SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I suspect you probably have as difficult a time understanding me and what I want as I do understanding your point of view

I don't have difficulty understanding your POV. I know some people are much more open than I am. That doesn't confuse or bother me. Some people are huggers. Some people don't like to be touched or even gotten too close to, physically. I don't expect other people to be like me, so I don't have difficulty understanding them.

I am more open with people I really trust. It takes a lot for me to trust someone with my innermost emotional being. Sharing that makes me very vulnerable. I won't be vulnerable with many people.

I'm also not invested in how other people live. As long as no one is being hurt, I don't care what others do or think or believe.

I like EH's explanation of evaluating whether or not a friendship would be harmful to the M. I think that's going to look very different for a monogamous vs. polyamorous M. Since a polyamorous M is open to other romantic relationships, it would take a lot more for a friendship to be harmful to it.

If my spouse was not some sort of crazy jealous person (which he wouldn't be because I wouldn't marry someone like that), I would choose him over a friend. I have a much deeper, stronger, important connection and commitment to my H than any friend. So, yeah, if it came down to him or my friend, I would have to choose him.

Unless his friendship is specifically at my expense and that's not what I'd consider the usual situation for friends.

That is exactly what an EA is. It is a relationship that is had at the expense of the spouse. What, exactly, that means is going to depend on the type of relationship you have with your spouse, to a certain extent. But, even in the most open of Ms, a friendship can become harmful to the M if it becomes too much, if it pulls one spouse away from the other.

That is exactly what an EA is. It is a relationship that is had at the expense of the spouse. What, exactly, that means is going to depend on the type of relationship you have with your spouse, to a certain extent. But, even in the most open of Ms, a friendship can become harmful to the M if it becomes too much, if it pulls one spouse away from the other.

I guess I simply believe so strongly in personal autonomy. I don't think it's right to ask your spouse to give something up in general. I think if the friendship is so toxic or damaging, that it's important to let your spouse "wake up" and realize that. It's important to express your thoughts and feelings so they know where you stand, but they need to make the decision for themselves.

My current husband had a friend who hated me, because he felt like I was taking him away. There's too much background for me to summarize that easily. He didn't want my husband to marry me and kept trying to talk him out of it.

My first reaction was to tell my husband he could no longer be friends with this man, like I suspect most of you would feel. Then I sat with my feelings for a while and remembered that they had been best friends for 7 years. Even though I had more than good reason to ask, my husband would still likely resent me for asking him to choose me over his friend.

So, I didn't. I set boundaries for my own self protection. I chose not to be around this friend, and I did request that my husband not have him in our home. If he wanted to see him, he could go out.

My husband needed the time to process the situation for himself. I wouldn't have married him if I didn't trust his judgment, right? So it wasn't long before he realized that he didn't want to spend time with someone who disliked his wife, and he ended the friendship himself. Now, at two years out, he tells me he is so glad I gave him the space to figure it out for himself.

I just truly don't believe it's right to make rules for your partner. And I would not give up friends for my spouse, because I believe that it's wrong for my spouse to ask that. I would happily ensure they don't have to interact, or see the friend away from home if he'd prefer that. But I wouldn't end a friendship for him.

coco, no friendship can pull spouses apart. That's denying individual agency. A friendship can't cause damage to a marriage. Only the people involved in the marriage can take actions that do that. If you don't allow a friendship to pull you from your spouse, then it doesn't, plain and simple. I think that's the critical piece here.

[This message edited by PSTI at 2:57 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

I set boundaries for my own self protection. I chose not to be around this friend, and I did request that my husband not have him in our home. If he wanted to see him, he could go out.

Ok....so lets say your husband agrees to YOUR boundaries but....he decides that his friend is more important than you. He spends more time away from you to be with this friend AND brings the friend into your home when he knows you wont be there.

Would you not feel violated?

How are your boundaries any different than setting rules? Again its just symantics.

Ok....so lets say your husband agrees to YOUR boundaries but....he decides that his friend is more important than you. He spends more time away from you to be with this friend AND brings the friend into your home when he knows you wont be there.

