Affair with a married man.... what should I do?

[searock]

If the husband cheats it's no one but the husband's fault.

OP, don' do it.

[MaidenMinx]

I don't get it. Can't he just say he isn't interested? Why would it entirely be the woman's fault if he had an affair?

oh that's why it would depend on the circumstances. If it were to happen he'd be sleeping on the couch for a ****ing long time at the very least.

[bulrush]

If you want to have an affair, go ahead. You don't care about the consequences, that looks sure. He will not leave his wife, and you will only get hurt in the end. We have had plenty of women on this forum who were broken and sad because the man wouldn't leave his wife. Isn't that enough experience for you?

P.S. Wakeup is a woman and gives damn good advice. I've been here a while. She is very direct, but her advice is still good if you ignore the tone of her message.

[bulrush]

If the husband cheats it's no one but the husband's fault.

How sexist. May I remind you that it takes 2 to cheat, and it's both of their fault. Or maybe the wife is just bad in bed? And he doesn't get his needs met at home.

[Wakeup]

while I agree with your point...you state that she "enabled a married man to cheat" ...and "enabling him to have his cake and eat it to" ....this married man is not a child and is well aware of what he is doing wrong...I agree that he is a douche bag....

If cheaters (men and woman cheaters) did not have someone that was enableing them to cheat then there would be no cheating. If people just said "no, you're already in a relationship and I'm not interested in interloping into it" then cheating (other than through prostitution) would not exist. no one said the married man was a child. I'm speaking to the OP so I'm addressing her and what she "is."

P.S. He's not the only douche-bag. Takes two douche bags to do what they're contemplating doing.

Originally Posted by MaidenMinx
oh that's why it would depend on the circumstances. If it were to happen he'd be sleeping on the couch for a ****ing long time at the very least.

What fking difference does it make if he had to "be lured?" The fact remains that he caved to it and still did it. You're being quite sexist and you're giving your cheating partner a pass (by blaming the lurer for everything) for his actions. When cheating is involved there are two people: The Cheater and The Enabler. Both are just as at fault as the other. The only difference is you (the one being cheated upon) love one of the two involved.

If the husband cheats it's no one but the husband's fault.

But, if there was no one that would cheat with him, how would he be able to?

[bcgirl]

If a cheating personality is going to cheat...he's going to cheat. The fact that he was the one that asked you if you want to make this a "regular" routine makes me think you aren't his first girl he's done this whole cheating thing on. The reality is that a "family man" who is married with children is most likely not going to break up his family and house to pursue a life with his mistress. The bottom line is that you are going to be his mistress. He has the upper hand, he is out of town and meets you at your house or hotel. His wife is clueless and there is no evidence. Be careful because A LOT of mistresses get attached to the married man. Sure, it starts out as sex, but then after a while emotional ties are bound to happen. You two are in fact human. You are in your thirties and probably soon would like to find a man, get married and settle down. He's in his forties...he has all that. I just hope that one day you won't find yourself in your forties, unmarried, no children and trying to pursue this married man into divorcing his wife and marrying you. My advice, don't play with fire. He is a naughty man for cheating on his wife, but you don't have to be the mistress. If he is horny and having marital problems, he can go pick up a prostitute. If you do pursue something with him...he will tell you all kinds of stories about how he will leave his wife someday and their problems, giving you some kinda hope that you'll be the lucky lady who gets to hold your hand in public. Karma can be a real bi*ch and when you're married one day....I sure hope your husband doesn't treat you the way he treats his wife. By the way, it will just give you psychological grief in the future when you are married. You may keep your future husband on a tight leash because you'll always remember the affair you had with a married man and how easy it was for him to get away with the crime. I was the cheater in the relationship. I used them all for my selfish needs and then threw them out like they were trash. I don't feel the least bit bad about what i've done...even though I know it's so wrong and disgusting. But i'm just giving you a tiny glimpse into the way a cheater's mind thinks.....VERY SELFISHLY!

[searock]

How sexist. May I remind you that it takes 2 to cheat, and it's both of their fault. Or maybe the wife is just bad in bed? And he doesn't get his needs met at home.

Oh yeah, I meant that it's not the lover's fault. I would've said the same if it was the wife who cheated.

But, if there was no one that would cheat with him, how would he be able to?

The problem with cheating is not much the cheating itself as it is the idea of actually willing to do something so bad and hurtful to your partner. A partner who chooses to cheat would be willing to do so even if there was no one to cheat with. They would do it, if there was the chance. This is the problem.

[Wakeup]

Why do you think that, Sea? Takes two to tango, no? Just curious about your reasoning.

[searock]

The thing is, I think that if a guy (or girl) wants to cheat on their partner, or wouldn't say no if there was the chance, they are already being assholes. Just for wanting something like that. A person who is in a healthy, loving relationship shouldn't even consider the idea, they should be like "why on earth would I ever want something like that".

