"He moved out and initiated divorce proceedings, but in the time since, I was able to convince him that I am truly repentant and to give our marriage another chance for the sake of our children. The problem I have now is that he says that if we are to stay married, he wants it to be an open marriage. I've tried to tell him that I've gotten that out of my system and I don't want to be with anybody other than him, but he says there just isn't any way he can ever trust me again, he doesn't feel an obligation to be faithful to me anymore, and at least this way we're being honest about it."
Letter to advice columnist "Prudie" from a woman who "just want[s] things to go back to how they used to be."
Who's more wrong, the wife or the husband? It's easy to say the wife, but the husband is also wrong, because the idea of open marriage should be founded on trust, not mistrust. He's punishing her, deliberately, not pursuing what he believes is a positive way of life. (I'm not recommending polyamory, but if you're doing it as an expression of hostility to your primary partner, you're not doing it the way the prominent proponents say you should. I know... should... why speak of shoulds in the realm of transgression? I do get that. But I'm not one of the promoters of polyamory. I'm just someone who's listened to my share of Dan Savage podcasts.)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
To live freely in writing...
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
Posts
Blog Archive
-
►
2024
(2664)
- 11/17 (52)
- 11/10 (52)
- 11/03 (62)
- 10/27 (62)
- 10/20 (49)
- 10/13 (49)
- 10/06 (59)
- 09/29 (58)
- 09/22 (62)
- 09/15 (52)
- 09/08 (58)
- 09/01 (56)
- 08/25 (51)
- 08/18 (57)
- 08/11 (54)
- 08/04 (64)
- 07/28 (60)
- 07/21 (75)
- 07/14 (69)
- 07/07 (63)
- 06/30 (49)
- 06/23 (68)
- 06/16 (58)
- 06/09 (61)
- 06/02 (59)
- 05/26 (56)
- 05/19 (54)
- 05/12 (53)
- 05/05 (56)
- 04/28 (65)
- 04/21 (57)
- 04/14 (68)
- 04/07 (56)
- 03/31 (55)
- 03/24 (56)
- 03/17 (59)
- 03/10 (52)
- 03/03 (63)
- 02/25 (59)
- 02/18 (45)
- 02/11 (60)
- 02/04 (56)
- 01/28 (50)
- 01/21 (64)
- 01/14 (62)
- 01/07 (59)
-
►
2023
(3115)
- 12/31 (58)
- 12/24 (43)
- 12/17 (55)
- 12/10 (66)
- 12/03 (57)
- 11/26 (56)
- 11/19 (44)
- 11/12 (55)
- 11/05 (69)
- 10/29 (63)
- 10/22 (54)
- 10/15 (62)
- 10/08 (69)
- 10/01 (70)
- 09/24 (55)
- 09/17 (49)
- 09/10 (62)
- 09/03 (54)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (45)
- 08/13 (50)
- 08/06 (54)
- 07/30 (62)
- 07/23 (50)
- 07/16 (49)
- 07/09 (59)
- 07/02 (61)
- 06/25 (63)
- 06/18 (53)
- 06/11 (63)
- 06/04 (67)
- 05/28 (53)
- 05/21 (60)
- 05/14 (66)
- 05/07 (66)
- 04/30 (67)
- 04/23 (54)
- 04/16 (55)
- 04/09 (64)
- 04/02 (63)
- 03/26 (64)
- 03/19 (76)
- 03/12 (60)
- 03/05 (52)
- 02/26 (63)
- 02/19 (49)
- 02/12 (66)
- 02/05 (63)
- 01/29 (60)
- 01/22 (57)
- 01/15 (60)
- 01/08 (66)
- 01/01 (60)
-
►
2022
(3553)
- 12/25 (55)
- 12/18 (56)
- 12/11 (73)
- 12/04 (71)
- 11/27 (76)
- 11/20 (76)
- 11/13 (80)
- 11/06 (71)
- 10/30 (72)
- 10/23 (60)
- 10/16 (61)
- 10/09 (63)
- 10/02 (70)
- 09/25 (56)
- 09/18 (62)
- 09/11 (64)
- 09/04 (76)
- 08/28 (75)
- 08/21 (63)
- 08/14 (71)
- 08/07 (76)
- 07/31 (74)
- 07/24 (71)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (67)
- 07/03 (70)
- 06/26 (73)
- 06/19 (79)
- 06/12 (74)
- 06/05 (87)
- 05/29 (54)
- 05/22 (66)
- 05/15 (72)
- 05/08 (76)
- 05/01 (62)
- 04/24 (62)
- 04/17 (70)
- 04/10 (69)
- 04/03 (82)
- 03/27 (67)
- 03/20 (64)
- 03/13 (64)
- 03/06 (79)
- 02/27 (64)
- 02/20 (66)
- 02/13 (68)
- 02/06 (59)
- 01/30 (70)
- 01/23 (58)
- 01/16 (61)
- 01/09 (64)
- 01/02 (68)
-
►
2021
(3054)
- 12/26 (55)
- 12/19 (52)
- 12/12 (53)
- 12/05 (51)
- 11/28 (44)
- 11/21 (62)
- 11/14 (54)
- 11/07 (54)
- 10/31 (65)
- 10/24 (73)
- 10/17 (61)
- 10/10 (62)
- 10/03 (64)
- 09/26 (59)
- 09/19 (48)
- 09/12 (53)
- 09/05 (60)
- 08/29 (76)
- 08/22 (67)
- 08/15 (66)
- 08/08 (53)
- 08/01 (55)
- 07/25 (56)
- 07/18 (58)
- 07/11 (59)
- 07/04 (52)
- 06/27 (57)
- 06/20 (57)
- 06/13 (65)
- 06/06 (64)
- 05/30 (50)
- 05/23 (64)
- 05/16 (56)
- 05/09 (65)
- 05/02 (63)
- 04/25 (62)
- 04/18 (56)
- 04/11 (64)
- 04/04 (71)
- 03/28 (68)
- 03/21 (57)
- 03/14 (66)
- 03/07 (60)
- 02/28 (53)
- 02/21 (56)
- 02/14 (40)
- 02/07 (62)
- 01/31 (53)
- 01/24 (61)
- 01/17 (56)
- 01/10 (58)
- 01/03 (58)
-
►
2020
(3644)
- 12/27 (49)
- 12/20 (40)
- 12/13 (56)
- 12/06 (61)
- 11/29 (57)
- 11/22 (59)
- 11/15 (57)
- 11/08 (71)
- 11/01 (76)
- 10/25 (68)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (64)
- 10/04 (70)
- 09/27 (71)
- 09/20 (64)
- 09/13 (61)
- 09/06 (70)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (78)
- 08/16 (71)
- 08/09 (50)
- 08/02 (76)
- 07/26 (62)
- 07/19 (70)
- 07/12 (64)
- 07/05 (74)
- 06/28 (84)
- 06/21 (88)
- 06/14 (73)
- 06/07 (91)
- 05/31 (99)
- 05/24 (82)
- 05/17 (76)
- 05/10 (93)
- 05/03 (78)
- 04/26 (72)
- 04/19 (63)
- 04/12 (71)
- 04/05 (74)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (64)
- 03/15 (83)
- 03/08 (75)
- 03/01 (78)
- 02/23 (70)
- 02/16 (69)
- 02/09 (67)
- 02/02 (81)
- 01/26 (68)
- 01/19 (61)
- 01/12 (63)
- 01/05 (62)
-
►
2019
(3453)
- 12/29 (81)
- 12/22 (51)
- 12/15 (74)
- 12/08 (73)
- 12/01 (66)
- 11/24 (74)
- 11/17 (77)
- 11/10 (68)
- 11/03 (69)
- 10/27 (83)
- 10/20 (83)
- 10/13 (92)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (49)
- 09/22 (60)
- 09/15 (68)
- 09/08 (67)
- 09/01 (54)
- 08/25 (64)
- 08/18 (61)
- 08/11 (56)
- 08/04 (57)
- 07/28 (53)
- 07/21 (68)
- 07/14 (61)
- 07/07 (60)
- 06/30 (65)
- 06/23 (67)
- 06/16 (54)
- 06/09 (42)
- 06/02 (64)
- 05/26 (62)
- 05/19 (60)
- 05/12 (64)
- 05/05 (77)
- 04/28 (78)
- 04/21 (43)
- 04/14 (58)
- 04/07 (67)