Would you not feel violated?

How are your boundaries any different than setting rules? Again its just symantics.

It's not semantics. We both have the autonomy to make our own decisions. We communicate our personal boundaries with each other, and our wants, needs, and expectations.

If my husband chooses to do something that he knows will cross my boundaries, he can do so. At that point, since it's my boundary, I get to decide what to do. My first step is always going to be "Hey, you did X. Do you remember us having a conversation about my feelings about X?"

At that point, it's really all about his reaction. Maybe he totally forgot that X was an issue for me. Maybe he remembered, but X was really important to him for some reason and so he was going to discuss renegotiating the boundary with me. Maybe he didn't think X was a big deal.

Most of those reactions, we can work with and resolve the issue. The only time it would become a big problem is if X is very important to me, and he legitimately does not care how I feel about it. Anything else? We can find a way to work through it because we're partners and under it all, we care about each others' thoughts and feelings, and we approach things as a team.

Are there times when he really wants X and I really do not want X, or vice versa? Sure, we're human beings and that's how life works. But by approaching the situation with the goal of being fair and finding the best mutual resolution rather than trying to "win", we can usually work it out.

If it's a boundary issue that is serious enough and one of us is unwilling to make the decision to renegotiate, then it might signify that we aren't compatible anymore. There's nothing wrong with that- why stay in a relationship that would make one or both of us unhappy? Obviously that's the nuclear solution that neither of us wants and it would have to be a really big X for us to put that as a priority ahead of working things out.

But tell me- how exactly would rules do any better? Your spouse isn't your child. All they do is give you something to hold over your partner's head if they don't do what you want them to do. Rules don't actually protect you, they just attempt to control the situation.

In the specific situation you gave, I probably wouldn't object to the friend being there if I wasn't, assuming the friend wasn't stealing or damaging property or anything crazy like that. I would be willing to negotiate on that point. If my husband was choosing to spend more time away from home to be with this friend, my issue is with my husband, not with the friend. It's not a friend problem. As long as my husband was meeting his work and family responsibilities, I'd likely accept it for a while. When I started to feel neglected, I would tell him that I needed more quality time and ask him for the specific amount of time I wanted. Then the ball is in his court. If he cares about me so little that he won't give me more time when I ask for it, what am I doing with him anyway?

At the end of the day, the real relationship killer is contempt, no? If your partner genuinely cares about your thoughts and feelings, then you can generally find a way to negotiate a compromise most of the time. If they don't care, then I wouldn't want to be in that relationship anyway.

I really think that in a healthy, loving relationship that most problems can be worked through with open and honest communication, and respect for personal autonomy.

I am in a monogamous marriage. Theres no room for a third person. Friend or not. Once my wayward husband gave of himself to another what should only be kept within our marriage he crossed a line and when it's not physical intercourse it's called an EA.

When it involves physical contact it's a PA.

Simple. Agree or not I dont care. This is MY view for MY relationships and MY marriage. My husband agreed to those terms when he married me.

If hes unhappy with accepting those terms now that hes living them he can freely chose to divorce me.

Edited for spelling

[This message edited by DragnHeart at 7:05 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

Sometimes I wish I had a time machine. A trip 5 years down the road would be interesting. I can’t help but wonder if PSTI’s honeymoon will still look as perfect? Will all her polyamory solutions to marriage and “fidelity” still hold water? Will she still feel the need to educate those who live in monogamy, who are here to work through complete betrayal of that agreement, that all can be solved through a swinger lifestyle? What a fucking joke.

Sometimes I wish I had a time machine. A trip 5 years down the road would be interesting. I can’t help but wonder if PSTI’s honeymoon will still look as perfect? Will all her polyamory solutions to marriage and “fidelity” still hold water? Will she still feel the need to educate those who live in monogamy, who are here to work through complete betrayal of that agreement, that all can be solved through a swinger lifestyle? What a fucking joke

Loukas, I feel like you haven't understood me if that's what you take from my posts. I surely don't think life's problems can be solved with a swinger lifestyle. I am not even a swinger and I wouldn't recommend that as a lifestyle. I think that without a solid foundation of honesty and good communication, which obviously most marriages here lack or y'all wouldn't be here- that it's destined to be a giant mess. What I'm actually promoting IS that honesty and good communication, and those are learned skills, not things we are just born with.

