Can an affair ever have a happy ending?

whitewing

I don't think that there is a particularly nice way of saying that ptn is exhibiting vile behaviour in carrying out the affair. And it does get to a point that you wonder how many vile acts make a person bad.

QuackQuackOops

Welshwoofs wrote: »

I don't subscribe to 'right' or 'wrong' - it's too simplistic. I prefer to think of reasons for doing it in terms of 'understandable' or 'not so understandable'

I'd expect everyone here would agree that the most preferred course of action if your marriage is dead would be to end it before moving on. However sometimes the practicalities of life get in the way; you may not be able to afford to leave then and there, you may have had legal advice not to leave then and there, your spouse may plead with you to stay and try again, you may just be scared to death of the fall-out (and fear/cowardice are human qualities we all suffer from at times), you may regret the affair and want to end it but don't know how. Then there's all the other reasons - perhaps your spouse is mentally or physically abusive and an affair is escapism, may be you're suffering from a mental illness yourself, may be you thought your marriage was ok but you meet someone else who makes you realise that you'd 'settled for second best' in the first place. Of course there's also the reason that you're simply bored of screwing your wife and fancy a leg-over elsewhere (one of the not understandable reasons.)

I've encouraged someone to have an affair before - my Mother. The last 5 years of my Step-Father's life were spent in a nursing home because he had Altzheimer's. He was basically already dead; at least everything he'd ever been had long gone. My Mother was miserable, lonely and missing companionship so I signed her up to a dating site and within a few weeks she met a lovely chap. They're very happy...so that was an affair that worked out well and had perfectly understandable reasons for being conducted in the first place.

In short, these situations are waaayyy too complex to give a blanket condemnation (or blessing) on in my view.

All so true and all so understandable - until the man utters the words "I love you" to someone else. Then he becomes a liar and a cheat and the mistress is so convinced that she is the shining light in his life that she hangs on and on and on until he plucks up courage to actually leave.
None of those things you have mentioned matter one little bit if the man no longer loves his wife and indeed, loves someone else.

These guys are not respectful men. They are not a good catch. They are prepared to hurt, upset, devestate and disregard the one person in the world that they ever make vows to.
A respectful man would finish what they started before moving onto something else.

MoreOn

whitewing wrote: »

Isn't the blanket observation on this thread that ptn should not be having/continuing the affair?

I can't remember anyone actually supporting it, just some people making excuses for how may have started or being ongoing for the moment.

I didn't support or condone..

QuackQuackOops

Welshwoofs wrote: »

I think you've missed my point by a country mile.




Again, you've missed my point. I'll put it another way....

Many people, on hearing that child got run over by a driver who didn't stop, would automatically call that driver all the names under the sun and insist it was a heinous crime. However, as you've rightly identified, if the driver was in the middle of a ruddy great myocardial infarction or the victim of a sudden brake failure then they're not guilty of a heinous crime after all - they're as much of a victim as the child. In other words, you couldn't judge the running over of a child on face value because there are grey areas.

Turning to the question of affairs, you equally can't paint all women who have an affair with a married man as callous, calculating home wreckers because there are a myriad of circumstances which led them to make the choice to enter an affair (up to and including not even realising they were having an affair!).

I think it is actually YOU who misses the point.

If a woman knows a man is married and still dates him then she is choosing that path for herself.

A person driving a car doesn't choose to have a heart attack just as they approach a zebra crossing do they?

Choosing to date a married man is wrong. Pure and simple. There are no circumstances that make it right. (and we are talking married and living together)
Driving a car to work one morning when you are sober is not wrong. Not stopping the car if you have a heart attack is not wrong either.

I am amazed that you can even try to compare the two.

nickyhutch

She's not trying to compare the two. She's saying that outwardly, we can't know what caused either to happen, so we can't make judgements.

Taadaa

nickyhutch, you are wrong. Of course all the circumstances and feelings are clearly known to all parties who have contributed to this thread. Their opinion is not in fact opinion, but is in fact, fact.

