Trashing the house

[Decorative]

Anger I can understand. Expecting someone to be altruistic and give up their love when you yourself are not willing to give up yours is just plain self-centered and selfish to me.

 

Although I did as Spark did- and kicked my spouse out and offered him the chance to go and be with his affair partner, he did not choose that. I did not do it out of altruism. I did it because I was not going to put up with a triangle like that for even a minute longer than I had to.

 

He fought for our marriage instead. He didn't want to go be with the OW when I had full knowledge of the situation. He wanted me.

 

I fail to see, however, how a betrayed spouse who upon finding out her spouse has been having an affair and doesn't roll over or go away quietly immediately is self centered/selfish. I admire a spouse who decides to stay and try and work it out differently than I did. Everyone has their own process and path.

 

I still cannot believe you called it selfish. Good Lord. That's a reach.

[BetrayedH]

I still cannot believe you called it selfish. Good Lord. That's a reach.

 

It's seriously deluded thinking that has gone on for far too long. The denial is so embedded that I'm not sure even consistent therapy would help. Amazing what the mind will do to justify unjustifiable acts. To be honest, I'm at the point where pity is my response. I don't even care to argue.

[96nole]

 

I like my men to have my moral code.

 

And here I was hoping you and Sauron would get together. Haaaa I kid, I kid!!

 

But yes, the delusion and justifying is just unbelievable. It's truly eye opening to the extent of how many disrespectful people there are out there.

 

BetrayedH feels pity. I think I just feel disgust. It's one thing to be the affair partner, but then to be so nasty towards the BS is just disgusting. I'm glad I don't personally know anyone like that.

[Decorative]

Being truly altruistic towards the OW would have been not accepting your husband back. What he wanted should not matter. The OW was going to get hurt and you should have done all in your power to prevent that hurt. That's being altruistic towards the OW. Not letting your husband choose, that's what the OW has been doing all along.

 

 

Hold up . Whatnow ?

 

You actually think it's better for the OW to get a spouse because the spouse has rejected them? And it was my responsibility to talk my spouse into going to her instead, to prevent * her *from getting hurt, even though it wasn't what my spouse wanted? In this woeful misuse of altruism that you're peddling? This one way altruism where the interloper in the marriage is given everything and the spouse and betrayed spouse have a duty to provide that?

 

Seriously?

 

I have no reply to that. I refuse to believe a human being can think that way . I prefer to think this is an intellectual exercise or something, to point out an absurd position.

 

( and for the record? I did not say I acted in altruism. I acted in self preservation to get the heck out of an insane situation. I wanted no part at all of the triangle once I learned of it.)

Edited November 15, 2012 by Decorative

[Steen719]

Sometimes, and I know this is hard to believe, but **sometimes** people say things here just to get us going! :lmao: I suggest a good cup of coffee and a good laugh this morning. It gets you going just fine!

[beenburned]

I, like Spark, Decorative, and many other BSs, left my marriage after d-day.

 

My H had every opportunity to then live the life of a single man. Freely choosing his OW or even many different women.

 

I refused to be married to a H that wouldn't, or couldn't, be faithful to me! I was not going to settle for anything less than what I wanted out of a H. I would have preferred being a single mother.

 

I never threatened him with loss of his children, as I wanted them to have a healthy loving relationship with their father.

[beenburned]

Steen,

 

Please pass the coffee!

[frozensprouts]

Being truly altruistic towards the OW would have been not accepting your husband back. What he wanted should not matter. The OW was going to get hurt and you should have done all in your power to prevent that hurt. That's being altruistic towards the OW. Not letting your husband choose, that's what the OW has been doing all along.

 

then what about your many posts where you expound upon the idea that if a wayward spouse stays at home, it's only because of finances, children, or the big bad wifey at home who somehow controls him and forces him to stay...

 

seems,in your mind, that as long as he's choosing the other man/woman, then he's using his free will...anything else is only due to pressure or force...

 

like many, many other betrayed spouses, I gave my husband the opportunity to leave, I even emailed his other woman and told him that if she wanted him, then they should be together....i'd called a lawyer and had him waiting to get the paperwork started for a simple and amicable divorce process...all of a sudden, neither of them wanted the affair anymore ( funnily enough, when we reconciled, all of a sudden she wanted him back...

[Steen719]

Steen,

 

Please pass the coffee!

 

It is so good.

 

I hear the "whahh whahh whahh" - like Charlie Brown, when I drink the coffee and read. Try it - it works and keeps my blood pressure down. Have a great day - off to work!

[frozensprouts]

it is actually beginning to become so absurd that it's funny...like a bad Monty Python sketch...

[Decorative]

Exactly. It is an intellectual exercise to show how absurd the position of the BS who expects the OW to be altruistic is. Let's use your post to show the point of view so many BSs hold on LS. The post remains the same except the participants in the triangle have switched places (in italics).

 

You actually think it's better for the BS to get a spouse because the OW has rejected them? And it was my responsibility to talk my MM into going to her instead, to prevent * her *from getting hurt, even though it wasn't what my MM wanted? In this woeful misuse of altruism that you're peddling? This one way altruism where the spouse in the marriage is given everything and the OW has a duty to provide that?

