Quote: This whole "fight for her" concept has left me, and I would venture to guess a whole lot of you all out there, totally confused. To fight, you need opposition, the A seems like the likely opposition, the threat. Fight the threat, and you are fighting against your S. No can do. So, the next enemy has to be the problems in the M, the ones caused by you. So the fight turns inward, introspectively battling your own issues in order to become a better person and a more worthy S. Somehow, this DOESN'T look like fighting, except to a COMPASSIONATE person. So the issue here is that behaviors that look like fighting are detrimental, begging, arguing, pleading, etc, but the real fight goes unseen. The responsibility for SEEING the fight falls on the shoulders of the WAS - and unless they are looking for it, they will not see it. They probably don't want to see it much of the time, and when they do, they want to see the pathetic, hurt, sad S that loves them so much they are falling apart in order to fuel their ego. So, where's the fight at? This is, of course, assuming that the LBS IS actually fighting here.
I LOVE THIS. You really nailed that feeling a LOT of us have when we thing about the whole "fighting" part that usually falls on us male LBS more than anyone else. There seems to be a contingent of people out there (not NECESSARILY on this board mind you) that feel if we don't actually take up arms against the OM or immediately make ultimatums, we are somehow weak or not fighting. I think you make a GREAT case for a different kind of fight, the "unseen" fight as you call it, can be the most difficult kind of battle for us to wage and of course, according to DB and many on this site, the most rewarding.
As for your sitch, I am tending to agree with this idea that you say to hell with this idea that somehow by taking care of your boy you are "letting" her go, or supporting the affair. In the future, if you are D and your W asks you to take him because she wants to go on vacation with her new boyfriend, are you always going to say no? What if you wanted her to do the same for you and your GF? I am not trying to paint a bleak picture, only to try to get you to see that the morality of this sitch is not absolute and entirely dependent on the timing of it... which is no small thing, I agree. You are still her H and she your W but if that is not to be in the near, or distant future, then what does it matter?
I hope I am making sense. What I am saying is that you are projecting all kinds of things onto this sitch, and that's your right, but you COULD decide that this is ONLY about you and your son and leave her the hell out of it.
One thing I thought of is this; is there any middle ground here? IS this ALL about a moral stand, maybe even trying to prevent her from going, or is there any practical value to trying to get her to arrange for/pay for someone to look after him with the idea that you will decide when and if that happens depending on your schedule?
That way she is being the responsible mom and you are still not being the 100% facilitator of her trip.
Lastly, that line about you "not loving her enough" if you do any of those things on her list is one of the most asinine, totally perfect WAS things I have ever heard. WTH? Um, honey, if you loved ME enough, you wouldn't be flying intercontinental to f--k my cousin.
Sorry muddle, she pissed ME off with that one.
Man, like I said, this is a tough one, one that I really have a hard time giving advice on. I guess I just did, but take me with a HUGE grain of salt.