What's interesting, is that people have been saying that to me in various forms for years. We all change over time, so I am sure the me you would meet in five years will be different. In fact, I hope she will be. We gotta move with the cheese :) Feel free to look me up, I'm sure I'll be around. I've been on various relationship forums for fifteen years and counting, off and on.

I rather like the person I've been becoming, especially since my WH left us. I was depressed and broken, and it took me four years to start to feel like myself again. And now, I've grown and become a better version of that person. I've become less black and white, more open minded and understanding about different positions. I've learned how to effectively communicate in a relationship. I've learned that the things I believed made a good relationship aren't actually the things that matter (thank you, IC!). I've become more tolerant of faults, more authentic as a human being, and more genuine in my connections with other people.

If I continue improving, I hope I will continue to love the person I am in 5 years, too. I like her a lot better than the person who allowed herself to be treated the way my WH treated me.

I'm not here to educate anyone. I'm here to have discussions about issues. Life isn't as black and white as many posters here seem to think it is, and discussing issues can only make people more open minded. That doesn't mean sexually- that means willing to listen to ideas you may not have originally considered.

I'm not the one who is making it about individuals; you're trying to make it about me. I'm making it about issues. You may want to consider why you feel the need to try and make it personal, when I am here to share my experiences both as a BW and as a happily married wife, and also to learn from many of you. An echo chamber helps no one, wouldn't you agree?

[This message edited by PSTI at 9:17 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

My first reaction was to tell my husband he could no longer be friends with this man, like I suspect most of you would feel

Here's where you're wrong. I have never had a reaction of wanting to tell any significant other that he couldn't be friends with someone. My fch has had plenty of friends that I don't like. I just don't hang around with them. My fch can go do things with them on his own. I tell my fch that I don't like them, and I tell him why. He respects that I don't want to be around them.

Your boundaries don't sound any different from mine, or really most others on here. We set our boundaries and communicate them to our partners. They decide whether or not to respect our boundaries. We act accordingly. That's exactly what you described.

I, too, am beginning to feel like you are talking in circles. What is your point in this thread? Do you want us to tell you that you are justified in being upset that your friend dumped you for his wife? You can certainly be upset about that. Rejection hurts. Do you want us to agree with you that your relationship with said friend wasn't an EA? We can't do that.

But, I doubt you know all of their history. Maybe you had perfectly innocent, completely platonic intentions. You don't know what his intentions were. You don't know if he had done things in the past that made her feel unsafe. If there was something about your relationship with her husband that she felt unsafe about, it is his duty, first and foremost, to make her feel safe. His ultimate duty lies with his wife, not with you. When he chose to marry her, he chose her above all others.

Why get married if you aren't going to do that? Unless it's a marriage of convenience. If you marry someone with the understanding that you both are perfectly fine if either one meets someone else and decides they want to be with that person instead of you, what's the point? You can do all of that without being married. I'm not talking about being married and being polyamorous. I assume that in that situation your spouse is still above all others. If he's not and someone else could easily come along and take his place, why marry him? To me, being married means you've made a promise to not let that happen.

PSTI - your posts do come across a little “evangelical” for lack of a better word and superior. But I don’t like at all the way Loukas communicated w you. However, I do see that evangelical aspect of your posts as well. It comes off as “Here comes PSTI the expert coming to save you w her boundaries (not rules totally different) and all of this should be totally clear and if not then you are just controlling and possessive. Can’t have posessiveness as that is bad, not at all a normal mammalian feeling one may have in monogamy”. It also feels like you are trying to convince people EAs aren’t a thing or like this whole thread is all research for a Huffpost or offbeat home article about that. It doesn’t have a pure issues-only sort of feel it feels like there is an angle.

