose a certain course of actions, often things we do not intend become part of the choice, so maybe that is also what some are missing. That while you may not choose to actively be "involved with the M", your choice to be in a triangulated affair joins your life with that of a woman you don't know and who doesn't know you, like it or not. Then some OW, like the ones who seem to know down to what sex acts the BS doesn't like, to those who plan trips, take involvement to a very tangible level...but others who do no such thing are also involved.

 

The involvement/impact dichotomy can be misleading...I think the two overlap and aren't clearly distinct.

 

I gave some examples in earlier posts but manipulating the MM to purposely change things in the M (one BS posted her H had left the bedroom because of OWs demands), gathering information about the BS from the Ws and using it to manipulate, stalking or seeking the BS out. I see those as clear involvement in the M. I appreciate what you're saying but I disagree. I know the A had an impact but I wasn't involved in the M any more than he was involved in any R I might have been in. Impact yes, involvement no. There were times when he did create overlap but they were due to things he'd done or ways he'd reacted to things.

 

I think I've said everything I can on the subject. As with a million topics we'll never find common ground but that's ok. It's all a learning curve for me.