- 03/31 (75)
- 03/24 (65)
- 03/17 (68)
- 03/10 (70)
- 03/03 (71)
- 02/24 (62)
- 02/17 (88)
- 02/10 (72)
- 02/03 (55)
- 01/27 (68)
- 01/20 (72)
- 01/13 (76)
- 01/06 (76)
-
►
2018
(3410)
- 12/30 (59)
- 12/23 (45)
- 12/16 (76)
- 12/09 (83)
- 12/02 (69)
- 11/25 (68)
- 11/18 (61)
- 11/11 (61)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (76)
- 10/21 (71)
- 10/14 (53)
- 10/07 (53)
- 09/30 (61)
- 09/23 (61)
- 09/16 (63)
- 09/09 (57)
- 09/02 (55)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (63)
- 08/12 (59)
- 08/05 (69)
- 07/29 (64)
- 07/22 (60)
- 07/15 (69)
- 07/08 (67)
- 07/01 (67)
- 06/24 (62)
- 06/17 (68)
- 06/10 (65)
- 06/03 (65)
- 05/27 (54)
- 05/20 (63)
- 05/13 (53)
- 05/06 (78)
- 04/29 (74)
- 04/22 (68)
- 04/15 (71)
- 04/08 (53)
- 04/01 (76)
- 03/25 (64)
- 03/18 (78)
- 03/11 (67)
- 03/04 (71)
- 02/25 (66)
- 02/18 (70)
- 02/11 (64)
- 02/04 (68)
- 01/28 (80)
- 01/21 (73)
- 01/14 (65)
- 01/07 (82)
-
►
2017
(3818)
- 12/31 (85)
- 12/24 (66)
- 12/17 (75)
- 12/10 (74)
- 12/03 (77)
- 11/26 (75)
- 11/19 (58)
- 11/12 (70)
- 11/05 (75)
- 10/29 (67)
- 10/22 (76)
- 10/15 (72)
- 10/08 (70)
- 10/01 (63)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (63)
- 09/10 (65)
- 09/03 (66)
- 08/27 (69)
- 08/20 (59)
- 08/13 (66)
- 08/06 (73)
- 07/30 (89)
- 07/23 (79)
- 07/16 (81)
- 07/09 (75)
- 07/02 (64)
- 06/25 (83)
- 06/18 (70)
- 06/11 (67)
- 06/04 (74)
- 05/28 (75)
- 05/21 (77)
- 05/14 (81)
- 05/07 (89)
- 04/30 (83)
- 04/23 (80)
- 04/16 (71)
- 04/09 (78)
- 04/02 (74)
- 03/26 (83)
- 03/19 (74)
- 03/12 (77)
- 03/05 (60)
- 02/26 (49)
- 02/19 (72)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (88)
- 01/29 (91)
- 01/22 (82)
- 01/15 (47)
- 01/08 (60)
- 01/01 (48)
-
►
2016
(3557)
- 12/25 (61)
- 12/18 (62)
- 12/11 (59)
- 12/04 (60)
- 11/27 (74)
- 11/20 (68)
- 11/13 (79)
- 11/06 (62)
- 10/30 (88)
- 10/23 (75)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (58)
- 10/02 (72)
- 09/25 (70)
- 09/18 (70)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (64)
- 08/28 (53)
- 08/21 (62)
- 08/14 (70)
- 08/07 (67)
- 07/31 (68)
- 07/24 (57)
- 07/17 (71)
- 07/10 (53)
- 07/03 (53)
- 06/26 (80)
- 06/19 (81)
- 06/12 (73)
- 06/05 (65)
- 05/29 (74)
- 05/22 (67)
- 05/15 (70)
- 05/08 (89)
- 05/01 (79)
- 04/24 (67)
- 04/17 (59)
- 04/10 (61)
- 04/03 (52)
- 03/27 (68)
- 03/20 (76)
- 03/13 (68)
- 03/06 (81)
- 02/28 (65)
- 02/21 (69)
- 02/14 (70)
- 02/07 (75)
- 01/31 (68)
- 01/24 (59)
- 01/17 (69)
- 01/10 (80)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2015
(3788)
- 12/27 (71)
- 12/20 (68)
- 12/13 (81)
- 12/06 (70)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (58)
- 11/15 (76)
- 11/08 (84)
- 11/01 (73)
- 10/25 (74)
- 10/18 (65)
- 10/11 (75)
- 10/04 (87)
- 09/27 (59)
- 09/20 (71)
- 09/13 (55)
- 09/06 (63)
- 08/30 (72)
- 08/23 (70)
- 08/16 (70)
- 08/09 (65)
- 08/02 (65)
- 07/26 (55)
- 07/19 (66)
- 07/12 (69)
- 07/05 (62)
- 06/28 (83)
- 06/21 (79)
- 06/14 (69)
- 06/07 (81)
- 05/31 (84)
- 05/24 (78)
- 05/17 (90)
- 05/10 (85)
- 05/03 (86)
- 04/26 (77)
- 04/19 (78)
- 04/12 (63)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (79)
- 03/22 (73)
- 03/15 (63)
- 03/08 (79)
- 03/01 (66)
- 02/22 (82)
- 02/15 (78)
- 02/08 (67)
- 02/01 (84)
- 01/25 (79)
- 01/18 (63)
- 01/11 (87)
- 01/04 (70)
-
►
2014
(3825)
- 12/28 (62)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (78)
- 12/07 (97)
- 11/30 (84)
- 11/23 (82)
- 11/16 (70)
- 11/09 (71)
- 11/02 (91)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (71)
- 10/12 (86)
- 10/05 (61)
- 09/28 (58)
- 09/21 (67)
- 09/14 (56)
- 09/07 (70)
- 08/31 (64)
- 08/24 (63)
- 08/17 (51)
- 08/10 (79)
- 08/03 (71)
- 07/27 (75)
- 07/20 (81)
- 07/13 (75)
- 07/06 (67)
- 06/29 (41)
- 06/22 (80)
- 06/15 (78)
- 06/08 (91)
- 06/01 (59)
- 05/25 (58)
- 05/18 (90)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (72)
- 04/27 (72)
- 04/20 (73)
- 04/13 (82)
- 04/06 (81)
- 03/30 (77)
- 03/23 (66)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (77)
- 03/02 (90)
- 02/23 (73)
- 02/16 (91)
- 02/09 (77)
- 02/02 (91)
- 01/26 (86)
- 01/19 (81)
- 01/12 (90)
- 01/05 (67)
-
▼
2013
(5117)
- 12/29 (83)
- 12/22 (82)
- 12/15 (51)
- 12/08 (95)
- 12/01 (87)
- 11/24 (79)
- 11/17 (71)
- 11/10 (94)
- 11/03 (86)
- 10/27 (73)
- 10/20 (88)
- 10/13 (79)
- 10/06 (65)
- 09/29 (65)
- 09/22 (78)
- 09/15 (81)
- 09/08 (77)
- 09/01 (79)
- 08/25 (79)
- 08/18 (96)
- 08/11 (64)
- 08/04 (82)
- 07/28 (84)
- 07/21 (110)
- 07/14 (112)
- 07/07 (91)
- 06/30 (101)
- 06/23 (101)
- 06/16 (106)
- 06/09 (133)
- 06/02 (111)
- 05/26 (86)
- 05/19 (126)
- 05/12 (125)
- 05/05 (133)
- 04/28 (103)
- 04/21 (126)
- 04/14 (98)
- 04/07 (100)
- 03/31 (110)
- 03/24 (121)
- 03/17 (120)
- 03/10 (102)
- 03/03 (98)
- 02/24 (129)
- 02/17 (104)
- 02/10 (116)
- 02/03 (135)
- 01/27 (125)
- 01/20 (125)
- 01/13 (123)
- 01/06 (129)
-
►
2012
(4971)
- 12/30 (88)
- 12/23 (103)
- 12/16 (129)
- 12/09 (120)
- 12/02 (126)
- 11/25 (98)
- 11/18 (62)
- 11/11 (87)
- 11/04 (111)
- 10/28 (98)
- 10/21 (105)
- 10/14 (101)
- 10/07 (94)
- 09/30 (90)
- 09/23 (83)
- 09/16 (93)
- 09/09 (114)
- 09/02 (93)
- 08/26 (91)
- 08/19 (103)
- 08/12 (68)
- 08/05 (74)
- 07/29 (108)
- 07/22 (117)
- 07/15 (93)
- 07/08 (88)
- 07/01 (85)
- 06/24 (76)
- 06/17 (92)
- 06/10 (126)
- 06/03 (96)
- 05/27 (100)
- 05/20 (124)
- 05/13 (99)
- 05/06 (110)
- 04/29 (87)
- 04/22 (98)
- 04/15 (82)
- 04/08 (87)
- 04/01 (90)
- 03/25 (85)
- 03/18 (98)
- 03/11 (94)
- 03/04 (96)
- 02/26 (91)
- 02/19 (88)
- 02/12 (74)
- 02/05 (78)
- 01/29 (74)
- 01/22 (80)
- 01/15 (77)
- 01/08 (71)
- 01/01 (76)
-
►
2011
(4463)
- 12/25 (93)
- 12/18 (87)
- 12/11 (88)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (84)
- 11/20 (71)
