Letters to the Editor
-
@ avast2006, continued:
Consider on the other hand, a man who, once on month on his wife's bridge night, goes out and has no-strings-attached sex with another woman (same woman each month) -- and on the remaining twenty-nine days of each month is loving, attentive, and devoted to his wife. The "no sex, no affair" contingent would unreservedly label this man's behavior as an affair -- and yet he is tending his marriage with far more care than the man in the previous paragraph. To condemn the second man while giving the first one a pass does not speak of much regard for what really goes into a relationship. You can screw pretty much anybody, but can you make a life with them?
I would condemn both men. Knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn't put up with either of them. However, the "no-strings" guy may still put me at risk for disease or might get that other woman pregnant, making a threat to my own family and children and finances. For most women, committment means giving up screwing anybody else. If they want something more specific they need to talk about it. If marriages are to endure, there must be open communication.
Me, I would say that both of them are engaging in affairs: one sexual, one emotional. The reason to use the word "emotional affair" is to emphasize that just because it doesn't involve actual, physical sex doesn't mean it isn't still cheating.
For me, the word emotional means that emotions were involved. Having been married to the sociopath, men without emotions, men who can do almost anything without normal emotion, are much, much scarier. Emotions are good things if people temper them with reason and don't expect others to "feel" as they do. I am not minimizing what women and men go through when their partners give to others emotionally what they should be giving to their spouses, but over the long haul of a committed marriage, people mess up. If we intend to kick them to the curb, we owe it to them and to ourselves to make the boundaries clear in advance of possible behavior.
-
@ susan sunflower
You touch on another of my pet peeves. Now I am going to sound terribly old-fashioned. Why are people such damned roundheels these days? For those unfamiliar with the term, it means an easy lay. People get in these relationship and make the most absurd assumptions. Women sometimes really piss me off. I am talking my daughter's generation here now. They have sexual freedom. Good for them. However, they should not assume that just because they sleep with a guy and intend to be faithful that he is going to follow suit. She could be playing for diamonds while he is playing clubs. I know I sound like a dreadful prude, but young women at least would be much happier if they held out longer until they could decide what they really wanted from a man.
They should research oxytocin and the role it plays in the female sexual interactions. It is like a bonding drug. It is also influences the initial production of milk in lactating mothers. In other words, women can produce oxytocin getting a nice massage from a guy. Suddenly she thinks he might be Mister Right. Most likely he thinks he is merely engaging in foreplay that will lead to sex without complications.
-
sorry, couldn't resist.
I was stuck on the ranch in Texas with the cheating sociopath and he was at Cambridge, Mass. getting a professional degree.
Laura Bush, is that you?
:-D
-
Ha!
Very funny, Avast2006. Some humor in this debate.
I certainly can understand your confusion, given our First Lady's attraction to sociopaths.
This topic does get me going simply because I have been that girlfriend whose boyfriend justified spending more time with another woman because this other woman was 'a friend' and they weren't having sex (well, not initally anyway).
I wrote about the whole torrid affair on an earlier post so I won't get into it again.
I think another reason I get reactive is because I have had too many men, who had girlfriends/wives, think it was ok to pursue my 'friendship' without really copping to the aforementioned partner. Again, wrote about it in an earlier post.
I really think the LW let a once harmless situation get out of control. Had I been in her shoes, I would not have spent so much time with the boss outside of work, regardless if I was in a relationship. I always have to take into consideration the wife/girlfriend's feelings.
Ok, another story....I know, I know...I tell a lot of stories but, what can I say. I'm Irish.
A while back, I had a good male friend who had a girlfriend. This guy and I talked on the phone almost every day. We had been, prior to him getting together with his now-ex girlfriend.
Nonetheless, she had a problem with our friendship. I was hurt and a bit angry because my guy friend and I were purely platonic. However, I had to set aside my feelings and repect her wishes. So we only talked on the phone about once every few months or so.
Well, he and his girl broke up recently. Turns out, she was spending about 20 hours a day on Second Life, that 3D simulated online community. And she was 'cybersexing' with another avatar (Second Life user). My friend and his girl weren't doing well to begin with but this was the last straw.
I get to talk to him more often now (which I don't really...on the phone about once a month) so I can check on him and see how he is holding up.
Point is, I have to always take into consideration the other party.
My ex-boyfriend's 'friend' (now second ex-wife) didn't do that. And, neither did the LW, until she woke up and got another job, extricating herself from this situation.
-
@ avast2006
Very funny. Actually, I don't think Bush rides.
Coincidentally, I was just in another thread where I had said that I thought Bush was a sociopath and I got a reply from a guy who said he didn't think I would recognize one. Seems he is uniquely prescient when it comes to sociopaths. I can't claim to be as good even after living with one. It would be nice if they would let us know before they enter our lives.