But, I doubt you know all of their history. Maybe you had perfectly innocent, completely platonic intentions. You don't know what his intentions were. You don't know if he had done things in the past that made her feel unsafe. If there was something about your relationship with her husband that she felt unsafe about, it is his duty, first and foremost, to make her feel safe.

I don't know, coco- I'd known him for 12 years. She'd known him for six months. He really was a "good man". I used to tease him about being so virtuous, because he really was. I don't think I could believe that.

I hear what you're saying, but I don't think it's our duty to bend over backwards when our spouses are being silly. And I'm not saying people here ARE being silly. But making those absolute statements? Yes, I think it lacks nuance, if nothing else.

Justsomelady- no articles here. Like I said, I've been haunting various relationship forums for more than a decade. I genuinely enjoy seeing the variety of human expression in relationships, and sharing my own experiences. And I love a good discussion of issues. I would sit all day and listen to any one of you tell me your story because that's where I believe life truly is.

So I have a bit of a poet's heart :) But as you can see from this thread, connections do matter to me. No ulterior goals other than a good conversation.

[This message edited by PSTI at 9:25 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

I don’t believe you.

You are more than welcome to believe whatever you like. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other.

If you'd like to continue discussing EAs, I'm up for that as well. If not, feel free to pass by my posts.

[This message edited by PSTI at 10:16 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

If you marry someone with the understanding that you both are perfectly fine if either one meets someone else and decides they want to be with that person instead of you, what's the point? You can do all of that without being married. I'm not talking about being married and being polyamorous. I assume that in that situation your spouse is still above all others. If he's not and someone else could easily come along and take his place, why marry him? To me, being married means you've made a promise to not let that happen.

I'm curious about this too, unless it's a purely legal construct for nesting partners with children. I'm not positive where your own M lies on the spectrum between hierarchical poly and relationship anarchy, but given how bonded you are to your BF, I would predict it was closer to the latter end. Which is fine and all, the three of you are happy with it and your kid is comfortable, and those are the things that really matter, IMO. But if marriage isn't "for better, for worse, forsaking all others, as long as you both shall live," then how is it differentiated from any other significant relationship?

For me, it's worth giving up everything and everyone else to have that "you and me, always and only" bond. I don't ever need to be concerned about the cute girl my H is fucking getting a job offer in Dallas, so that I have to decide whether to leave my life to follow them or live here without him. I like knowing that this will never even come up as a topic for discussion. If one of us gets cancer, the other will be devoted to getting them through it 100%, not worrying about whether the outside partner feels neglected by repeatedly canceled dates during 18 months of chemo. We will never have to feel badly about breaking anyone's heart if we feel overwhelmed and put each other unequivocally first. That's the deal, and if we sometimes feel sadness that it limits some options, we knew that was the case when we signed up. Otherwise, why not just stay single?

That's what I thought marriage was. I'm not saying this to be contrary or offensive, but because I genuinely don't know: if that's not what makes a relationship a marriage, then what is?

[This message edited by BraveSirRobin at 10:31 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

BSR- I think that I'm just coming from an entirely different view on this. It gets into one of those lovely philosophical topics where you can broaden it all the way into, what does marriage mean at all? (would be happy to spin off into that if you like!)

Honestly, no, I'm not a relationship anarchist. I've seen so many horror stories from that side of things, and I believe that a lot of them are only in relationships for as long as it is good for them. Probably a lot of the things I'm about to say are what y'all think of me, so if it's coming from me, that should say quite a bit. I see people who don't value the relationship as its own entity with its own wants and needs (like we discussed upstream- I see a relationship as both individuals, and an entity). They seem selfish to me, in a lot of ways, and I'm sure they're not all like that but it's rather a predominant feature that I see in the RA/solo poly community.

My husband and I have always had an open and poly relationship. I asked him to marry me- he'd never been married before. But I certainly didn't have to marry him to stay with him, and after my horror show of a divorce (my first marriage lasted 14 years, by the way), my family was surprised I wanted to take that risk again.