- 11/13 (77)
- 11/06 (78)
- 10/30 (70)
- 10/23 (79)
- 10/16 (95)
- 10/09 (77)
- 10/02 (99)
- 09/25 (82)
- 09/18 (91)
- 09/11 (79)
- 09/04 (83)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (91)
- 08/14 (80)
- 08/07 (89)
- 07/31 (69)
- 07/24 (102)
- 07/17 (66)
- 07/10 (90)
- 07/03 (89)
- 06/26 (69)
- 06/19 (80)
- 06/12 (93)
- 06/05 (110)
- 05/29 (90)
- 05/22 (88)
- 05/15 (92)
- 05/08 (83)
- 05/01 (95)
- 04/24 (84)
- 04/17 (77)
- 04/10 (90)
- 04/03 (96)
- 03/27 (83)
- 03/20 (96)
- 03/13 (97)
- 03/06 (105)
- 02/27 (91)
- 02/20 (83)
- 02/13 (79)
- 02/06 (75)
- 01/30 (78)
- 01/23 (78)
- 01/16 (104)
- 01/09 (80)
- 01/02 (103)
-
►
2010
(3835)
- 12/26 (73)
- 12/19 (72)
- 12/12 (96)
- 12/05 (76)
- 11/28 (77)
- 11/21 (75)
- 11/14 (92)
- 11/07 (82)
- 10/31 (84)
- 10/24 (64)
- 10/17 (79)
- 10/10 (84)
- 10/03 (88)
- 09/26 (77)
- 09/19 (69)
- 09/12 (73)
- 09/05 (62)
- 08/29 (67)
- 08/22 (65)
- 08/15 (82)
- 08/08 (67)
- 08/01 (83)
- 07/25 (67)
- 07/18 (76)
- 07/11 (73)
- 07/04 (60)
- 06/27 (86)
- 06/20 (66)
- 06/13 (57)
- 06/06 (53)
- 05/30 (79)
- 05/23 (88)
- 05/16 (85)
- 05/09 (81)
- 05/02 (81)
- 04/25 (71)
- 04/18 (61)
- 04/11 (80)
- 04/04 (62)
- 03/28 (64)
- 03/21 (66)
- 03/14 (49)
- 03/07 (71)
- 02/28 (76)
- 02/21 (66)
- 02/14 (82)
- 02/07 (61)
- 01/31 (79)
- 01/24 (87)
- 01/17 (80)
- 01/10 (72)
- 01/03 (69)
-
►
2009
(3716)
- 12/27 (58)
- 12/20 (53)
- 12/13 (84)
- 12/06 (77)
- 11/29 (78)
- 11/22 (50)
- 11/15 (83)
- 11/08 (78)
- 11/01 (74)
- 10/25 (85)
- 10/18 (69)
- 10/11 (63)
- 10/04 (91)
- 09/27 (86)
- 09/20 (82)
- 09/13 (60)
- 09/06 (64)
- 08/30 (81)
- 08/23 (82)
- 08/16 (72)
- 08/09 (70)
- 08/02 (45)
- 07/26 (76)
- 07/19 (71)
- 07/12 (42)
- 07/05 (57)
- 06/28 (105)
- 06/21 (86)
- 06/14 (71)
- 06/07 (83)
- 05/31 (83)
- 05/24 (57)
- 05/17 (74)
- 05/10 (83)
- 05/03 (57)
- 04/26 (70)
- 04/19 (67)
- 04/12 (82)
- 04/05 (63)
- 03/29 (62)
- 03/22 (67)
- 03/15 (68)
- 03/08 (50)
- 03/01 (60)
- 02/22 (53)
- 02/15 (55)
- 02/08 (68)
- 02/01 (89)
- 01/25 (81)
- 01/18 (83)
- 01/11 (91)
- 01/04 (77)
-
►
2008
(3407)
- 12/28 (75)
- 12/21 (44)
- 12/14 (63)
- 12/07 (78)
- 11/30 (87)
- 11/23 (68)
- 11/16 (75)
- 11/09 (85)
- 11/02 (81)
- 10/26 (79)
- 10/19 (86)
- 10/12 (70)
- 10/05 (66)
- 09/28 (76)
- 09/21 (84)
- 09/14 (75)
- 09/07 (73)
- 08/31 (81)
- 08/24 (75)
- 08/17 (73)
- 08/10 (73)
- 08/03 (56)
- 07/27 (57)
- 07/20 (55)
- 07/13 (42)
- 07/06 (47)
- 06/29 (58)
- 06/22 (62)
- 06/15 (53)
- 06/08 (65)
- 06/01 (53)
- 05/25 (45)
- 05/18 (62)
- 05/11 (73)
- 05/04 (69)
- 04/27 (69)
- 04/20 (68)
- 04/13 (64)
- 04/06 (63)
- 03/30 (49)
- 03/23 (54)
- 03/16 (56)
- 03/09 (72)
- 03/02 (70)
- 02/24 (61)
- 02/17 (62)
- 02/10 (68)
- 02/03 (60)
- 01/27 (58)
- 01/20 (51)
- 01/13 (49)
- 01/06 (69)
-
►
2007
(2915)
- 12/30 (67)
- 12/23 (50)
- 12/16 (51)
- 12/09 (51)
- 12/02 (50)
- 11/25 (51)
- 11/18 (57)
- 11/11 (64)
- 11/04 (68)
- 10/28 (57)
- 10/21 (55)
- 10/14 (57)
- 10/07 (52)
- 09/30 (60)
- 09/23 (66)
- 09/16 (39)
- 09/09 (61)
- 09/02 (65)
- 08/26 (54)
- 08/19 (55)
- 08/12 (58)
- 08/05 (59)
- 07/29 (53)
- 07/22 (58)
- 07/15 (51)
- 07/08 (63)
- 07/01 (66)
- 06/24 (54)
- 06/17 (45)
- 06/10 (55)
- 06/03 (69)
- 05/27 (60)
- 05/20 (68)
- 05/13 (72)
- 05/06 (56)
- 04/29 (49)
- 04/22 (52)
- 04/15 (52)
- 04/08 (50)
- 04/01 (41)
- 03/25 (50)
- 03/18 (50)
- 03/11 (62)
- 03/04 (54)
- 02/25 (47)
- 02/18 (53)
- 02/11 (50)
- 02/04 (61)
- 01/28 (65)
- 01/21 (50)
- 01/14 (51)
- 01/07 (61)
-
►
2006
(2745)
- 12/31 (53)
- 12/24 (55)
- 12/17 (54)
- 12/10 (65)
- 12/03 (82)
- 11/26 (50)
- 11/19 (54)
- 11/12 (58)
- 11/05 (65)
- 10/29 (56)
- 10/22 (64)
- 10/15 (63)
- 10/08 (55)
- 10/01 (60)
- 09/24 (59)
- 09/17 (43)
- 09/10 (36)
- 09/03 (56)
- 08/27 (54)
- 08/20 (47)
- 08/13 (54)
- 08/06 (51)
- 07/30 (47)
- 07/23 (45)
- 07/16 (42)
- 07/09 (60)
- 07/02 (46)
- 06/25 (52)
- 06/18 (50)
- 06/11 (55)
- 06/04 (54)
- 05/28 (41)
- 05/21 (54)
- 05/14 (47)
- 05/07 (63)
- 04/30 (52)
- 04/23 (40)
- 04/16 (38)
- 04/09 (54)
- 04/02 (48)
- 03/26 (52)
- 03/19 (45)
- 03/12 (47)
- 03/05 (49)
- 02/26 (46)
- 02/19 (50)
- 02/12 (43)
- 02/05 (47)
- 01/29 (56)
- 01/22 (45)
- 01/15 (44)
- 01/08 (44)
- 01/01 (55)
-
►
2005
(2920)
- 12/25 (56)
- 12/18 (49)
- 12/11 (67)
- 12/04 (73)
- 11/27 (62)
- 11/20 (65)
- 11/13 (67)
- 11/06 (68)
- 10/30 (64)
- 10/23 (64)
- 10/16 (68)
- 10/09 (61)
- 10/02 (75)
- 09/25 (59)
- 09/18 (58)
- 09/11 (54)
- 09/04 (57)
- 08/28 (82)
- 08/21 (58)
- 08/14 (67)
- 08/07 (61)
- 07/31 (54)
- 07/24 (62)
- 07/17 (70)
- 07/10 (59)
- 07/03 (65)
- 06/26 (78)
- 06/19 (53)
- 06/12 (54)
- 06/05 (44)
- 05/29 (51)
- 05/22 (53)
- 05/15 (34)
- 05/08 (38)
- 05/01 (61)
- 04/24 (55)
- 04/17 (55)
- 04/10 (63)
- 04/03 (61)
- 03/27 (51)
- 03/20 (42)
- 03/13 (57)
- 03/06 (45)
- 02/27 (48)
- 02/20 (44)
- 02/13 (36)
- 02/06 (50)
- 01/30 (50)
- 01/23 (37)
- 01/16 (29)
- 01/09 (41)
- 01/02 (45)
-
►
2004
(2035)
- 12/26 (48)
- 12/19 (41)
- 12/12 (46)
- 12/05 (47)
- 11/28 (53)
- 11/21 (45)
- 11/14 (46)
- 11/07 (60)
- 10/31 (48)
- 10/24 (45)
- 10/17 (60)
- 10/10 (37)
- 10/03 (42)
- 09/26 (37)
- 09/19 (46)
- 09/12 (30)
- 09/05 (40)
- 08/29 (43)
- 08/22 (39)
- 08/15 (27)
- 08/08 (36)
- 08/01 (32)
- 07/25 (43)
- 07/18 (28)
- 07/11 (35)
- 07/04 (34)
- 06/27 (31)
- 06/20 (35)
- 06/13 (35)
- 06/06 (21)
- 05/30 (32)
- 05/23 (40)
- 05/16 (35)
- 05/09 (46)
- 05/02 (52)
- 04/25 (52)
- 04/18 (45)
- 04/11 (36)
- 04/04 (37)
- 03/28 (31)
- 03/21 (40)
- 03/14 (33)
- 03/07 (36)
- 02/29 (41)
- 02/22 (31)
- 02/15 (33)
- 02/08 (43)
- 02/01 (33)
- 01/25 (43)
- 01/18 (56)
- 01/11 (30)
334 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 334 of 334She expects your congratulations, liar. She is a martyr. Just like you.
