Does OW/OM have a duty to the BS?

[Decorative]

I like that analogy, but I can already imagine that the counter argument that they were merely a passenger in MM's car when he rammed headlong into the marriage.

 

A passenger giving a blowjob to the driver.

 

*did I say that out loud ?*

[eleanorrigby]

A passenger giving a blowjob to the driver.

 

*did I say that out loud ?*

 

But she was invited to give it, so is absolved.

[nofool4u]

Does OW/OM have a duty to the BS?

 

Yes. They have a duty to not be a complete sh*t to the BS in the form of helping to cause them pain.

 

That is unless an OW/OM thinks its all fair to be a reprehensible person to someone else in real life that doesn't deserve what they are dishing out to them.

[nofool4u]

He would be beyond furious.

 

Is it my duty or responsibilty to act in some moral way regarding what made his wife go outside of their marriage for affection? No.

 

How convenient. Married women are fair game for you and it doesn't matter who you help cause pain. Disgusting.

 

You didn't rob that bank, you just drove the getaway car.

[Realist3]

How convenient. Married women are fair game for you and it doesn't matter who you help cause pain. Disgusting.

 

You didn't rob that bank, you just drove the getaway car.

 

Nice attempt at changing the intent. It is not my moral duty to determine why his/her WS did what they did.

[nofool4u]

Nice attempt at changing the intent. It is not my moral duty to determine why his/her WS did what they did.

 

Change the intent? Sorry, thats what YOU did when you posted what you did.

 

The title of the thread is "Does OW/OM have a duty to the BS?"

 

Not "Does the OW/OM have a duty to accept responsibility for the MM/MW's choices"

 

You are right, its not your duty to determine or take responsibility for the WS's actions. But thats not what the thread is asking.

[Realist3]

Change the intent? Sorry, thats what YOU did when you posted what you did.

 

The title of the thread is "Does OW/OM have a duty to the BS?"

 

Not "Does the OW/OM have a duty to accept responsibility for the MM/MW's choices"

 

You are right, its not your duty to determine or take responsibility for the WS's actions. But thats not what the thread is asking.

 

 

No, I was right. You attempted to make a conclusion off of what I stated, which changed the intent of what I said.

[turnera]

I think it doesn't matter whether the OM/OW is moral or whatever, because THEY are not the people with whom you exchanged vows. Who/what/how they are has no relevance to what your spouse did to you.

[nofool4u]

No, I was right. You attempted to make a conclusion off of what I stated, which changed the intent of what I said.

 

Ok, so what is the intent of what you said seeing as how thats not what the thread is about?

[nofool4u]

I think it doesn't matter whether the OM/OW is moral or whatever, because THEY are not the people with whom you exchanged vows. Who/what/how they are has no relevance to what your spouse did to you.

 

I can agree a little with this. But its not true. OM/OW did play a role in helping to cause the BS pain. But as long as they get theirs right?

 

I'll digress, it is the WS that needs to be the focus of the blame, but that doesn't leave an immoral being that doesn't care who they help hurt blameless.

 

I will not be a party to anyone's pain, therefore you will not see me knowingly becoming involved with someone elses wife/girlfriend. And why would I lower my standards being with someone that is a cheater in the first place?

[Decorative]

I think it doesn't matter whether the OM/OW is moral or whatever, because THEY are not the people with whom you exchanged vows. Who/what/how they are has no relevance to what your spouse did to you.

 

I don't know you.

 

So if I take my car and run over your foot, it's all good because I didn't personally promise not to, okay? LOL

[Tainted love]

The OW in my situation only felt a duty of obligation to me when my SO threw her under a bus. All of a sudden she felt I needed to know the truth!

 

Funny how her duty of obligation didn't exist when she was banging ten bells out of my partner.

 

They are both to blame although I can only hold one accountable - that doesn't mean I can't ensure that the OWs partner is fully aware of the facts - my duty of obligation to someone else who is being as blindsided as I was.

[turnera]

Whoever YOUR SPOUSE chose to cheat with is not your problem.

 

All that does is help you avoid looking at your spouse and your marriage.

 

Happens all the time, though.

[nofool4u]

Whoever YOUR SPOUSE chose to cheat with is not your problem.

 

All that does is help you avoid looking at your spouse and your marriage.

 

The spouses wouldn't/can't cheat if there were people more than willing to help them do it and not care who they are helping hurt.

 

And no, knowing this does NOT help one avoid looking at their spouse and marriage. Its simply saying in the context of infidelity, it takes 2, sometimes more, people for cheating to happen.

 

I held my x-wife responsible for what she did, still doesn't mean her OM didn't have a role to play in it. People have a responsibility to be decent to others. I don't see much decency in boning other people's spouses.

[Tainted love]

Whoever YOUR SPOUSE chose to cheat with is not your problem.

 

All that does is help you avoid looking at your spouse and your marriage.

 

Happens all the time, though.

 

So they're blameless? Their actions (especially when they expose the affair) are to be bypassed? My SO cheated but the OW made it possible for him to do so. She would only be blameless if she didn't know the MM was in a relationship.

 

The OW (or OM) know they are jointly creating a situation which will more than likely change a BWs life forever.

 

I'm sure she will think I'm completely blameless when I expose the affair to her partner

[turnera]

So they're blameless?

Where did I say they were blameless?

 

I said who/what/how THEY are is not your problem.

 

Your problem is your spouse and your marriage.

 

If you waste time hating on the OW, it's just blameshifting that allows you to not pile anger on your spouse, where it more rightly belongs. After all, HE vowed to honor you; not the OW.