They are people of high moral fibre who can look down their nose at anyone who does anything they wouldn't do. Because they wouldn't do it, this gives them the God given birth right to slag off anyone who does.

I think the gist of it is that they are angels on high horses, and the rest of us...well we are just fallible humans

God I love this site. :rotfl:

Sorry if this offends anyone, but hopefully it doesn't offend you any more than it offends others to be judged and told how to live their lives by complete strangers who never have and probably never will meet them.

Welshwoofs

QuackQuackOops wrote: »

I am amazed that you can even try to compare the two.

It wasn't a comparison. It was two completely different examples of situations where surface appearances sometimes don't tell the full story,

These guys are not respectful men. They are not a good catch. They are prepared to hurt, upset, devestate and disregard the one person in the world that they ever make vows to.

I'm sorry to say that 'vows' mean very little to me. I'm not religious and I don't believe that marriage is necessarily for life - it may have been when we were all pretty much destined to die from some nasty malady before we reached 40, but I don't personally believe it's terribly realistic to think that everyone who gets married is going to remain in love and happy with that person for 40-50 years.

It'd be nice if everyone could extricate themselves from a dead marriage before finding a new relationship but again, realistically, that's not always going to be the case. I'd also add that even if they do the honourable thing and end the marriage before looking elsewhere, it's still going to hurt and devastate the spouse if they didn't also want it to be over.

Taadaa

Welshwoofs wrote: »

It wasn't a comparison. It was two completely different examples of situations where surface appearances sometimes don't tell the full story,




I'm sorry to say that 'vows' mean very little to me. I'm not religious and I don't believe that marriage is necessarily for life - it may have been when we were all pretty much destined to die from some nasty malady before we reached 40, but I don't personally believe it's terribly realistic to think that everyone who gets married is going to remain in love and happy with that person for 40-50 years.

It'd be nice if everyone could extricate themselves from a dead marriage before finding a new relationship but again, realistically, that's not always going to be the case. I'd also add that even if they do the honourable thing and end the marriage before looking elsewhere, it's still going to hurt and devastate the spouse if they didn't also want it to be over.

Don't apologise for your opinions to anyone.

I think this is an excellent point that has not been raised before. Quite a few people have said they should end the relationship (and have disregarded all arguments for it not being possible), but no one has considered how hurtful that is, as well. Perhaps the answer is to spend the one life you have being miserable in order to avoid hurting anyone else.

Having an affair is deceitful and hurtful and fraudulent on a moral level. I say that knowing that I have done it myself. Am I proud of it? Of course I'm bloody not. I would never intentionally hurt someone. But sometimes, !!!! happens. Can anyone honestly say they have never, ever done something deceitful and hurtful? Have never lied, have never put themselves first at someone else's (potentially) expense?

Is it a cowards way out, to save hurting the person that they once, and maybe still love? I don't know. But I am sure someone opinionated and on morally higher ground than me will tell me shortly :rotfl:

VestanPance

Welshwoofs wrote: »

I'm sorry to say that 'vows' mean very little to me. I'm not religious and I don't believe that marriage is necessarily for life - it may have been when we were all pretty much destined to die from some nasty malady before we reached 40, but I don't personally believe it's terribly realistic to think that everyone who gets married is going to remain in love and happy with that person for 40-50 years.

You should never get married if that's your attitude. The length of time has nothing to do with it. The success depends on both putting the effort in, not running away.

VestanPance

Taadaa wrote: »

I think this is an excellent point that has not been raised before. Quite a few people have said they should end the relationship (and have disregarded all arguments for it not being possible), but no one has considered how hurtful that is, as well. Perhaps the answer is to spend the one life you have being miserable in order to avoid hurting anyone else.

Oh look it's excuse time. It's not an excellent point at all. People are well aware the ending a relationship will hurt, but then there's doing it with a clear mind and dignity or with no dignity with an affair.