The husbands response is perfect. He, at least, is giving her fair warning.
She doesn't want her lifestyle interrupted, obviously, so she expects him to make the sacrifices of his pride and integrity so she can feel better about herself and have as few consequences as possible.
'For the Children" yea right. She wasn't thinking about the kids when another dude was balls deep inside her.
To the former Mrs.NoNo, you have my sympathies, glad you got away.
I have some friends in the midst of a divorce. They have one son around 7 years old, who is starting to exhibit some problematic, acting-out behavior issues - most likely a result of his parents splitting up.
For a young only child - this has got to be hell on earth. Without one sibling to relate to or lean on, this poor little guy must feel terribly alone.
This got me to thinking: why THE FUCK can't those two grow up, put their own needs aside, and learn to live together as ROOM MATES and continue to raise their son together?
Both adults would be considered free to date, but it must be kept out of the family home. Given the choice, I'll bet most kids would rather see their parents move into separate bedrooms, have the random fight, but stay under the same roof than live apart.
I know I am dreaming, but you have to understand: I don't have a DOG because my lifestyle won't give it the best life it can have. So when people can't put their KID first.....
She wasn't thinking about the kids when another dude was balls deep inside her. SGT Ted
Irrelevant. A solipsist needs to justify her need to feed her ego, and her kids are just the tool she needs. They become an extension of her, so everything for her automatically is for them. Hence, the 20th century's greatest feminisit invention: "It's for the children."
To paraphrase Inga and to clarify what she really meant: A happy mom, happier children (a provider's happiness is irrelevant). Fucking some other guy makes her happy. Therefore, her fornication is for the children. QED
"They're both wrong. She should never had cheated on him if she wasn't completely positive the marriage was over, and then she should've waited to separate before hopping in the sack. He is a fool for taking her back and if he isn't a complete fool he should just go his separate way and meet some nice woman as a single man. Joint custody for kids."
5/15/13, 11:59 AM
By the way, SGT Ted, please note that a solipsist tends to quote herself, as if what she says is the most important thing ever.
Note I don't let Mr.NoNo paraphrase me.
Note that I did anyway.
People don't wait to separate before getting in bed with someone else because what if they divorce and then don't find someone?
So they're *shopping*.
And sorry... I got no sympathy for the excuses people think up, and most particularly no sympathy for the "be happy" excuse. If the person you're married to isn't a terrible, horrible person that you have to sneak out with the kids in the middle of the night to escape... stop lying about it and stop pretending you're not shopping.
And if divorced people suddenly become happy... I never met them
[Waives hand in the air] Meet me. Once divorced, I felt like I had lost weight. Actually, I DID. About 195 pounds of dead weight that I had been dragging around for at least the last 10 years of our marriage. It truly felt as if a giant weight had been lifted from me.
I realized that my days and nights would be as calm, peaceful and predictable as "I" wanted them to be. I had peace of mind at work. Time to consider what I should be and could be doing with my life. My finances were in order and getting better every day. Leisure time and school events with my child were also peaceful and able to be structured instead of in constant chaos. I could make PLANS and be able to stick to them. I would never have to think about my ex again or how he was going to affect(screw up) my days and nights or mess with my mind.
The only contact we would ever have would be anything to do with our child, and it would be cordial. We would [and did] make plans for seasonal custody, IF she wanted it. Spend summers and Christmas vacations with her father, whom she loves, and which she did until Junior High school and ceased at her request. I asked no questions as to why. Her decision. That was only fair. I got the joy of being with my child the rest of the time. I'm willing to share.
I didn't collect any child support, even though I was entitled and didn't bother to try to collect. Why waste the time and energy on a fruitless endeavor?
He would move on and do whatever with his life.....and I would with mine. We would both be better for it. I know I am.
My life was happy happy happy and has been ever since.
The only time I ever think about my ex is moments like this and when we have a mutual event concerning our child. Like her graduation from College or her wedding or our mutual grand children's birthdays or something else. We can be adults and speak in cordial tones.
"...idea of open marriage should be founded on trust, not mistrust."
Trust only happens in a closed marriage. If you don't like the sound of a marriage being closed, then you don't understand what a marriage is. Oh but wait... society doesn't understand what marriage is anymore since we are busy redefining it to incoherence.
Once trust is broken, how do you re-establish it again? From what little I understand of Judaism/Jewish culture, there is a process for making apologies, and it involves some form of restitution. So, perhaps a divorce and remarriage after time has healed wounds is the way to go. In a courtroom, once a witness lies, how does the jury find a way to believe anything the witness says afterwards? (Jodi A, anyone?)
Love is a like a magic spell, once it's broken, its broken. The best advice is to never let the monster in the room in the first place: the possibility that the faith/trust/love would ever be allowed to be broken.
Open marriage? it's contradiction in terms, a Rousseauian utopian fantasy. Marriages are closed, that's the whole point.
THANKYOU DBQ, for sharing. I'm sure they won't call you a liar. I've known at least three women with similar stories to yours. It happens.
THANKYOU DBQ, for sharing. I'm sure they won't call you a liar.
Now don't go trying to get people to believe that her story in any way validates yours. Yours was totally different. I'm sure you'd remember it, if you tried, you fraud.
Marriages are closed, that's the whole point.
I'm not sure what the word means anymore, and neither does anyone else.
Her story absolutely validates mine. I'm sure her daughter is better off for not having grown up with her father in the house and probably does not blame and maybe even thanks her Mom ( DBQ) for being a strong woman who got away.
to everyone getting hung up on the term open marriage and saying that's not a real marriage: that's the point. he doesn't want to be married to her. he's willing to stay married on paper and share a home for the kids. he's a hero. he's leaping on a grenade. I doubt he has illusions. ALP's term ROOM MATE MARRIAGE is appropriate.
Years later, after divorce and remarrying, now for almost 20 years, my daughter had graduated from college and with a relationship or two that she had had to deal with, told me that she understood why we got divorced and that she thought it was the best thing to do. She also said she NOW understood just how bad it was for me when she was little. That she knew things weren't really good, not really what was happening, but as an adult, now she did. It wasn't a Gee Mom, I'm glad you got divorced moment.....but ....almost.
She also 'sort of' let on that her father was doing the same mind games with her as she became a teenager, she recognized the pattern, and that was why she decided to not go visit for a while.
Note: I never talked bad about her father to her. I never complained about my marriage to my child. THAT would be highly inappropriate. I always "Put on a happy face" maybe even Academy Award performances. Truth is that it wasn't ALL bad. We had some good moments, some good times and there was love of a kind.
She, on her own, came to some conclusions. She still loves her father, as it should be, and has a good relationship with him, but she also sees him as he is.
Inga said...NoNo, I find it quite unbelievable you were actually married long enough to have children. You are a prime example of just exactly what I'm talking about. I can't imagine some woman having to live with someone like you. What would he children be exposed to?
Inga said...I'm sure her daughter is better off for not having grown up with her father in the house
vile
DBQ, from everything you've said he was (at the least) emotionally and psychologically abusive. I get that. CAN someone make another person unhappy? Of course they can. But in general terms, if someone's not constantly screwing with you, a person ought not blame unhappiness on others... but they do.
