SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-14-2004
SAH/WOH--extramarital affairs
1037
Tue, 02-15-2005 - 12:54pm

I was just at the gym this morning and overheard a conversation between two women on treadmills who were discussing/debating as to whether married sahms were any more or less likely to have affairs than married wohms.

I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on this.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-07-2004
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:18pm

I haven't claimed to *know* anything. That's our main disagreement in this entire thread. I don't presume to *know* anything about the person having an affair either - and in particular that he/she has a character flaw or is immoral. I have said (well I think I said it) that we cannot judge a person by their actions alone. I truly believe that. I also think you cannot judge by what a person tells you - they may be minimizing, attempting to relieve you of a burden of worrying for them or any number of other things. The closest I came to saying I *know* anything is that I would question as to whether the person who prefers a life of celibacy over moving on, is *perfectly fine".

Nick

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-07-2004
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:23pm

I realize that a widow having sex is not committing adultry. My point is that differences do not equal flawed. Let me put it this way then. If the woman in kristi's example gave in to her desire and had sex with another man, she is not automatically flawed as a human being. The woman who had a stronger resolve, or less of an appetite is not a better person. She is a different person with a different threshold. That's all.

Nick

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:29pm

<>


Of course not when you're not talking about the differences leading to an immoral act.


<>


I disagree. Someone who does not commit an immoral act *is* a better person than someone who does. Obviously there are other things that coudl factor into the overall picture ... I mean a woman who cheats and has no other immoral activity is a better person than one who doesn't cheat but is a serial killer. But, *all other things being equal*, one who doesn't cheat is a better person than one who does.

Choose your friends by their character and your socks by their color.  Choosing your socks by their character makes no sense and choosing your friends by their color is unthinkable.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-07-2004
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:37pm

Clearly, you have been given far more insight into people than I. I don't feel that I have enough information by witnessing an act, to determine a person's value and worth, or to determine who is better than whom. I am not a religous woman, but I do believe that only God truly knows what is in the heart of any human being which is why he gets to pass judgement - not I. My father used to always say that we'll be surprised who gets into heaven, and who doesn't, because we are so often wrong in our judgements. Even Mother Theresa could have been coveting her neighbor's spouse, thereby breaking one of the 10 commandments - I just don't have the power to see into the heart of a cheater like you do.

Nick

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:40pm

Oh, no, I understand fine. I don't agree that never having a craving is what "perfectly fine" means. If so, no one is perfectly fine.

I love watermelon. LOVE watermelon. It's the middle of February. Haven't had one in months and months. I sure will have one when it's again available. I could probably really whip myself up about it if I spent five minutes sitting here picturing what it's like to eat one, but believe it or not, I haven't spent the last several months in a state of lack of watermelon frustration, I've found other things to do and think about. Per your definition I guess I'm STILL not "perfectly fine" because if I were "perfectly fine" I'd have to not care at all if I ever had one again. To ME what "perfectly fine" means is handling the state of not having everything of everything you want whenever you want in a sensible manner - enjoying really nice other things and finding other good healthy uses for whatever "appetites" you do have.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-25-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:41pm
Quite seriously.

Virgo

Virgo
 
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:51pm

You're taking this *way* too far.


I haven't said the person is useless or unredeemable or unforgiveable or unable to change. You seem to think that I view someone who cheats as despicable.


Let me tell you a story that may clarify my feelings/thoughts further.


My ex-next door neighbor was the "other woman" to one of my co-workers. "Barb" was having an affair with the husband of "Liz" (my coworker). It was a long, public affair that was very hurtful to Liz. Barb didn't care, obviously. when I first moved in, I tried to not socialize with Barb. I really didn't have much respect for her, as she was carrying on this obviously immoral thing. My children, however, LOVED Barb. They loved to go play in her yard while she watered or play with her dog, etc, etc. I came to really like Barb too. She was great with my kids. I also got to know here in a professional capacity and I really like the woman. However, she is *still* an immoral person, in some ways. Do I think I am *better* than her? Only in that small way. There are probably things about me that make me a lesser person in some ways.

Choose your friends by their character and your socks by their color.  Choosing your socks by their character makes no sense and choosing your friends by their color is unthinkable.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 5:58pm

"Encourage" is a lot stronger than what I read FDE to have said.

Someone else's sexual expression couldn't really be something that's for me to decide. I would certainly do, and enjoy doing, whatever I could. Intercourse is a wonderful thing, but it is not the be-all and end-all, or even the main part, of what human contact people need. I definitely wouldn't feel it appropriate to be "encouraging" my DH to have sex with someone else - I am absolutely sure he be very deeply offended by any such suggestion.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 6:04pm

Anyone ever seen "Breaking the Waves"? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt_0115751/


"Drama set in a repressed, deeply religious community in the north of Scotland, where a naive young woman named Bess McNeil (Emily Watson) meets and falls in love with Danish oil-rig worker Jan (Stellan Skarsgaard). Bess and Jan are deeply in love but, when Jan returns to his rig, Bess prays to God that he returns for good. Jan does return, his neck broken in an accident aboard the rig. Because of his condition, Jan and Bess are now unable to enjoy a sexual relationship and Jan urges Bess to take another lover and tell him the details. As Bess becomes more and more deviant in her sexual behaviour, the more she comes to believe that her actions are guided by God and are helping Jan recover."


I remember being very disturbed, but intrigued, by this movie.

Choose your friends by their character and your socks by their color.  Choosing your socks by their character makes no sense and choosing your friends by their color is unthinkable.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-19-2003
Fri, 02-18-2005 - 6:06pm
IME - lack of sex is a bit more frustrating then lack of watermelon. I would be "perfectly fine" with never having the latter.

Pages