MODS - please delete thread

MoreOn

Welshwoofs wrote: »

Where has that been stated? I've not seen it.


The Op said:

"The OW has emailed him a few times about the baby calling it 'our daughter'; 'your daughter' etc when he has made it clear he will pay but doesn't want anything to do with her (rightly or wrongly) and she has been told to stop contacting him or we will file for harassment"

So basically the Op's spineless husband has threatened this woman with harassment for emailing him "a few times about the baby".

"OW has been a bit of a biatch since we have been back together again"

Your biased view do you no favours..

Welshwoofs

MoreOn wrote: »

"OW has been a bit of a biatch since we have been back together again"

Your biased view do you no favours..

How does being 'a bit of a biatch' equate to harassment? I'm sure she has been a bit of a biatch; after all from her side she left her husband for this chap, he shacked up with her then left her, fathered a child with her and then dumped that too. My guess is that 99.9% of people would be a wee bit aggrieved in that situation.

Perhaps whilst you're at it you could explain my 'biased view'? My only view on this is that this guy needs to grow a pair and be Father to a child he has 50% responsibility in spawning. Threatening the Mother of that child with harassment because she contacts him about their child is pathetic.

quantumleap

MoreOn,

Quick question for you, how do you expect the OW to feel about the whole situation? If you do reply please explain rather than being sarcastic.

RichGold

RichGold wrote: »

Have you considered that he might have another affair before your child is born and leave with the new woman, having nothing to do with you and your child?

This might sound bad, but I almost hope that happens. Right now you are condoning it happening, so why shouldn't it happen to you?

Essentially you're helping this idiot have his cake and eat it.

MoreOn wrote: »

This is wild speculation in your over active mind and unhelpful to OP

What am I speculating about? I suggest you look up the word "speculation".
Bextra said she was planning on having children with someone who had previously left her, had a child with someone else, then left the other woman & child and by Bextra's own admission has had nothing to do with his child since.
I was merely putting forward the point that it could easily also happen to Bextra, and for her to consider how she would feel if he sods off right after the birth of their child for a new woman.

I know of a bloke who's done this, 4 times, so how is this "in my overactive mind"?

MoreOn

quantumleap wrote: »

MoreOn,

Quick question for you, how do you expect the OW to feel about the whole situation? If you do reply please explain rather than being sarcastic.

The whole situation is raw for all of them, very complicated and she to has my simpathy... I'm not going to critise any of them..

I can critises those that cast aspersions based on a re-interpretation of an interpretation of a limited interpretation of an interpretation of a not fully known interpretation..

newcook

RichGold wrote: »

Bextra said she was planning on having children with someone who had previously left her, had a child with someone else, then left the other woman & child and by Bextra's own admission has had nothing to do with his child since.

Bextra said that her husband had an affair and that he wasnt with the woman through the pregnancy, after the baby was born and hasnt had anything to do with the child or the mother. he didnt leave her, he cheated on her (still no better but hey ho!)

while Im not sticking up for blokes who have nothing to do with their children, some of them didnt 'ask' to be dads (yes, he should wear a condom/not have sex etc if he cant accept the concequenses) but the decision is up to the woman as to whether she has the baby or not and ultimately making someone a father whether they wanted to be or not.
surely the man should decide if he wants to be part of the childs life? Before people start on about responsibility, he is being responsible by providing for the child. Responsibility does not mean he has to be part of the childs life.

MoreOn

Welshwoofs wrote: »

How does being 'a bit of a biatch' equate to harassment? I'm sure she has been a bit of a biatch; after all from her side she left her husband for this chap, he shacked up with her then left her, fathered a child with her and then dumped that too. My guess is that 99.9% of people would be a wee bit aggrieved in that situation.

Perhaps whilst you're at it you could explain my 'biased view'? My only view on this is that this guy needs to grow a pair and be Father to a child he has 50% responsibility in spawning. Threatening the Mother of that child with harassment because she contacts him about their child is pathetic.

Thank you for your guess...

Since when does emailed twice equate to the full extent of harrassment, all i'm doin to pointing out your missing bits already posted and possibly those that have not....

What makes you think your views aren't biased?

MoreOn

RichGold wrote: »

What am I speculating about? I suggest you look up the word "speculation".
Bextra said she was planning on having children with someone who had previously left her, had a child with someone else, then left the other woman & child and by Bextra's own admission has had nothing to do with his child since.
I was merely putting forward the point that it could easily also happen to Bextra, and for her to consider how she would feel if he sods off right after the birth of their child for a new woman.

I know of a bloke who's done this, 4 times, so how is this "in my overactive mind"?

"Have you considered that he might have another affair before your child is born and leave with the new woman, having nothing to do with you and your child"

Regardless of whether you know someone that knows a dog, there is no basis in OP's comments to even consider this... Thus it is wild speculation... like digging for gold in you garden just because of someones hunch it's an extreme posibility..

quantumleap

I agree MoreOn that the situation is raw for all of them and I too feel for both women involved. I just believe, as most posters on this thread appear to, that the husband/lover needs to grow a set and accept that he has a role to play in the life of both his children. He should be adament about this (in a fair way) and insist that he wishes to be involved whilst accepting that this may take time.

On another note, I don't really know why you have to be sarcastic to be honest. You have a different but equally valid opinion on this topic - I don't see why you just don't explain it rather than resorting to nonsense.

MoreOn

quantumleap wrote: »

I agree MoreOn that the situation is raw for all of them and I too feel for both women involved. I just believe, as most posters on this thread appear to, that the husband/lover needs to grow a set and accept that he has a role to play in the life of both his children. He should be adament about this (in a fair way) and insist that he wishes to be involved whilst accepting that this may take time.

On another note, I don't really know why you have to be sarcastic to be honest. You have a different but equally valid opinion on this topic - I don't see why you just don't explain it rather than resorting to nonsense.

You were doing quite well at being concilatory until your last word. If some things need explaining, what makes you consider the issue is me as apose to others or errr you, or perhaps it's just another example of "a lack of perfect interpretation"

As for the OH and OW (should I question your use of the term/tense in using "lover" and your "most posters"?), I'm not sure what OP and her OH's discussions were prior to that statement or in fact whether that statement wasn't off the cuff or bound in time... That one statement within itself cannot explain him his behaviour in it's entirety... I'm not sure how anyone can extrapolate him other than through their own biases...