I don't think DBQ is a liar, or describing a divorce based on her happiness, or one stemming from infidelity. According to her, the ex made their child's school events chaotic and she hints toward financial issues of his making. That's not what Ms. Old Flame wrote about---it may well also be happening in their marriage, but we can't know that. Inga is advocating divorce based on just what we know, that Mom slept with someone else and Dad would like to as well.
I don't doubt that lots of people are happy after divorcing a dysfunctional deadweight, though I remain convinced that most are pretty miserable during that divorce and that the kids share that misery. Cheaters are not automatically dysfunctional deadweigh, though. If there's not a real deal-breaker, good parents should put up with some unhappiness and yes even loveless time for their kids sake.
Yes Acm, if one doesn't love their spouse enough to not cheat on them, then IMO, it's a sham marriage anyway and not worth continuing, EVEN for the children. My kids grew up without their father, they are all succesful and happy, two of them married and one engaged to be married and my youngest still single.
Yeah, the husband is being punitive. This won't work.
If the husband wants to be married he should be married, with all the commitments that entails. Otherwise, it's over.
He didn't break the contract, but he doesn't have the right to impose a new contract, either.
Also, Synova is right. Divorced people always justify their decisions as if everything was either their partner's fault or some natural force that prevented the marriage from working. It was always inevitable.
I never hear anyone say "I wish I hadn't gotten divorced." That's how unreflective people are about it, and how much people have to rationalize what they did. Surely some divorces are a mistake? You'd never know it from the stories people tell.
If you don't want to fight in front of the kids, then don't fight in front of the kids. If you want to get along then get along. People very often act like it's their right to act out on their emotions even when the results are awful. If your priority is staying married rather than winning fights and getting what you want then you are far more likely to stay married.
Marriage is for other people, your family, not yourself. If you want to do everything for yourself then don't get married. It's not about you.
Of course you don't have to put up with an abusive spouse, or a deadbeat, or a cheater. But that's not usually what happens.
You either forgive or you don't. There is no half-forgive, half-revenge.
She did a terrible thing. He's doing a terrible thing.
Why do people choose to make such awful messes of their lives?
Yes Acm, if one doesn't love their spouse enough to not cheat on them, then IMO, it's a sham marriage anyway and not worth continuing, EVEN for the children
Fucking boomers.
Althouse here demonstrates how, no matter what happens, she can find an excuse to blame the man.
Freeman,
He is doing something very human.
What do you think he should do?
Althouse here demonstrates how, no matter what happens, she can find an excuse to blame the man.
I do have a hard time following her assertion that trust is necessary for an open relationship. She won't explain her logic on that, which is the cornerstone of her complaint against the guy.
Is her Old Flame a man or a Woman: it Makes a Difference. A Hot, Hot Difference.
What Dante said.
In spades. Boomers destroyed marriage because they made everything selfish. It's all about "feelings" and "love" and "fulfillment." Nothing about duty or responsibility or doing what's right.
What is marriage for? Your own feelings or the the welfare of your family?
I have a son who speaks like a two year old who's almost eight. I have a wife with a crazy work schedule. I work as a pizza driver. Boo hoo, life is so hard, I feel so bad, waaaaaa. Who cares? You don't. The only ones who matter are my family, and the Lord. This isn't about me at all.
My wife is a wonderful person who I love dearly, but even if she wasn't it wouldn't matter. I signed on to be married for life, I have a son, and I'm not leaving. What would happen if I did? My son's life would be ruined. My wife wouldn't be able to raise him alone. What could possibly justify that? Some bullshit about how I felt?
Marriage and love are what you do, not some bullshit that goes on in your head. Reality is what you live, not some emotion that will come and go. And you know what? You control your emotions, too. If you can't control them I'm really sorry. I control what I do. I am responsible for what I do. So is everyone else.
People talk about feelings to excuse what they do when there is no excuse. They know other people will buy it. We shouldn't.
The biggest mistake of the last 50 years is to elevate the "inner life" above what people actually do. Your self is your actions, nothing more. You are what you do.
I understand his point of view better. You really can't trust a cheater again - ever, so this is his way of working around it. He should probably just get divorced.
As a boomer and as a woman, a widow who raised four children on my own, I don't think for one second my decisions for my family were selfish. I could've remarried, but didn't because no one I met could've made my children's life better. No marriage is better than a bad one.
Freeman,
He is doing something very human.
What do you think he should do?
To err is human, but it's still erring.
Forgive and try to build back a marriage or don't. Don't pretend to forgive while trying to enact revenge at the same time. Those dishes can't be served together.
At this point, he should just grudge fuck her at his leisure, get his other trim elsewhere, grudge fuck her some more, then if she puts up a fuss, take her to divorce court and grudge fuck her there. Win win.
You either forgive or you don't. There is no half-forgive, half-revenge.
There's no reason to assume this is about "revenge".
Here's a more realistic interpretation: the guy no longer has any romantic or sexual feelings for his "wife". He is willing to "stay together for the kids", but only if doing so leaves him room to find a new romantic partner.
It isn't about wanting revenge on her. It is about not caring, anymore, what she wants.
So the court jester of the eristocracy, Inga the drunken fool, dick trips her way into this conversation with more tales of the unbelievable and vapid. Where is my popcorn dammit.
Meth, why are you so obsessed with me? It's creepy.
I find it interesting that Althouse did not include the last three sentences of the original letter: "... it makes me ill to think about him being with another woman. I just want things to go back to how they used to be. How can I convince him that we need to be completely committed to each other in order for this to work?" Which manage to cast the woman in an even more unfavorable light (if possible).
Inga said...
Meth, why are you so obsessed with me? It's creepy.
The fact that you think that I am is what is really creepy. Creep on creepin' on, bug-face.
"There's no reason to assume this is about "revenge"."
Unless the man is actually a robot, which I doubt, he cares. Also, if he wants to stay married, he'd have to choose to care. You cannot both choose to stay married and choose not to care about the other person. These states are not compatible.
In fact, choosing to care is a huge part of what makes some marriages successful while others fail. If she had chosen to care earlier on, they wouldn't even be at this point.
Since I didn't address you Meth and you continue to post obsessive abusive comments on this blog directed to me, it's obvious to everyone here who is being obsessive. You make yourself appear to be the loon I strongly suspect you are.
Exactly Freeman. It's my opinion that if two people love one another they don't do this to each other.
Also, not to get too old time religion on you, but this open marriage business is only a sinful response to the wife's sinful act. Playing right into the evil that would consume a man.
If one can't forgive, at least don't make a mockery of forgiveness.
John Lynch said..."The biggest mistake of the last 50 years is to elevate the "inner life" above what people actually do. Your self is your actions, nothing more. You are what you do."
Amen and amen.
If I put myself in the guy's shoes and imagine what I would do if I were him (that's what we are all doing here, right?) I find his actions understandable, but not well thought out. Essentially, he's using 'open marriage' as a pseudonym for 'sham marriage'; his wife has destroyed their real marriage, but he's willing to go along with the pretense, living in the bombed-out shell of a relationship, "for the children's sake". Or maybe mainly to hurt his philandering wife. Either way, it will probably end in an escalating spiral of infidelity, deceit, and hatred, and as such is a bad idea.
However, we only have her interpretation of his behavior, and she is obviously an unusually selfish kind of person, assuming she's not just a figment of the agony columnist's imagination.
Just to be clear, I'm not on a high horse here. I am doubtful that I would choose to forgive the wife if I were this guy. And, as this was a one time thing, I think that's probably a flaw in my character. But there it is.
"Either way, it will probably end in an escalating spiral of infidelity, deceit, and hatred, and as such is a bad idea."
This. They would make a little hell on earth.
"Either way, it will probably end in an escalating spiral of infidelity, deceit, and hatred, and as such is a bad idea."
This. They would make a little hell on earth.
5/15/13, 8:25 PM
Exactly, and how would this be good for their children?
Meth, why are you so obsessed with me? It's creepy.
Because you post responses like this.
If you would ignore the bait, they'd be over you in a hot second. But you reliably always rise to the occasion.
As a boomer and as a woman, a widow who raised four children on my own, I don't think for one second my decisions for my family were selfish. I could've remarried, but didn't because no one I met could've made my children's life better. No marriage is better than a bad one.
You sacrificed, like any good mother would. I have no reason to doubt what you did, and accept it.
Why, though, do you then say other sacrifices aren't right? The children are most important. How many ways can I express this? Time speeds up, life has been lived, and there are new lives with so much time, choices, and opportunity.
You of all people, who had enormous burdens, and denied yourself, should understand this.
Dante, IF this couple or any other couple COULD deny themselves any further cheating and could truly put on a happy face for YEARS to come for the sake of the children, then more power to them I suppose, but realistically I don't see it happening and what would probably happen is what Paco Wove and Freeman described.
One of the most routine events in human relations - someone cheated on their spouse - has really got the comments today.
I could've remarried, but didn't because no one I met could've made my children's life better.
Says every crazy over-the-hill harridan.
