Forum Archives

Return to Forum List

Betrayed All Over Again

You are not logged in. Login here or register.

kaylee711 posted 8/28/2014 19:48 PM

WS got me to meet him 1/2 and believe that his A was not physical-only online, but I still couldn't stand the sight of the engagement and wedding rings on my finger. WS said that he understood why and he wanted to buy me a new ring set for my bday today. We went to the jewelry store last night after MC, but the jeweler had already closed. I felt like an ass bringing it up again on our way out to dinner tonight, but when I did, he shrugged it off, saying it would be too expensive. Why was he all prepared to do this for me yesterday and break my heart into a million pieces today on my bday??? He SURE had enough money to buy the OW flowers and pay her cell phone bill secretly over the past 5 years!

wk55hn posted 8/28/2014 19:51 PM

Maybe she wouldn't continue in the relationship with him if he didn't do those things for her, so he had to, or else lose her.

tremble posted 8/28/2014 19:58 PM

Oh Kaylee I'm so sorry. That has got to hurt. Did you ask him why he changed his mind? Even if it is the money he could have worded that so much better.

yewtree posted 8/28/2014 21:10 PM

Wow. Perhaps you can consider changing the title of this post. It's more offensive than his attitude about your rings.

Chicky posted 8/28/2014 21:25 PM

That stinks. After his response, I'm sure you probably don't want to and most would probably advise against it, but I would ask him why he changed his mind. That probably has more to do with my propensity to HAVE to have an answer to things that bug me. (((((Hugs))))

BtraydWife posted 8/28/2014 21:28 PM

He changed his tune because he is trying to buy your compliance. He had sex with her, you know this. You will not get anywhere with an unremorseful wayward. All the effort, time, etc you are expending is a waste. Everything you are doing is what happens after he becomes remorseful.

He's proven he's not willing to do that because it's the right thing to do. Until you enforce a real consequence, like kicking him out, this horrible painful place you are in will continue on with no end in sight.

New rings are a distraction to buy him more time. You can't expect him to come out of his fog until you come out of yours.

Please let us help you. The things you are doing won't get you your desired result.

He changed his mind on the rings because it was meaningless bullshit to him. Please realize this.

The person keeping you in this painful place is you. We can help you out of it.

kaylee711 posted 8/28/2014 21:29 PM

Sorry to sound offensive??? I'm the one who had to cover overdraft fees because of the inappropriate gift giving... This is supposed to be a safe forum where in say what I feel in my heart..

kiki1 posted 8/28/2014 21:39 PM


I believe yewtree is referring to your use of the term "indian giver" as being offensive.

its politically incorrect.

dont worry about the rings. His behavior is more important and telling.


Cookie7088 posted 8/28/2014 22:06 PM

This post "Title" is highly offensive. It's not that it's "politically incorrect" - it's completely inappropriate.

Ignorance of its meaning is no excuse!

MODS please remove this immediately.

As a person of Native American culture, and raised on a reservation - you have no idea these simple offensive words have caused...

I associate it as using the "N" word to the African American population -- and that is absolutely horrible!

Deeply Scared posted 8/28/2014 22:36 PM

While the title of this thread may seem inappropriate, upon further research we found that the term does not imply anything racist or negative towards Native Americans. Here is one of the definitions we're referring to:

Indian Giver:

There are two popular etymologies for this term for a person who gives a gift only to later demand its return. The first is that it is based on an unfair stereotype of Native Americans, that they don't keep their word. In the other popular explanation, the term doesn't cast aspersions on Native Americans, instead it echoes the broken promises the whites made to the Indians. Neither is accurate, although the first is closer to the truth.

Instead the term comes from different commercial practices. To the Native Americans, who had no concept of money or currency, gifts were a form of trade goods, of exchange. One didn't give a gift without expecting one of equivalent value in return. If one could not offer an equivalent return gift, the original gift would be refused or returned. To the Europeans, who with their monetary-based trade practices, this seemed low and insulting, gifts were not for trade but were to be freely given.

The noun Indian gift dates to 1765. Indian giver follows about a century later in 1865. Originally, these reflected simply the expectation of a return gift. By the 1890s, the sense had shifted to mean one who demands a gift back.

If you find this thread upsetting, please leave it so it doesn't further detract off the original content

determinata posted 8/28/2014 22:38 PM

Hi Kaylee,
I am so sorry your H is not remorseful, as he appeared to be. I do want to point out a potential danger, though: You didn't really believe the A was online only but he convinced you, then dangled new jewelry, only to pull it off of the table once he gained your compliance.

I think you have to face a few things:
- He's not remorseful.
- Either this A or another was likely physical. If your gut doesn't believe it, you shouldn't believe it, especially if you have no polygraph to back it up.

I know you are hurt immeasurably but it's better to know these things now so you can decide what to do. And I know it isn't much but happy belated birthday, ok? You made it another year in life and though that may feel like no consolation now but you are alive and that is worth celebrating, even if by yourself.

Hugs to you.


P.S. I know you didn't mean for it to be but yes, the thread title is racist and offensive. I say this with love and understanding that you did not know it. Let's make sure this remains a safe space for EVERYONE by asking the mods to change the title.