I consider myself to be a descriptive hierarchical polyamorist. That means that I consider myself to have a hierarchical relationship based on "the way things are" because I parent with DH and we have legal entanglements. It doesn't mean that any future relationships are limited by artificial constructs- they can grow in whatever way they happen to go. I have some personal boundaries (i.e no more children) but they aren't related to hierarchy. There's a big difference between that and a prescriptive hierarchy, which basically says to future partners, this is my spouse so you basically will always come second no matter what and you should be grateful for whatever snippets of my time I give you and that's that. Kinda like an AP, honestly. People, especially unicorn hunters, often treat secondary partners in a deplorable fashion and it's appalling. But that's a bit of a digression, my apologies. I guess you would consider my personal philosophy to be somewhere in the middle of that spectrum from strict hierarchy to relationship anarchy.

As to why be married, I wrote this a while back:

What is a marriage? Is it only about sex? Is it only about love? I think this is a question that we all have to answer for ourselves. What does your marriage (or in general if you're not married) mean to you?

Sex with others, or love with others, doesn't cheapen my marriage in any way. I married DH not only because I love him, not only because I like to have sex with him- but because I want to build a life with him. He doesn't check all the boxes but who does? That's a beyond unrealistic expectation. I know I don't check all his either. But that's not the point. The point is that we want to grow old together and be life partners. We not only love each other, but we choose each other every single day. We share love and passion, tears, anger, and everything on the spectrum. He's my best friend, and I'm his.

I'm not even sure why the sexual fidelity has come to play such a large role in relationships, other than the concern in the past for men having to raise others' children unwittingly. I don't know why sex has become so strongly correlated with love in Western society, when so many other cultures have other norms about sex.

To me, marriage isn't just about a legal agreement. It's not just about who you have sex with. And it's not just about children, or security, or couple's privilege. It may be about all those things, but to me it's something more. It says to me, I want to share this journey with you. I love you and accept you for who you are now, knowing that we will both grow and change over the years. It says to me, I will make sacrifices for you as you make them for me, because our relationship has intrinsic value and we want to invest in it and each other.

So I will never vow to DH that there will be no others; quite the contrary, I have promised him there always will be. But he knows that whatever connections I build with others do not take away from what I have with him. So why did I want to marry him? Because he's become the person in this world that I can trust to always have my back (and to point out when he thinks I am wrong, to boot), to know the innermost secrets of my heart, and to support me to reach my goals.

I can have a committed relationship with DH without sexual or romantic fidelity. Commitment doesn't have to mean forever, although we both want and hope it will be, just like everyone else who says those magic words. Commitment for commitment's sake if a relationship is toxic never helped anyone.

To address those specific examples you brought up- I decided that I am rooted right where I am. For various reasons, I will not be moving. DBF knows that, and it has nothing to do with his importance to me, but if he accepts a job offer somewhere far away, he knows the romantic aspect of our relationship would end because I am not happy in long distance relationships. I would hope we could eventually transition into friendship but I know it would take time to deal with the hurt feelings. As for the serious illness, if your "outside partner" was upset about cancelled dates, I would say that doesn't say a lot about the emotional connection. If I had a life threatening illness, I would expect DBF to be right there supporting me through it as well. I would do that for him, too. While I'm not averse to relationships casual enough that you just have dates every once in a while, that's not what I really think of when I think polyamory. That means ethical romantic relationships, and a romantic partner should be more concerned about their partner than cancelled dates and should want to be there and help, in my opinion. As for breaking up with someone to focus on your spouse, I wouldn't do that. I don't think it's ethical to treat other partners as disposable. I am not sure what would have to happen to make me think that was necessary, because I can take care of my spouse without dropping everything else in my life. If I had a platonic best friend, I wouldn't drop them because my spouse needed me, so why would I need to do this with a romantic partner? And people tend to be understanding. When DBF was overwhelmed with work in the fall and we saw each other barely once a week for two months, I didn't break up with him because I felt neglected. I supported him and when he could put the crap down, he made sure to show me how much he appreciated it. I'm sure if I needed to focus more energy on DH he would do the same for me.

Did I answer what you were asking in that massive response?