Like you had a choice.
EMD said...
But you reliably always rise to the occasion.
She's a floater if you know what I mean.
Meth, why are you so obsessed with me? It's creepy.
Yuck, Methadras. She's hot for you.
This is why I say the Lord's Prayer, emphasizing "and lead us not into temptation".
If you don't want to cheat, avoid the near occasions that lead to it.
She chose to cheat and wrecked their marriage. She sought it out and made sure it happened. It wasn't like some car accident.
He demonstrated, if accurately portrayed, fatal immaturity in his response.
Both are not adults, not in any meaningful sense.
If you would ignore the bait, they'd be over you in a hot second. But you reliably always rise to the occasion.
Not possible. She loves the attention. If she were 4 decades younger and a whole lot hotter, a man could work with her shit. Now it's just gross.
If you have an open marriage, the guy is at a disadvantage. Any woman can have as much sex as she wants any time she wants. The man has to work for it ;she doesn’t. It's not fair but that's the way it is. To make it fair, women need to be beaten and suppressed.
Nomennovum said...
Meth, why are you so obsessed with me? It's creepy.
Yuck, Methadras. She's hot for you.
Ewww...
It's completely sexist and wrong to claim that the husband is "punishing" the wife.
It would seem that he accepted her claim that they should not get divorced for the sake of the children, but that for him the marriage is irretrievably broken and that he cannot stay married to her in the traditional sense. It seems that he meant his vows and she did not, and he cannot escape the proof of that.
When you break it, you don't get to make the other person fix it. Sometimes the other person can't fix it. It is entirely unfair to claim that the wronged person is seeking revenge because the wronged person can't heal the damage the wrong has done.
Freeman,
Well, I'm not divorced after 23 years of marriage, but probably will be soon.
Here is what I think.
First, I think you are probably a wonderful mother, and a great spouse, but you don't understand what's going on in the rest of the world. You have your circle, and it's safe, consistent, and whole.
The rest of the world is collapsing around you. The simple things you accept, the rest of the US rejects.
The traditional (how about evolved) relationship between a man and a woman, because it doesn't fit some smart guy's abstract reasoning, is coming to a close, being replaced with a Chinese style program them mentality.
Meanwhile, I don't have a lot of respect for what you are. A person who lives a life someone else laid out for you, and it's OK because that's what others told you was OK, is in my view a coward's life.
That's stagnation, but the other is arrogance.
You've picked mediocrity.
Dante, IF this couple or any other couple COULD deny themselves any further cheating and could truly put on a happy face for YEARS to come for the sake of the children, then more power to them I suppose, but realistically I don't see it happening and what would probably happen is what Paco Wove and Freeman described.
See, Inga,you simply don't understand men.
No Man will ever be happy in monogamy. It's simply not in the nature. No matter how hot, how good the sex is, there will always be another woman, no matter how inferior, that attracts the man's attention.
Anything else is a lie.
It IS sacrifice. It has always been sacrifice, the grand compromise.
That's the way men are. Deal with it, and perhaps, appreciate the sacrifice.
Here is what I think.
First, I think you are probably a wonderful mother, and a great spouse, but you don't understand what's going on in the rest of the world. You have your circle, and it's safe, consistent, and whole.
The rest of the world is collapsing around you. The simple things you accept, the rest of the US rejects.
The traditional (how about evolved) relationship between a man and a woman, because it doesn't fit some smart guy's abstract reasoning, is coming to a close, being replaced with a Chinese style program them mentality.
Meanwhile, I don't have a lot of respect for what you are. A person who lives a life someone else laid out for you, and it's OK because that's what others told you was OK, is in my view a coward's life.
That's stagnation, but the other is arrogance.
You've picked mediocrity.
How bizarre and totally foreign to my actual life! I don't know how you've come up with so many false assumptions about me, but I'm guessing it has to do with hostility you feel over something I've written.
This is why I say the Lord's Prayer, emphasizing "and lead us not into temptation".
If you don't want to cheat, avoid the near occasions that lead to it.
She chose to cheat and wrecked their marriage. She sought it out and made sure it happened. It wasn't like some car accident.
He demonstrated, if accurately portrayed, fatal immaturity in his response.
Well put on all points.
Making false assumptions about other commenter's lives seems to be a trend around here lately. Why do they think they know us?
I've worked with a bunch of men, and two women, who treated their marriages as "open" without bothering to inform their partners. Not my business, really, but I found it hard to trust them professionally. What bugged me most was having to hear about it.
I'm guessing it has to do with hostility you feel over something I've written.
Not at all. I don't have any hostility towards you at all, in fact the opposite.
You are walking the paved path, is what it seems to me, and are not understanding of the reality around you.
Making false assumptions about other commenter's lives seems to be a trend around here lately. Why do they think they know us?
Specifics, Inga linga, Allie oopsies. Specifics.
General far sweeping statements are meaningless.
Dante
Walking the paved path as ou call it is not for wimps.
The reality of the world, if I understand you correctly, is the very scenario this woman describes. The most difficult thing to do is to forgive and try to make a marriage that works.
That's the paved path and it has been proven to lead to a good place through many years and many experiences.
The "reality around you" is an unhappy and difficult way to live. It has not proven to work toward happiness for anyone.
that was a little incoherent.
Let me try again
Freeman is saying, if I understand her correctly, that it works for people to do things the traditional Christian way. Forgive and work hard to make things right.
You are saying, if I understand you correctly, that because terrible things were done the other person has the right to do terrible things as well.
This doesn't work and there is a lot of evidence that it does not.
It seems that quite a few commenters view a good marriage as only possible with an unrealistic worldview.
My parents and in-laws, and most of my friends are on their first marriages. All have undoubtedly gone through rough patches. The Christian concept of forgiveness and keeping short accounts is a large part of it.
I call that a sane worldview, resulting in the blessings of affection, stability, and support for all involved.
I don't think there's an eyeroll in the world sufficient for that screed of Dante's. Apparently
he knows what makes men---all men---happy better than the poor dear men themselves. And the "paved path" generally thought to be the civilized one, is actually the mediocre one? Because true greatness lies in the dirt, I guess.
The real asshat is the other man!
No. He didn't make any promises regarding who he would or wouldn't sleep with.
Unless, of course, he was also married.
This is why I say the Lord's Prayer, emphasizing "and lead us not into temptation".
A woman who once worked for me had quit her previous job when she started to become attracted to a coworker and decided her willpower wouldn't be up to the task if she didn't get out of there.
There's no reason to cheat on your spouse.
Dante, what you are calling walking the "paved path" is actually an attempt to walk a very narrow path. Broad is the way...
Your assumptions about this being the life expected specifically of me or adopted out of an unthinking desire to conform to expectations could not be more wrong.
So why would you have assumed these things?
In what way is the husband wrong? She's the one who violated the trust, not him. He offered his wife a deal to save the marriage after her transgression. If she doesn't like the terms she doesn't have to accept the offer. She should be grateful that he at least gave her a choice.
And when did you become a mind reader, Althouse? How do you know the husband's intentions are to punish his wife? Maybe he's had temptations at times and declined to act upon them. Maybe he simply wants to enjoy previously denied sexual pleasures for himself rather than punish his wife. If he wanted to punish her he would just divorce her.
Your assumption that he's out to punish his wife says more about your state of mind than his. You sound like a woman vicariously scorned.
"In what way is the husband wrong? "
His response is that of an adolescent. Tit-for-tat.
An adult male with a mature mind would either:
a) Divorce, or
b) Start over.
His answer is unworkable if adopted, and therefore foolish. It adds denigration to her betrayal, a plan even more terrible with children involved.
Marriage supersedes the will of the individual. It is not a contract specifying that gains must equal losses.
What would he gain by this, other than a satisfied libido? Shit, monkeys can do that.
Inga said...
"Yes Acm, if one doesn't love their spouse enough to not cheat on them, then IMO, it's a sham marriage anyway and not worth continuing, EVEN for the children....."
5/15/13, 7:01 PM
__________________
I'm going to frame this and bring it up every time you talk about the magic of Hillary Clinton.
Inga said...Making false assumptions about other commenter's lives seems to be a trend around here lately. Why do they think they know us?
Inga said...NoNo, I find it quite unbelievable you were actually married long enough to have children. You are a prime example of just exactly what I'm talking about. I can't imagine some woman having to live with someone like you. What would he children be exposed to?
Inga said...I'm sure her daughter is better off for not having grown up with her father in the house
she's not even sentient.
All happy families resemble one another, each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.
Tolstoy
My statment was based on NoNo's speech here on this thread, duh, X. You are quite stupid.
So why would you have assumed these things?
You are saying that you do not accept the morality laid out in the Bible? Or you view it as your duty to follow those rules?
Maybe it's hard to walk the narrow path, as you put it, but it's safe, isn't it?
