Can an affair ever have a happy ending?

gratefulforhelp_2

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I disagree with you here.

I think most of us aspire to be perfect and have high moral codes.

However, when it is put across with such vitriol and personal abuse that some posters do ,that is what I take issue with.

High moral values can be expressed in such a way, as many have done on here, as to not offend.

I find in life that most people respond to kindness and talking through things rather than 'laying down the law' to them all of the time.This just makes me switch off.

Agreed, that's what I was saying. We aspire to be perfect without it being necessary or even possible to achieve it.

lostinrates

FatVonD wrote: »

Apologies for carp typing (and bad cutting/rephrasing) but too much to type carefully! They were:

The Opportunist
Nothing to do with relationship, just right place, right time and curious to try something new.

The Infatuation Junkie
Men feel it more strongly due to testosterone levels. Always looking for chemical high and move on when it wears off.

The affair of the ego massage
People in LT relationships cheating to prove they're still attractive. Kicks in when they hit a certain age and want to recapture their youth. Less about sexual pleasure than proving to yourself you're attractive.

The affair of protest.
When things not going right/not getting enough attention, more common in women. Sometimes cry for help and will leave hints so partner will react and prove thye care.

The serious affair
The person prepared to walk away from wife and kids. They are tired of who they are and don't care if they get caught.



Vestan Prince/Radio, I had no idea you were both so young!

Thanks, but what horrid trite names they give the types. e.g. the serious affair...sounds more ''apathetic'' to me.

gratefulforhelp_2

Marisco wrote: »

Yes, but it's your moral stance, and that is fair enough. What you don't have, is the right to tell other people they are wrong in their choices. Of course someone betrayed is entitled to feel all those things, I did, but what I didn't do, is tell other people how to live their lives because of my situation.

If what Errata is saying is right, then it's understandable. My middle granddaughter has Aspergers.

On an open internet forum?

When the question was "can an affair ever have a happy ending?" ?

It's really hard to answer the question without getting into the rights and wrongs, as we have seen, unless we simply say

"yes" or "no".

lostinrates

Marisco wrote: »

.

If what Errata is saying is right, then it's understandable. My middle granddaughter has Aspergers.

I don't know all that much about aspergers, and the little I have gleaned is via MSE posters. Would it be fair to perhaps extrapolate that some one who views things black/white might have difficulty of the complexity of shades of grey others might be experiencing?

nickyhutch

gratefulforhelp wrote: »

One can aspire to high standards without necessarily always making it, or being "perfect".

One can (should) also aspire to high standards without insisting that those who don't aspire to them have loose morals.

POPPYOSCAR

gratefulforhelp wrote: »

What he meant was that you mean (meant) nothing to him. Glad you have escaped!



A valid choice that should be respected.

While I think that radiography could finesse her responses somewhat, the point she is making is a logical one.

For example...if I am anti abortion, at all, in any situation, then that is an absolute moral stance.

If I am anti abortion unless the child has a less than 20% chance of survival, then one could still say I take a strong moral position.

If I am anti abortion for others, but then decide actually it's ok for me or my friends if we mess up contraception, that's not flexibility or a mature approach, but an erosion of my original standpoint.

A lot of posters here have confused an aspiration to high (or just different) standards with being preachy.

One can aspire to high standards without necessarily always making it, or being "perfect".

eta bitterness seems to be a very easy insult to chuck around. IMHO someone who has been betrayed by their spouse is entitled to feel bruised/hurt/fearful/suspicious/angry...of course in the long term it isn't helpful, but we all take different routes through getting over traumas, don't we?

I presume you are referring to my post when you say this.

This is not an an insult. I recognise that he is very bitter about his break up and of course he is entitled to feel this way if he wishes.It is my opinion that it will do him no good in the long run.

I know someone that has remained very, very bitter about her breakup, and it has I believe made her very blinkered and ultimately ill. She has not been able to maintain a relationship, again in my opinion because she just cannot let go of the past.

She totally blames her ex and does not think she did anything wrong(although I would disagree with her there) her attitude has left her quite lonely and unhappy.

Marisco

lostinrates wrote: »

Although I entirely understand, and hope I evidenced that this morning, I think its a shame to switch of entirely from distasteful posts or preachy sounding ones. I am aware I often sound..um...a bit pompous, but somewhere in the pomp of my posts, for the patient, I hope there is something obliquely useful or thought provoking.

I think the problem with "preachy" posts though is, people get riled and don't read the message, which is understandable:) If I read a preachy post, I'm sitting here thinking "who the hell does s/he think s/he is telling me how I think/feel etc" Yours don't come across like that though. But the "message" of pontificating, preachy posts gets lost because they just annoy people. Then stances are taken and they soon degenerate into insults

gratefulforhelp_2

nickyhutch wrote: »

One can (should) also aspire to high standards without insisting that those who don't aspire to them have loose morals.

you're making a moral judgement on moral judgement.

Where will it end?

In my view adultery is wrong, in your view, it is ok in some mitigating circumstances (I think that's what you've expressed?).

Again - open internet forum, we are both entitled to express our views and argue them.

FatVonD

Pollycat wrote: »

I didn't know that, Errata and it may possibly explain the tone of her posts, but (and this is just imho) she has been aggressive in some of her replies.
Asperger's may be the explanation but should it be an excuse?

Lots of people (on both sides of the argument) have been very rude and aggressive in their posts and I think it would be a great shame (not to mention convenient) to dismiss someone's opinion because of their age and/or aspergers.

lostinrates

catkins wrote: »

Of course it is possible to have children and still have a very good and happy marriage but children do put a strain on marriage and most of the people I have known over the years that are divorced say that problems started when they had children and that without children their marriage may well have lasted..

I think that's a bit of a (see this is where I'm struggling for a word.....ether and um...thing that you get if you get two pieces of evidence to get a false conclusion which is clear 9if you put other things in the picture...grrrrrrr)

because people often have children when the relationship stops working how it used to, (i.e. it could start struggling then anyway) because they think its time to grow up, or sometimes even to fix things.

Not having children can also cause problems, if one in the partnership wants them a bit. And affairs with ''infertility'' cruelly used as a justification must be heartbreaking and soul destroying.


We don't , and can't, have kids either. Both of us would have quite liked them but look on the postitive side. Not having kids means we don't ever hyave to grow up properly, there is no one to whom to set an example about what to eat, how to sleep, etc etc. We have pets who get spoken to in baby language, and who don't need school fees or university fees. I think it keeps one a bit ''childish''.