From NPR's CodeSwitch Blog on race:

The concept of an "Indian gift" or an "Indian giver" traces its roots back to at least the 1700s. In his 1765 History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, "Thomas Hutchinson defined an Indian gift as a present "for which an equivalent return is expected."

During their legendary journey West in 1804, explorers Meriwether Lewis and William Clark often encountered Indians over the course of their travels. The picture the pair paints of Indians and their culture was not pretty. Lewis and Clark frequently suspected Indians of either stealing their belongings or plotting to do so. Gifts in particular, as Thomas P. Slaughter points out in his book Exploring Lewis and Clark: Reflections on Men and Wilderness, frequently created problems for the explorers.

Slaughter writes that in one instance, a group of Indians offered Lewis and Clark some roots, which the explorers rejected because they felt that "[the Indians'] expectation for those presents of a few roots is three or four times their real worth." Turning down the gift, however, insulted their hosts and led Lewis and Clark to label the Indians "forward and impertinent, and thievish," in their journals.

Author David Wilton argues in his 2004 book Word Myths: Debunking Linguistic Urban Legends that the concept of an "Indian gift" arose when white settlers misinterpreted the Native American concept of bartering:

"To an Indian, the giving of gifts was an extension of this system of trade and a gift was expected to be reciprocated with something of equal value. Europeans, upon encountering this practice, misunderstood it, considering it uncouth and impolite. To them, trade was conducted with money and gifts were freely given with nothing expected in return. So this native practice got a bad reputation among the white colonists of North America and the term eventually became a playground insult."

. . .

Alas, it isn't true that "we can all agree" that the phrase is inappropriate. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines an "Indian giver" as "a person who gives something to another and then takes it back or expects an equivalent in return." The term, the dictionary notes in italics, is "sometimes offensive."

Sigh. Even now, in 2013, the dictionary definition of the phrase only deems it sometimes offensive. While it's always startling to discover ingrained racism in the dictionary, even more jaw-dropping is the definition from 1962's Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins by William and Mary Morris.

The entry begins on a progressive (for 1962) note, as the authors applaud the recent trend in film that rejected "the old concept of the Indian as a ruthless, bloodthirsty warrior." The article's conclusion, however, is stunning:

"If you are willing to concede that the Indians occasionally employed trickery in their dealings with the whites, you will understand why the white man came to use the word Indian as a synonym for 'bogus' or, to use a favorite adjective of children, 'pretend.' So an Indian giver is, in a youngster's own language, only a 'pretend giver.'"

Emphasis mine [meaning, NPR's]. Note the usage of the words "trickery", "bogus" and "pretend." It should also be noted that the dictionary this passage appeared in was right on the shelf of my local library a stark reminder that while language evolves, the reference section doesn't always catch up. William and Mary Morris probably did not realize it at the time, but in this one paragraph, they managed to neatly summarize about 200 years of stereotypes about Native Americans.

[This message edited by determinata at 11:23 PM, August 28th (Thursday)]

Lowlow posted 8/29/2014 00:23 AM

I'm contacting the mods regarding th title of this thread. I don't want to TJ this question as the issue is important. Our friend is hurting because her WS has reneged on a promise

We have heard you... Mods, I will send a separate message

Chicky posted 8/29/2014 00:25 AM

2 members have already done that and a MOD HAS responded above.

Direct quote:

If you find this thread upsetting, please leave it so it doesn't further detract off the original content

Lowlow posted 8/29/2014 00:32 AM

Please see mods post

tryingagain12 posted 8/29/2014 01:01 AM

The thread title is considered to be an offensive racist slur to many American Indians:

Or just google that term plus 'slur' or 'racist' and you'll find tons of links and further reading.

I say this because kaylee obviously didn't realize the weight/history of that term when naming her thread that - but considering how many people recognize it as such, I think it will probably continue to detract from her hearing from a variety of folks who might have support/advice for her, because it's hard to get past that slur staring them in the face. Just my 2 cents.

Others will have better advice for you, kaylee, than I, but it sounds to me like your H is the one being the ass, not you. Of course you brought it up again - I would have too! He promised you a deeply symbolic gift that you got excited about and now he's going back on his word so casually. Did you ask him what changed?

MovingUpward posted 8/29/2014 04:55 AM

What a crappy change in his thinking. It does give you a view point onto his value of the marriage at this point and definitely something to bring up in the next MC. A fair questioning MC is what is he willing spend (money time and effort) to repair this marriage.

Deeply Scared posted 8/29/2014 05:37 AM


I've changed the title of your thread due to members threadjacking it despite our earlier flag for them to step away.

Hopefully this change will lead to more constructive support

Lionne posted 8/29/2014 07:46 AM

Kathleen, it sounds like he has a long way to go to find true remorse. He back pedaled because he rethought his position and decided he didn't need to make the grand gesture for you to cave.
I'm so sorry, honey. You are the prize, he doesn't get it.

Tickingtock posted 8/29/2014 13:42 PM

Any update kaylee?

Return to Forum List

© 2002-2018 ®. All Rights Reserved.