Follow this path and you are a good person.
You are saying, if I understand you correctly, that because terrible things were done the other person has the right to do terrible things as well.
I don't see the guy following his biological imperatives as terrible. Perhaps you do because these things are deemed immoral in the Bible.
I do think the woman doesn't have a leg to stand on. The only argument she can make is what's best for the children.
Choosing to follow teachings from the Bible makes something laid out for you? I'd say that's clearly incorrect.
(1) You have to choose to follow the Bible. There are many ideas a person could follow, the Bible is one. Every person, every one, follows some idea. The Bible is no more "laid out" than any other.
(2) The Bible is hardly a bullet point list. If you'd like to follow the God of the Bible, you'd better be ready to do some deep thinking.
(3) The huge proliferation of Christian sects attests to the fact that life isn't laid out on a paved path for Christians.
Additionally, I see that you've now attempted to backpedal your erroneous assumptions.
Now it's not that I've naive, unaware of what's going on in the world, treading the path expected of me because others told me to do so, as you first asserted. Now it's just that there are rules in the Bible that I try to follow, and you disagree with them.
Okay.
Dante said..." Maybe it's hard to walk the narrow path, as you put it, but it's safe, isn't it?
Follow this path and you are a good person."
I see. Following your animal urges makes you a bold and noble fellow.
"it's obvious to everyone here who is being obsessive."
Inga, your statement is false.
My statment was based on NoNo's speech here on this thread, duh, X. You are quite stupid.
Do you have any idea how mind-numbingly stupid and mendacious you sound? Everything you say sounds either semi-retarded, fantastical, or evasive. Everything.
Inga said...
Making false assumptions about other commenter's lives seems to be a trend around here lately. Why do they think they know us?
Oh yeah mean false assumptions about the life you constantly reveal to us? Got it.
HA said...
And when did you become a mind reader, Althouse?
You have to ask a woman this? ROFL!!!
Nomennovum said...
My statment was based on NoNo's speech here on this thread, duh, X. You are quite stupid.
Do you have any idea how mind-numbingly stupid and mendacious you sound? Everything you say sounds either semi-retarded, fantastical, or evasive. Everything.
You just taught her a new word that describes who and what she is to some degree. You have my sympathies.
When women behave badly, other women tend to excuse or mitigate the bad behavior with what they perceive as great Solomonic wisdom: blame some man too.
We all know the alleged Solomonic wisdom is simply the rationalization of their emotional cognitive dissonance.
I see commenter 'Dante' has provided me my daily dose of "WTF?". That's why I love Althouse -- you never know where it's going to come from!
I see. Following your animal urges makes you a bold and noble fellow.
Look, I feel really badly for what I said to wonderful Freeman. But I can't take it back and I still think that way.
Here is the reasoning. Doing something else because someone told you it is right, or you believe God wants you to do it, etc., is a lot easier than trying to figure out how morality makes sense on your own.
These group moralities have time and again proven weak, and have allowed people of just about every religion to perform serious evils in the world, including the Christians, say in CA with the Indians, the Crusades, Muslim Terrorism. It's all justified because it's God's ideas (as interpreted by some person).
As an individual who has suffered at the hands of group think (all black school when young), I find group think, the weakening of the individual, and yielding of reasoning to others a very dangerous thing.
Developing your own moral code is much harder, because you don't have any authority to back up on. You have to consider what different things mean. It's very hard, but I think in the end yields a stronger morality.
To wit; I have suggested that marriage is a Grand Compromise. I don't know of anyone who has presented it in that form. I am completely behind marriage as an institution for heterosexuals to raise children, including the restrictions on men's biological urges. But here again, marriage is being destroyed, as evidenced by this woman's actions, and the free way in which she is willing to express to the world what she did.
And in my view, the grand compromise is being tinkered with in wrong ways by the courts. I don't know enough about other people's experience to know what is going on to know whether these tinkerings are good or not. I suspect not.
Warmed-over Nietzsche.
Warmed-over Nietzsche
Didn't read much Nietzsche.
But what is the Bible, but another form of what some people think you ought to do and believe? Same thing to me. Oh, I know, you think it's some super being, and all, but in fact you believe that stuff because someone else told you to.
So let me get this straight. Your ideas come from nowhere. You've built your mind in a vacuum. But religious people must have heard a bunch of their ideas somewhere else, so they are weak. Also, religious people are into groupthink and Freeman is specifically.
I don't think you've thought this one through.
Warmed over Nietzsche.
---
Excellent band name, and spot on.
Look, Dante, every choice available to us---be monogamous, don't be monogamous, walk on the dirt or walk on the pavement---has been chosen by, and advocated, by others. They're still a choice. I won't speak for Freeman, but I find just as many people telling me "marriage is just a contract" as "marriage is a holy covenant" or "monogamy is misery" vs. "monogamy is bliss". No matter which one I choose, you can't say it's just that someone has told me it will work; I was told both would work, so I made my decision as an individual.
Developing one's own moral code. Hmmm. I wonder---do you also develop your very own hygiene code? Brushing your teeth twice a day is unnatural after all (look.at the noble animals) and it would just be conformist to do what other people told you to (no matter how well it worked for them).
So let me get this straight. Your ideas come from nowhere. You've built your mind in a vacuum.
For someone who stated:
How bizarre and totally foreign to my actual life! I don't know how you've come up with so many false assumptions about me,
That's a bit hypocritical, don't you think? Seriously, I get the feeling you are a wonderful person, but it's an assumption from your writings, and I could be wrong. Here is the attitude that ticked me off:
this open marriage business is only a sinful response to the wife's sinful act
You offer no reasons, you offer no thought, you simply state "It's sinful." Why? Because some dead guy said so you create a black and white view of this guy's actions.
I, on the other hand, can offer up thoughtful reasons why open marriages don't work so well, but there is at least one instance in South America where an entire tribe operates as an open marriage.
acm:
No matter which one I choose, you can't say it's just that someone has told me it will work; I was told both would work, so I made my decision as an individual.
Right, so you too make your own morality.
That's different than reading some words written by dead men and conforming to them.
I've given my reasons why I think that's bad.
Here is an example. A lot of people like to say the days of the slaves were a different time, and people didn't know better.
I say BS. They knew blacks were people. That's why they had sex with them, and American blacks almost always have some white in them.
They allowed their personal morality to be swayed by group morality. Someone says "Hey, they are savages," then it becomes OK to rape them. I, on the other hand, say BS.
Does that make any sense to you? That's what I'm talking about. Group morality is an enabler of evil deeds.
Wombats dig extensive burrow systems with rodent-like front teeth and powerful claws. Once they are introduced to a thread they take it over. One distinctive adaptation of wombats is their backwards pouch. The advantage of a backwards-facing pouch is that when digging, the wombat does not gather soil in its pouch over its mainly imaginary young. Although mainly crepuscular and nocturnal, wombats also venture out to feed on cool or overcast days. They are not commonly seen, but leave ample evidence of their passage, treating logic as minor inconveniences to be gone through or under, and leaving distinctive cubic faeces.
It is sinful for being disobedient to God; I do believe that, and that's a belief that I rationally chose
OK, let's leave it at this. I still think what I think, but I'm sorry I said what was on my mind. There doesn't seem to be much purpose or value to having said it.
Also, I do think religion provides a lot of good, as I have mentioned over the posts. For instance I think it has done a great job of being the caretaker of marriage, and if you have read my posts, you will know that I'm opposed to gay marriage even though I see nothing sinful in homosexuality.
"Why? Because some dead guy said so you create a black and white view of this guy's actions."
You are reading your simplistic view of Christians into what I write. You're blaming Christians for getting ideas from somewhere else, and I'm pointing out that that's silly because both non-Christians and Christians alike exist in the world and are exposed to ideas and choose what to believe or follow. One can thoughtfully and rationally choose to be a Christian and to follow a Christian morality. You're starting after that choice is made and saying, "See, you didn't think about this!" That's nonsense.
You're assuming I'm saying, "Bible says it's sinful, so it is! Dats all I know," but that's not what I said. It is sinful for being disobedient to God; I do believe that, and that's a belief that I rationally chose. It's sinful because it can only create a little hell on earth, a tiny family misery. It's sinful because it does not come from love. You could write a whole book on why this is sinful from the perspective of Christian morality.
You are being shallow in your assumption that all Christians are shallow.
I still think what I think, but I'm sorry I said what was on my mind.
What you have never explained is what you mean by having things laid out. If one becomes a Christian, there are things you accept, but you had to become a Christian. That is a choice. It is not laid out.
(And sorry for throwing the comments out of order. I had to correct typos I made on a tablet.)
I don't mind you saying it. I think you are wrong, and I'd like to explore it.