[turnera]

I'm sure she will think I'm completely blameless when I expose the affair to her partner

Who CARES what she thinks? And by all means, expose to her partner. He needs to know.

[CantgetoveritNY]

What about the OW that seeks out MM's. Throws herself at an MM that has never strayed before?

 

What about the OM that seeks out MW's. That uses all the tricks in the book to get what he wants from a MW that has never strayed before.

 

Serial cheating OW & MM have this pattern. They are not in the same category as OW & MM that also slip up only once. They are like child molesters or rapists. Looking for victims, stalking them, hunting them down. One after the other to satisfy their selfish needs.

[Tainted love]

Who CARES what she thinks? And by all means, expose to her partner. He needs to know.

 

I don't care what she THINKS. I care about the actions they both have taken that have have changed my life. I care about her having sex with my partner, entering my home to do so, ringing me, driving past my home, exposing the affair. I wouldn't be human if I didn't. I care about his lies, his betrayal, the humiliation he has heaped upon me.

 

My blame and hurt lies predominantly with my SO. It focuses there but she doesn't escape blame.

 

What I'm saying is its not black and white, it's grey too -fifty shades of it in their case...

[Ninja'sHusband]

I'll repeat what I've said before. I think the *blame* lies with both the AP and the WS, but the person the BS should be concerned with is the WS. They are the one that's in the relationship with you. There a zillion of possible APs. You can only decide if you trust your spouse or not.

 

I think the AP has general responsibility to not act immorally just like anyone else on this planet. They have a responsibility not to rob your spouse, kill them, or cheat with them. Unfortunately, only 2 of those are against the law, even though cheating isn't the least of the three.

[cocorico]

I've not been on LS long but since I have been I've felt like I'm the only one that feels there is some responsibility for the OM/OW to act morally. <snip> What do you think?

 

I certainly agree that everyone should, at all times, act authentically, in accordance with their own moral code. And if your moral code tells you As are wrong, then participating in one will lead to cognitive dissonance at best, or self-loathing and low self-esteem, as we so often see on these boards.

 

If OTOH your moral code does not rule out As, then those issues clearly do not apply and as long as you behave within the law, in accordance with any ethical codes or work-based policies that may apply to you (such as, no consorting with students, or patients, or clients, etc) and the other person is a fully informed, freely consenting adult, and you are not breaking any contract of your own (an oath of celibacy, your own marital vows, etc) you are free to love whom you will and to act on that within mutually agreed parameters. If you do that, you are acting perfectly morally, whether or not someone else's moral code concurs.

[CantgetoveritNY]

 

and the other person is a fully informed, freely consenting adult, and you are not breaking any contract of your own (an oath of celibacy, your own marital vows, etc) you are free to love whom you will and to act on that within mutually agreed parameters. If you do that, you are acting perfectly morally, whether or not someone else's moral code concurs.

 

I can see that the OM/OW is free to love whoever. But free to act in a way that violated the standard of conduct held by say the WS's BS? See there we have a clash of moral codes. Who's code is more important? This kind of thing can lead to war between nations. Helen of Troy was not a myth. And on a smaller scale it can lead to murder. And often does. Beware the clash of moral codes.

[ComingInHot]

So that realist guy has no morals or ethics w/regards to human relationships therefore taking no responsibility for his behavior... I am still deciding if I'm envious of that or disgusted by it.

[cocorico]

I can see that the OM/OW is free to love whoever. But free to act in a way that violated the standard of conduct held by say the WS's BS? See there we have a clash of moral codes. Who's code is more important? This kind of thing can lead to war between nations. Helen of Troy was not a myth. And on a smaller scale it can lead to murder. And often does. Beware the clash of moral codes.

 

Do you consider yourself bound by the moral codes of random others, when you yourself do not share those codes? Speaking only for myself, I do not consider my moral code to be enforceable on others, nor do I expect them to uphold that code unless they voluntarily share it. For example, I consider it immoral to avoid tax and so choose not to associate with those who do (or to patronise such businesses) but while I might hope others might share that value, I know that IRL many don't, and - as long as their behaviour is legal - I can hate it all I like but that is their choice. I do not expect them to be bound by something I consider to be "the right thing to do" simply because I consider it thus. And - although their failure to pay their full tax liability hurts me as well as every other citizen because it translates into less money in the public purse for health services, roads, policing, etc - they are unlikely to reconsider their morality simply because of potential (or actual) hurt to people they have never met.

[CantgetoveritNY]

Do you consider yourself bound by the moral codes of random others, when you yourself do not share those codes?

 

For example, I consider it immoral to avoid tax and so choose not to associate with those who do (or to patronise such businesses) but while I might hope others might share that value,

 

I share your view on paying taxes. However I take it one step further. I feel obligated not just to avoid doing business with tax cheats but to turn them in. Otherwise they are allowed to continue to steal from both you and the rest of us tax paying citizens. Likewise when Paris stole Helen, Hector was bound by his moral code to seek vengeance upon Paris and his city, Troy. Likewise many a cuckold H feels bound by his moral code to take vengeance upon the OM that screwed his WS. Even if he also hates the WS.

 

The OM may very well see himself as acting honorably since he has not violated his own very low standards of conduct. However the OM is at great risk for violating the standards of the BS. And the OM's view of himself as honorable will do nothing to protect him from the BS. The BS does not value the OM's moral code and why should he? the OM did not honor the BS's code. No respect either way and then you have war.