SourCherryDrops - in regards to your comment about by what percentage we disagree, I think we have a little more complex problem - I can see from your replies below that I didn't make myself completely clear, as you seem to disagree with things I never said.
You are right, that my FWW having had Multiple OM does make it easier for me to draw the conclusion that the OM were not particularly special, that they could have been anyone.
and Perhapes you are right that there is a very different dynamic at work in a LTA where the WS and OP are not serial cheaters. Actually the more i think about it the more i see that this is a differnet situation.
This is a minor point but in my mind it is quite simple - the length of the A and the "history of the OP" are just mitigating or aggravating "factors), the core of the problem boils down to just whether the behavior was a one-of, completely atypical for the WS, or whether it's a pattern (i.e. multiple OPs). In my case, it was 200% atypical - my H has never had poor boundaries, never showed anything resembling a womanizing behavior, no porn, no SA, nothing sleazy, ever - I have high standards, no way in hell I would have M someone like that. The A itself was something between a short PA and an extended ONS - a one time encounter with sex, my H had the opportunity to go for seconds and chose not to (we sued the OW and this fact was independently verified), but then the OW accused him of impregnating her which led to a second encounter and more sex. That's basically it - my H then confessed, remained in contact with OW only to make sure she wouldn't continue the pregnancy and then dumped her the day she had an abortion. Never wanted to have any further dealings with her, has been transparent to the point of absurdity, has boundaries that make me laugh (refuses to do activities with out little kids when there is a risk that he might be alone with just moms, on one occasion got hostile with a woman who tried to invite him over for coffee - 100% innocently I'm sure), etc. etc. The OW, otoh, was a serial, a dedicated and quite skilled spider woman - but that really is completely beside the point. If he didn't really want her, nothing would have happened. Do you see why I view her as having to be special to him? As soon as I discover that there was another one, no matter what the circumstances, the focus of the "crime" would completely shift from me being deficient/her being "better" somehow, to him being just someone, who will simply stick it in whatever wet hole he can find. Even harder to justify staying with, but at least not such a horrific assault on my value as a wife, my selfesteem, whatever.
I would still disagree that in that situation the WS prefered one over the other... i think its more likely that they prefered having two partners to having one. That there were elements from each that they prefered... that there were some that they only got from one partner and not the other.
I hope we are not arguing semantics here - yes, in a way they do prefer having two, except that the OP is the preferred romantic/sex partner while the BS is just a tool, a requirement to maintain the stable home environment that most people enjoy having. For all I know my H would have loved to run off with his OW, except that a. she wanted someone with deeper pockets (he was faking poverty when he realized that she considered carrying the baby to term so that she could live off of the child support payments - a forced sugar daddy kind of a deal) b. he realized that if he went with her, he would have to be the adult in the relationship, whereas in our M, that was primarily my role (iow, a lazy bum who ultimately decided that having great sex is not worth all the other consequences). You have no idea how much I now feel like the "sensible choice" and how much I resent it. If I ever run into someone to whom I will be what the OW was to my H (the crazy, totally UN-sensible romantic #1 preference), I will be out of this M in 2 seconds flat.
I guess I should have been more explicit in my previous post and said that at least for a time an OP is the WS's "romantic/sexual" preference to avoid confusion.
The reason i dislike the HS drama as a metaphor is for the reasons that lost in toronto raises, to my mind any meaningful similarities are overshadowed by the shallowness of most HS dramas... a lecturer of mine used to say a good metaphor is worth a dozen theories, (could be one of the few really valuable things i got out of his class..but i digress)...
Actually, I used the high school "romantic trio" example to illustrate my point that even in a completely DISSIMILAR context - when there is no infidelity and the relationships lack "gravity" due to short durations and the relative insignificance of the interactions between the parties involved, the person relentlessly pursuing someone who clearly prefers another, makes themselves look pathetic. It was supposed to be a contrast, not a parallel - there is a reason why I am not a writer :-)
I do understand that you may feel that fighting to save or maintain a marriage or relationship after Infidelity shows a lack of dignity ... IMHO this is actually underneath the words, a similar concept to what i intended with my moto of being a protagonist for yourself. ... As a BS we need to stand up for ourselves, we need to do what it takes to maintain our own self worth to maintain our own dignity. Regardless of what path we choose to take be it R or D the goals should be that we can allways walk proud within our own skins.
OK, this is the core of the misunderstanding . There is obviously an element of "pathetic" in being cheated on in the first place, it's not a feather in anyone's cap by any stretch. Even if some people manage not to let this affect their self esteem, that's how they will be perceived by the vast majority of people in their vicinity (if one is lucky, there may be an exception or two, but for the most part, this is how it is). And please, no one shoot me saying this - it is just my observation of how it is in the Western as well as many other societies I know. It is NOT my saying so that makes it true :-) BUT, this is something the BS has no control over, as it is something that is done to them by their WS. It's only after DDay that we get to make choices that affect how pathetic we look going forward. I am merely suggesting that doing a Sandra Bullock seems to be the shortest path to undoing some of that "patheticness" from the PR standpoint (i.e. how one is perceived by the majority of others). In contrast, the BS who opts to out the A to everyone who's willing to hear about it, calls the OP's spouse, employer and pastor, and so on, often becomes the butt of cruel jokes, cute but hurtful sayings ("hell hath no fury..."), the target of condescending comments or pity (esp by those who firmly believe that something like that could never happen to them). Gosh, even those who chose to R without having to resort to this kind of a fight, are already contributing AN AWFUL LOT to the M by agreeing to accept these social consequences, along with the risk that their WS will make them look even worse by re-offending in the future. I don't include this element in the "fight" to save the M per se, because it's fairly passive (there is nothing to do, other than accept it and hope for the best) and I'm only objecting to the active fighting - I'm not talking about situations where the A has already ended, the FWS wants to R and is making an honest effort to correct the wrongs he has inflicted on his BS. The core of my argument is that it is imho wrong to egg on the BS whose WS is still in the process of pursuing the OP, to take active steps to win the WS back. As someone has aptly put it earlier in this thread "she doesn't want someone who doesn't want her". That's exactly it! Pursuing a WS who is making it abundantly clear that they now prefer the OP is precisely what would damage my self esteem the most and make me look pathetic on top of pathetic. Not the choice to R and D, just the "running after" the WS - being the one who cares about the M when the WS clearly doesn't.
If one BS feels that they can do this best by Reconciling and giving it their every effort then we should support them in that, just as we should support the BS that decides that for them to maintain their dignity they need to seek a D.
See, this is what this argument has degenerated into - suddenly people have decided that I said that everyone who chooses to R is pathetic. I NEVER said that. I've had that problem with assorted other threads on this board - I express an opinion about one specific aspect of something and it gets twisted into my being 100% for or against the whole thing. I can't even begin to speculate if I express myself so poorly or it's a matter of reading comprehension or just someone looking for a reason to blast me. I usually don't even come back to clarify and defend myself, this thread seems particularly sane and respectful for the most part, which is a nice change of pace.
Here is an example:
To say that a BS is pathetic to want to stay with their WS is an insult in the worst way.
Huh?
Edited because I phrased some things harsher than i should...
[This message edited by skylers_mom at 10:26 AM, June 10th (Thursday)]