Dante, genius, I'm a Christian, too. I chose that, just as Freeman did. You're seriously saying that because we share beliefs on morality with other humans (something you do as well; you and dear souls like Bill Ayers have the monogamy-is-misery thing in common) and read books (some written by people who are now dead) we're just conforming to the words of a dead man? Meanwhile, you are better and somehow less evil because you chose to pretend that you made it all up yourself (newsflash: eleventy kajillion men before you have referred to marriage as a great compromise) and to avoid reading or listening to other perspectives?
BTW, group morality---abolitionists were, yknow, a grouo, and an overwhelmingly Christian one---is what freed the slaves. Shockingly, lots of people figuring out morality for themselves tend to figure that their own might makes moral right.
What you have never explained is what you mean by having things laid out.
What I mean is there is a code of conduct you accept, and follow. Is it not following the instructions down for how to behave, and what values to have?
It's like you said. As a Christian you accept things, and I will add it's part of Christianity to accept them without questioning (I think it was Job who had to suffer horribly, and eventually God told him sorry, you simply have to accept my word).
For instance, that homosexuality is a sin. Can you tell me one reason why homosexuality is a sin, other than it is written in the bible as an offense to God?
acm:
Meanwhile, you are better and somehow less evil because you chose to pretend that you made it all up yourself (newsflash: eleventy kajillion men before you have referred to marriage as a great compromise) and to avoid reading or listening to other perspectives?
I said I was better? I'm different. I have a different perspective.
Looking at
google marriage "Grand Compromise" -civil -democrats I see 7,900 instances, not kajillions, and I don't think my politics filter got rid of all of the political instances where they are referring to gay marriage.
Dante, using the Bible, or any other code is a way of recognizing that I am not an expert on everything and don't have all the answers. I look to my doctor for guidance, because I don't know everything about the human body. I don't think he knows it all, either, but I figure he knows more than I do, having studied it quite some time. I think about what my doctor says for me to do before I do it, and indeed I researched him and chose him before taking any advice. Religion is the same way---people who recognize their inability to be objective about their own morality, or to know all that much, choose someone for guidance and they choose, every day, how much of that guidance to apply to their own lives. Accepting guidance =/= blindly following. Accepting guidance is about humbling oneself enough to admit that we don't know it all.
And gay sex is a sin because it's a waste. Sex has two purposes---to bring forward new life and to bring man and wife closer together, as that couple is the backbone of a strong, healthy society. Since gay sex does neither, it's a waste of time and energy and needlessly puts people at risk of disease and heartache.
And gay sex is a sin because it's a waste.
God said that? Hope you aren't presuming to know God's mind =).
Dante, people who have spent their entire adult lives in careful study of what God and His Word have come to that conclusion, and have presented their findings. You can read John Paul II's Theology Of The Body, or a number of other papers, encyclicals, etc on the matter. I don't presume to know, but yes I do believe.
Besides, I love how you ask why gay sex would be a sin aside from offending God, and then.upon getting just that, you go back to wondering if it really does offend Him.
"As a boomer and as a woman, a widow who raised four children on my own, I don't think for one second my decisions for my family were selfish. I could've remarried, but didn't because no one I met could've made my children's life better. No marriage is better than a bad one."
There is no obligation in this society for widows to remarry. Aid to Widows and Orphans has existed, as far as I know, as long as the this country itself. It was Daniel Patrick Moynihan who warned that single mothers were not the same aas widows when Congress changed Aid for Widows and Orphans to Aid for Families With Dependent Children. His predictions of what would happen have been borne out.
Not remarrying is not selfish. Nor is remarrying. In fact, if your children are female, not remarrying was statistically the better choice.
acm:
Besides, I love how you ask why gay sex would be a sin aside from offending God, and then.upon getting just that, you go back to wondering if it really does offend Him.
Sorry, I wrote the question poorly, and I was just having a bit of fun. I realized after I had my fun that I'd written the question poorly, but had to run to the vet because our dog has a concussion/neurological damage.
The question should be "Why is homosexuality morally wrong?"
I don't buy the idea that it's a waste, because again that's merely saying "Cause God said so." I'm asking from your perspective, why is it immoral?
Because it needlessly exposes people to disease and heartache and wastes time and energy that could be otherwise spent wisely. It is morally wrong for people to risk their lives, their health and public health overall (when people choose both gay and straight sex) when there is no real benefit like procreation or marriage at stake. That is a moral reason that can be made and is made by atheists, and it can be applied to other pursuits like recreational sky-diving, drug use, soda drinking, etc. It's not "because God said so". You are free to reject it, for a number of moral reasons. For example, you may see the romantic relationship between two men as a moral good worth risking one's life for. But that's morality for you---not everyone is going to agree what's worth the risk.
But I still presented a reason besides God's disapproval.
To clarify, I'm not saying I would ever want to see gay sex, or drug use or soda-drinking or recreational sky-diving restricted in any legal way. I'm just saying that the argument "It is immoral to put one's health at risk---especially when healthcare costs are shared by society---for selfish reasons like one's own sensual pleasure." is an argument that has nothing at all to do with religion. It is used by anti-smoking and anti-junk food groups.
You're free to tell me why you think gay sex is moral. Since you used "biological imperative" to defend a man wanting an open marriage, though, you might look a wee bit silly.
acm: Don't eat ice-cream. That's the principle of your argument, but I don't think you believe your own argument.
Look, I'm sorry. Normally I would want to bridge the gap, but it's simply not possible.
Same with Freeman. I will admire women from afar, as wonderful creatures that are giving of themselves to the children.
>> I'm not willing to throw my marriage away because of one mistake. It isn't because I hate men, it's because I love my wife. Would that change if she made a habit of this?
But she ==didn't== make "one mistake". She had an ongoing affair.
And this is the first one that she got ===caught== at. Who can say what was going on before? Are you willing to stake money on the kids being biologically the husband's?
"with an old flame" = alpha male that she was thinking about while she was schtupping her husband. So, she was EMOTIONALLY cheating on him from the git go, perhaps.
You aren't willing to "throw away a marriage" when your wife ALREADY DID by cheating on you? It means you are a doormat. Many dogs will take a sh*t on you as time goes by, my friend.
>> I'm not willing to throw my marriage away because of one mistake. It isn't because I hate men, it's because I love my wife. Would that change if she made a habit of this?
But she ==didn't== make "one mistake". She had an ongoing affair.
And this is the first one that she got ===caught== at. Who can say what was going on before? Are you willing to stake money on the kids being biologically the husband's?
"with an old flame" = alpha male that she was thinking about while she was schtupping her husband. So, she was EMOTIONALLY cheating on him from the git go, perhaps.
You aren't willing to "throw away a marriage" when your wife ALREADY DID by cheating on you? It means you are a doormat. Many dogs will take a sh*t on you as time goes by, my friend.
How could anyone but a man-hating feminist or a fact-twisting lawyer come to the conclusion the husband is equally wrong? He's being upfront and honest with her. She betrayed and lied to him. It's affair 101 that the marriage is never the same after an affair is uncovered. You start from square 1 if you decide to move forward with it. He's being honest about the only way he can do that. She may not want it, but at least she has a choice of whether she has a spouse that sees other people. That's more than she gave him.
Thank you for casting the custom spell to return my Ex. He is back home with us now and things couldn't be better! I'm just amazed at how well and accurate the spell was. Almost every single one of my requests were fulfilled and I couldn't be happier! We are all taking a trip next week (we are taking our kids to Florida for a well deserved vacation) something that we never had done before (and also one of my spell requests) I'm so excited and so are our kids! We thank you! Liz & the Kids! this testimonies goes out to a spell caster called Lord. Azeez who use his spell to get my husband back home. He can also be of help contact him on lordazeez1990@hotmail.com
[b][i]"Prudie, it makes me ill to think about him being with another woman."[/i][/b]
Maybe that is what is precisely needed so that hopefully she will never again feel the need to "scratch that itch".
This is really tremendous that the way you desceibe. This information is so much more than I needed!keep it up .
Child Custody
No one deserve to be cheated on you can confront your cheating spouse with evidence,i was able to spy on my cheating husband phone without finding out.....it really helped me during my divorce ....you can contact 'hacksecrete@gmail . c o m' call or text him on 617 402-2260 for spying and hacking social networks, school servers, icloud and much more,viber chats hack, Facebook messages and yahoo messenger,calls log and spy call recording, monitoring SMS text messages remotely,cell phone GPS location tracking, spy on Whats app Messages,his services are cheap and affordable .
I needed closure to my Ex's phone activities as though he was cheating but I had no proof to confront him,I felt too bad and helpless during my divorce,thankfully a friend referred me to a Spylord who hacked and gained me remote access to his phone activities,it really helped me during divorce and actually got me custody over my son. Spylord also fixed my credit score that he damaged..I refer Spylord to you on "hackingloop6@ g m a i l . com" also on WhatsApp + 1 484 540 - 0785. contact him for any hacking assistance,tell him I referred you.
Post a Comment