 

Yeah. I think the problem is- the MM doesn't want the OW, the vast majority of the time. Your own longlived situation, including the low contact that you have gone to now with him, illustrates that beautifully.

 

Nobody can make anyone else be with someone. The ugly truth you are doing mental gymnastics to avoid is that the MM has lots of choices, and doesn't normally choose the OW. Even his mean old "threatening to shoot him" wife cannot make him choose the OW.

 

Now? Where's that coffee?

[Decorative]

it is actually beginning to become so absurd that it's funny...like a bad Monty Python sketch...

 

You never expect the Spanish Inquisition....

[Decorative]

If the MM didn't want the OW, there would be no affairs.

 

I am sorry. I mean- the MM doesn't want the OW as a partner for their life, in most instances. For an affair? Sure. For life and family? Not normally. I think you understand that situation since your MM hasn't chosen you before his marriage and now while he sort of has you on the side. You aren't enough for him.

[SoleMate]

As I recheck the original topic of this thread - which was whether the house trashing metaphor had explanatory value with respect to affairs - I see that once again, we have broken into two basic lines of thought:

 

1) Anti-affair and anti-deception

 

2) Pro-affair (or pro-affair choice if you prefer) and deception-tolerant

 

I hope the anti-affair reasoning is educational for some. They'd probably be mostly lurkers as I see few active posters who are on the fence on this perennial topic. I like to see anti-affair arguments developed and polished as it gives us all a chance to improve our thinking.

 

Here's my worry: The more anti-affair arguments are raised, the more the pro-affair posters appear to feel pushed to support their choice in affairs. We may actually be hardening their thinking since they spend all their time rehearsing and replaying pro-affair memes. Could this be counter productive? Does anyone see this as an issue?

[Decorative]

Pretty obvious the wife isn't either...

 

Spin it however you need to. He obviously values his marriage more than his affair. And when push comes to shove, he will always choose her. If you told her today about you, he would choose her, and not you. The sum of all your postings and your reporting of what he says to you proves that.

[Decorative]

As I recheck the original topic of this thread - which was whether the house trashing metaphor had explanatory value with respect to affairs - I see that once again, we have broken into two basic lines of thought:

 

1) Anti-affair and anti-deception

 

2) Pro-affair (or pro-affair choice if you prefer) and deception-tolerant

 

I hope the anti-affair reasoning is educational for some. They'd probably be mostly lurkers as I see few active posters who are on the fence on this perennial topic. I like to see anti-affair arguments developed and polished as it gives us all a chance to improve our thinking.

 

Here's my worry: The more anti-affair arguments are raised, the more the pro-affair posters appear to feel pushed to support their choice in affairs. We may actually be hardening their thinking since they spend all their time rehearsing and replaying pro-affair memes. Could this be counter productive? Does anyone see this as an issue?

 

Yes. That is a good point. It's probably best to disengage.

[waterwoman]

Hi

 

I started this thread as a way of working out why, when I intellectually accepted that the only party who had deliberately hurt me was my H, I still felt residual anger at OW. As it happens I did know her, but I don't know that it would be all that different if she was a total stranger. IMO it takes a massive and deliberate step off the straight and narrow to indulge in a EMR with a married person, simply because of the damage it will cause. I don't think it takes a hugely altruistic and selfless individual to decide not to do that.

 

Once a relationship is established I can see that for the MP it might well have as much substance as their marriage and I can see trinity's point that, at that stage, demanding selflessness from the OW is as daft as demanding selflessness of the BW. Emotions are engaged. The relationship is real, illicit or not. I just question how anyone can allow themselves to get to that stage.

[frozensprouts]

You never expect the Spanish Inquisition....

 

we are the wives who say "nee" (?)

 

I've got to stop watching reruns on YouTube ( but my oldest loves that show)

[Spark1111]

Hi

 

I started this thread as a way of working out why, when I intellectually accepted that the only party who had deliberately hurt me was my H, I still felt residual anger at OW. As it happens I did know her, but I don't know that it would be all that different if she was a total stranger. IMO it takes a massive and deliberate step off the straight and narrow to indulge in a EMR with a married person, simply because of the damage it will cause. I don't think it takes a hugely altruistic and selfless individual to decide not to do that.

 

Once a relationship is established I can see that for the MP it might well have as much substance as their marriage and I can see trinity's point that, at that stage, demanding selflessness from the OW is as daft as demanding selflessness of the BW. Emotions are engaged. The relationship is real, illicit or not. I just question how anyone can allow themselves to get to that stage.

 

Me too!

 

And there is always the assumption that BSs must really be awful and frumpy and never hit upon or have an old boyfriend find them on a social networking site while experiencing a lull or low in the marital relationship.....

 

Nothing could be further from the truth often enough.

 

I just think some are better at recognizing that spark of emotional and physical attraction and shutting it down to preserve their marital relationship.

 

Others, less so. They seemingly talk themselves into this grand passion, the unrequited illicit love of a lifetime, star-crossed lovers, who, if situations had only be different...and at that point, they no longer care whose house gets trashed.

[William]

Yes. That is a good point. It's probably best to disengage.

Moderation agrees. This will be a visible review. Expect a decision on re-opening within 24 hours.