I don't think the lover has any fault - as long as they aren't friends/relatives/whatever with the partner who is being cheated on. She (or he) is just offering something - it's up to the husband (or wife) to decide whether he/she wants it or not.

Don't take me wrong, I would, personally, be mad as hell at the woman who even dared take my guy away from me. But if he were to cheat on me, I'd be WAY more pissed at him than at her. Who is she anyway, you know? HE betrayed my trust. She doesn't even exist (assuming she was a stranger to me in the first place).

[Wakeup]

What about the person who is the so called "lover?" Shouldn't then have the personal boundaries in place to keep away from a man or woman that is married? Where is their integrity, sense of what is right, they have lack of self-respect to accept, how were they bought up that they'd interlope into someone elses life in that manner and not care about anyone but themselves and what's in it for them? Why do they get their self-worth though the mis-placed affections of someone that they will likely never have. Fear of commitment? Codependency on their own ex? Something is missing in the people that are enablers, thats why they enable.

This is not a case of a married person pretending to be single and duping the OP.. she knows the score and she's ignoring the fact if she goes ahead. That does not make her an innocent party to what is about to happen.

Two people are wrong here for obvious reasons in my not so humble opinion.

[searock]

Well yeah, the lover clearly has problems of her own, for the reasons you stated. Depending on her morals, she may even be morally wrong. But as regards the wife... she should be pissed at her husband, not her husband's lover. It was his choice, his decision to betray her. I'm not saying it isn't normal to be pissed at the lover as well, I can totally understand it, I just rationally think that it's the husband's fault if HE chose to cheat.

[Leona77]

That would completely depend on the circumstances... He kinda needs his limbs. If you knew my hubby you'd understand why it would be safe for me to assume if he strayed he would have to be lured therefore the woman involved would deserve to lose her limbs.

I'm affraid that is totally wrong! No man can be 'lured' without his own consent,unless he is raped. It's far easier to blame the other woman more because you don't love her. And it's much easier to justify your husband's actions just because you love him. See it as it is. Nobody slips their di*k into someone's va**na by accident! It's not like:'Oooops, I tripped, fell over and my d** accidentaly fell into place, sorry darling''....I am not saying the mistress is not equally guilty for going after somebody who is already taken,but to excuse the man,to mee, is rediculous.
The wife might find it 'easier' to forgive the husband because it would be too much hassle chopping off his limbs ( you'd have to hate him AND push him around in a wheelchair on top of it)...Even though this would be my preferred option
I am single and have never 'lured' any married men...but I have them hitting on me very often!!! Some don't even need a second sentence to show me how open they are to any opportunities to scr*w me, whether they show it by the ambiguous words they use when they talk to me and by their body language....I am nothing but horrified by this pattern & this is why I am very worried that my potential husband will be one of these men.
On the other hand, I can instantly tell a decent man - a husband who has a '' protective fence'' around him and his wife, even when she is not with him...I admire such men & hope to find one of them for me
It takes two to cheat...that's all I'm saying...oh yeah- and they are both equally guilty and pathetic...

[MaidenMinx]

What fking difference does it make if he had to "be lured?" The fact remains that he caved to it and still did it. You're being quite sexist and you're giving your cheating partner a pass (by blaming the lurer for everything) for his actions. When cheating is involved there are two people: The Cheater and The Enabler. Both are just as at fault as the other. The only difference is you (the one being cheated upon) love one of the two involved.

But, if there was no one that would cheat with him, how would he be able to?

Please do not get me wrong, if my husband cheated he would be in all kinds of hell. I'd just let him keep his limbs.
Fact of the matter is Sober Hubby would never cheat. Drunk Hubby rarely knows what is going on. If he was to ever cheat it would mean him getting drunk and being hit on. He would be more likely to lose his testicles than his limbs and would have to suffer through whatever I'd be likely to put him through until I was over it. The woman on the other hand would be able to go home and act like it hadn't happened. I wouldn't allow her that luxury.

[MaidenMinx]

Let me clarify, if my husband did what the husband in this situation did, his stuff would be thrown out the front, the locks on the house would be changed (the house he has lived in since he was 2 I might add) and I would divorce him (I am certain I would get the house) and we would have to go through ugly custody proceedings.

If however he was out drunk, got hit on and reciprocated, he would have to start with alcohol rehab before I would consider keeping him but I wouldn't necessarily go for the jugular. I would insist that he signed the house over to our son and if I let him back in it, he would have to be on his hands and knees.

Yes, a good chunk of the reason the woman would lose her limbs but he wouldn't is the fact that I love him and I have a relationship with him. I also follow WU's school of thought in that if there were no people willing to sleep with attached people then infidelity wouldn't exist.

[sssspanos]

Fewwwwww.... Thank God I m not married :-)