So, if she came and told you she couldn't live with another OM -not the one she betrayed you with, things would be different?
Sorry, I am holding my breath here (dont make me suffocate) till you figure out you wouldn't want to be friends with her either way right now. I've said before in my sitch, I wouldn't want my H to be with the original OW in the future if we do divorce, but being almost 3 years in this mess, I know deep inside, it' only the hurt and the bruised pride speaking. My right and my choice, but still loosing to the specific someone is a matter of semantics (correct word?), it matters, it hurts, it is understandable to cause anger but the fact is, this OM or another OM = no difference, she is gone (doubting that too).
Gypsy sees something I sense as well. All this wonderful typing and expression of funny-sarcastic posts, makes me worry about you. IMO, you are rationalizing everything you feel and since you need to rationalise your anger you are justifying it on this Friendliness etc etc. SP, guess what? You dont need 'excuses' or "reasons" to be angry and hate her guts at the moment. Feel it and deal with it. She is been acting poorly. You know that, we know that. What now?
IMO, keep the business matters, business matters. Dont mix feelings,money, kids... It may get ugly.
@CityGirl: And what is the point of adding more hurt? I will never understand it. Ever.
The only theory I've been offered, and it seems like a fairly persuasive one as I chew it over, is that it's either (or both) of Displacement -- separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening -- or Distortion -- a gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs.
IOW, WAS must do this rather than confront the reality s/he has created, even though it is presumably a reality s/he wanted.
So, if she came and told you she couldn't live with another OM -not the one she betrayed you with, things would be different?
I'm going to guess that what you meant to write is this:
"if she came and told you she couldn't live without another man -- not the one she betrayed you with -- things would be different?"
Basically, yeah. If she falls in love with Mr. Someone right now, that's her prerogative. We live apart, we're getting divorced; it's not my business who she attaches her emotions to. I can't fairly blame her for finding someone new after she's left me, can I? I could unfairly blame her, but that's something else entirely.
For me Signore Schmuckatelli is a different order of magnitude. He destroyed our marriage with her active assistance; then he destroyed her self-confidence (which bugged me, just because she's, you know, her); then she had so little self-respect for herself that she not only went back to him but made excuses for him -- not to me, but to her friends, whose opinions (she says) she values far more than mine.
If you want to think of it this way, frankly that just grosses me out. It just makes me wonder who she is after all.
@CityGirl: And what is the point of adding more hurt? I will never understand it. Ever.
The only theory I've been offered, and it seems like a fairly persuasive one as I chew it over, is that it's either (or both) of Displacement -- separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening -- or Distortion -- a gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs.
IOW, WAS must do this rather than confront the reality s/he has created, even though it is presumably a reality s/he wanted.
Sounds VERY cognitive dissonanc"y" and cognitive distortion"y."
So this is not a case of being hoist by my own Friendiness petard; it's a case of drawing a boundary -- I won't be friends with a woman who by her own admission cannot live her life if it doesn't include the man she betrayed me with and whose sense of a fair outcome is that she gets what she wants, and I voluntarily give up what little the law entitles me to.
So you can't be friends with a woman who does this, even after you are separated, moving toward divorce. But you COULD be friends with her while she was doing this, while she was still living with you in the marriage?
This is what I don't understand, SP (and granted, it's not our job to understand you), but I never could understand the total "friendiness" when you were going thru this with her . . . which I challenged you on, and you defended, very strongly, countering with, basically, "Why wouldn't I want the mother of my children to be emotionally healthy and happy?" which I could accept.
But now you seem to be TOTALLY batchit livid with her, when the marriage is basically no more, and she pulls the same crap behavior with you.
I just don't get it. And again, it's not my JOB to "get" you, but as someone else said above, I do kinda worry that you're "going to blow" or something.
Because they enjoy inflicting pain. I have seen WAW's on this forum admit that they really liked the sleaziness of the A's as well as all the other sh!tty things they were doing to their spose.
I'm glad to hear it's over. "Friendiness" didn't work and you two continue to fight, push each other's buttons, and wear each other down. It's far from healthy. But even though you've claimed you'll never speak again it seems she's still in there. Anger is part of the process. But you must understand she can't hurt you anymore if you don't let her.
"My actions are my only true belongings. I cannot escape the consequences of my actions. My actions are the ground upon which I stand." Thich Nhat Hanh
@CityGirl: And what is the point of adding more hurt? I will never understand it. Ever.
The only theory I've been offered, and it seems like a fairly persuasive one as I chew it over, is that it's either (or both) of Displacement -- separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening -- or Distortion -- a gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs.
IOW, WAS must do this rather than confront the reality s/he has created, even though it is presumably a reality s/he wanted.
It's difficult to conceive of such behavior as anything other than an attempt to self-justify an essentially selfish action. Who wants to be that guy who leaves a perfectly reasonable, if not shiny-new, partner? Especially if it's for some Strange? But that guy who leaves a demanding, over-the-hill, controlling (etc FITB ad nauseum...) shrew (possibly because he's found the Love of His Life) -- that guy can look himself in the mirror. Strike that, reverse it, and it works just as destructively for WAWs.
Cognitive dissonance is in there for sure, but I think it's more than just choice-affirming. Guilt-mitigation is a biggie, even if -- especially if -- it's unacknowledged. IMHO.
Of course, that's a muddled-thinking Epic Fail, and who would want to be within a ten mile radius of someone in those weeds?
Disengage, disengage ....
Last edited by Kettricken; 11/23/0906:55 PM.
"Show me a completely smooth operation and I'll show you someone who's covering mistakes. Real boats rock." -- Frank Herbert