[This message edited by PSTI at 11:41 PM, December 28th (Saturday)]

I think that without a solid foundation of honesty and good communication, which obviously most marriages here lack or y'all wouldn't be here- that it's destined to be a giant mess.

My marriage didn’t lack honesty or good communication, my ex did. That’s the difference you ignorantly or intentionally overlook.

Your posts have a recurring theme.

You want honesty, here’s some honesty, you know damn well what an EA is, you’re simply choosing to pretend you don’t to push your agenda. I don’t think you’re too simple to not understand that, so be honest in return and show your true hand.

[This message edited by Loukas at 3:18 AM, December 29th (Sunday)]

Sex with others, or love with others, doesn't cheapen my marriage in any way.

It does mine. That’s how I feel. You can call it possessiveness, controlling, pretend like you don’t understand it all you want, but it doesn’t change anything. I practice monogamy. To me that means my husband gives his romantic love to me and has sexual relations only with me.

That doesn’t make you better or more or evolved.

You’re still here acting like you’re better than others. Still acting like our relationships must be lacking something. Honestly it’s starting to come off as if we had just been less controlling and more understanding of our waywards side pieces, we wouldn’t have been cheated on. After all, what’s the big deal if they love and screw other people? They’re still married to us, right?

[This message edited by landclark at 7:59 AM, December 29th (Sunday)]

I haven’t read all the posts but I feel an ea is when your SO has a relationship with someone else that is secret in any way with you.

I think we get too caught up in somebody else's definition of things. If you find out your spouse is having some kind of secret "friendship" that bothers you then what more do we need to know? I know that sounds awfully simplistic but I have seen posts that basically say that if you talk to somebody and say things you would not say to your spouse, that is an "emotional affair." If that is true then I'm having an EA with all my family (especially sisters) all my friends including female friends and others as well. So I definitely don't go along with the broad definition like that one.

On the other hand, if your spouse is calling and/or texting the other person several times a day and he or she has NEVER done that with the regular "friends" then I would say that is a huge red flag and I, personally would call it more than a "friendship," and regardless of whether or not somebody else thinks what he was doing was not a big deal, to me it was almost a deal breaker, and would have been if he did not wake up immediately after D-day and started making his life about showing me that he could be a man who deserves to be my H.

You can build a life with someone without being married. You can be completely and utterly committed to another person without being married. To me, marriage is a legal contract/agreement. It's not about my love or commitment to my fch. It's about medical insurance and taxes and custody of our children and such.

he knows that whatever connections I build with others do not take away from what I have with him.

So, neither of you have to be concerned that the other might form such a strong emotional bond with another that you would divorce? Both of you have that boundary set. Ypu won't let another come between you. That was part of the agreement when you got married. So, your H is the one above all others, regardless of how you may feel for another.

Then, you won't have an EA. He won't have an EA. A monogamous relationship doesn't have room for such a strong emotional attachment to another. That's what makes it monogamous. That's the agreement that was entered into when the monogamous relationship was formed, whether through commitment or marriage.

I'm not talking about bending over backward to appease some silly whim. I'm talking about doing everything you can to make your partner feel safe in your relationship. If you aren't willing to do that, you aren't truly and completely committed to him or her. It's not about autonomy. You have the choice of whether or not to comply with their wishes. That's your autonomy.

If your partner is off the rails jealous and has a fit every time you meet someone, then they need therapy. Why would anyone stay committed to someone like that? I'm not controlling my fch when I say to him, "Hey, I get a weird feeling from that woman. I don't like you being so chummy with her." If he respects me and my feelings, he will back off the friendship with that person. If he doesn't, that's his choice, but I'm not going to be ok with it. That could lead to D. Again, that's not controlling him. That's taking care of me.

As to your friend, it doesn't really matter how long you knew him or what you thought of him. We only know that much about other people that they want us to know. You don't know what might have been going on in his head. Ypu don't know how he really felt. Ypu know what he told you. You know what he showed you.

If you are a BP, you know that all of that can be a lie. I'm guessing you thought you knew your XWH. I'm guessing you thought he would cheat on you. Obviously, you were wrong. You didn't really know anything.