Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

Needs to be negotiated up front though, doesn't it?

But as to your question, is your marriage open? If not, how would you feel about your wife stepping out?

Which isn't to say that I don't agree with you. But I think a lot of people share your view in theory but not in practice.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

One of the things that Thurgreed mentioned as a factor in his change was that he got older. As I recall, the douche is way younger than you. It may take a while before he has the maturity to want to make the change. Once he gets there, fine, you could consider making him a bigger part of your life, but unless and until, no way.

tm

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

This is much more important than his cheating. Clearly you should not take him back, and instead should consider a restraining order.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

That doesn't exist. You and your spouse will always desire to sleep with someone else. I understand you're in the honeymoon phase right now, but you surely recall those instance where you've found yourself randomly talking to someone attractive, and there's a sexual tension and you're thinking, "Damn. I'd like to sleep with this person, and it feels like they're thinking what I'm thinking." We simply aren't built for lifelong coupling within a single relationship.

That said, my wife and I accept the rules as they are and don't cheat for the same reasons TM noted (don't want to hurt each other and fuck things up). But never, ever, confuse that with the notion we wouldn't love a fling with someone else here and there. Everybody, in every relationship, wants to fuck somebody else. The only curative therapy I'm aware of for that is death.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

print this out and read it if you ever think about giving him another chance. that is creepy.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

The desire to do this is not the same as the action of doing this. I desired to fuck a lot of people during my relationship with [insert name here - I forget what he is called on this board, if anything]. However, I did not. Acting on every desire - especially when it fucks up your long term goals - is so fucking stupid and immature.

The problem is not the desire - that cannot be helped. The problem is the action - that is a matter of character.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Agreed. It's making a choice - the wrong and selfish one in instances such as yours.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I don't think I'd dig it, but the quid pro quo might ease that lack of comfort.

There is nothing like sleeping with someone for the first time. Unwrapping a Christmas present, etc... Even if it sucks, there's an exploration high. You're like Pizarro stumbling into the Incan palaces.

Well, maybe not that impressive, but you get the picture.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I know quite a number of people in open relationships of various degrees and for various reasons. Some work, some fail. The failures, in my experience, are generally due to either one party being more into the idea than the other or inadequately laid out/followed ground rules. The successes generally are due to very good communication and trust between the partners.

I know that I can't be in one, and fortunately for me, my boyfriend is on the same page.

ETA: I know one couple where this is not the case. She is pretty sure that she cannot be in a monogamous relationship. He's pretty sure he needs to be in one. They're working it out as much as they can.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

This guy sounds less and less appealing all the time.

For your daughter's sake you need to be able to deal with each other in a non-toxic manner. But it doesn't mean you have to take him back.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I know maybe one couple who has an open relationship and that one doesn't seem to be working so well. I think both sides of the argument have to do with human nature. Sure, we all would like to screw other people. We also don't want the person we committed ourselves to, fucking other people. And for that reason, I think you're completely full of shit when you say the quid pro quo might ease the lack of comfort you would get knowing your wife is fucking other men.

TM

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

I've heard lots of good things about maple-flavored sluts.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Precisely.

What you want is someone who thinks that on balance, it's not worth hurting you to satisfy some kind of primitive urge. Everyone has opportunity, and this guy put his own satisfaction ahead of your relationship. If you're cool with that, then you are, but it doesn't sound like you are.

Get what you want.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

Hence my earlier advice. Which, if you all forgot, is No Fucking Way.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

That precise advice appears to be new.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

It wasn't big, italic, or red enough for me to remember.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

at some point text cannot be "more" italic- instead it simply starts to become vertical.

think about it.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I have given your point the thought it deserves.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

I agree wholeheartedly with this. I dated someone who is a single father who made the same heart-wrenching decision to be happy. Unfortunately for him (and me), his ex made all of this as difficult as possible, using the child as an anchor.

I would have much preferred that my parents had divorced when they should have instead of when I was in my late 20s because the opportunity to grow up seeing functional relationships is much more important than the benefit of seeing two people in an unhealthy situation just because they made vows before God.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

It sounds like she's unhappy that he didn't reach this realization last time around.

(Plus whatever other problems there were.)

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

Your advice is certainly the best on this.

Consider this a big fat fucking 2.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

That's because however much most people (or some, or all -- depends who you ask) are wired for non-monogamy, they are even more wired for jealousy.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I thought it was "Marry a fireman."

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

I'm going to take this rare opportunity to completely, emphatically, and whole-heartedly agree with Hank.

Weed, Whites and Wine
 

Apropos of nothing* and for the 3 out there who might possibly care, the Black Crowes ended their gig last night with a great cover of "Willin'"


---

*and not really nothing - the idea of Muffin reconciling for the umpteenth time with McDouche wants me to immediately seek out heavy doses of weed, whites and wine.

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

Which is kind of a different way of saying wired for monogamy, right? At least in a relationship with a relative equal power dynamic (which of course is a very recent development for the most part).

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

...right there on the Group W bench....

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Amen.

My wife's parents divorced when she was 13. She's the oldest, and she and her siblings moved to the U.S. with their mother. The divorce should have come much sooner. They tried to keep it together "for the kids" but the environment was unbelievably corrosive.

The whole thing ended with my father-in-law threatening to try to have my mother-in-law committed. They were living in his native country, surrounded by his relatives, and my mother-in-law was isolated and handicapped culturally, lingustically, and religiously (their social life revolved around a splinter conservative sect founded by my wife's grandfather). A flight to the U.S. embassy ensued, along with a visitation battle involving two countries' courts. Thankfully, my father-in-law ultimately dropped the custody battle.

30 years on, some of the raw edges have worn away. My wife and her siblings have a relationship with their father (thanks to her). Both my mother-in-law and my father-in-law attended our wedding, and the grandkids know both grandparents. But my wife and her siblings endured a living hell to get there, both before and for years after the divorce that should have happened almost 10 years previously.

For what it's worth.

CDF

Re: Weed, Whites and Wine
 

Right here, baby.

And may I take this opportunity to add a no fucking way of my own.

Re: Weed, Whites and Wine
 

Like in Charlize pulling out the Ireland ball in the practice for the WC draw?

Re: On a "need to know" basis
 

Some woman, somewhere, is going to be very scared and unhappy in a "relationship" with him.

Don't let it be you.

CDF

Re: Weed, Whites and Wine
 

Racist.

TM

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Some people might say that you're a really terrible mother.

I'll just say 2.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

IMHO, divorce is harder on kids the older they get, except that it gets much less hard once they leave home.

Just do it!
 

Jesper Parnevik with a few choice quotes. Nike will be thrilled:

http://golf.fanhouse.com/2009/12/02/...usspor00000002

CDF

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

I'm not entirely sure this is always true.

I had a boyfriend who's parents divorced when he was almost 30, after almost 40 years of marriage. It totally rocked his perception of reality and he swore he'd never marry because everything he thought he knew about love and marriage was wrong.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Can you be certain he actually had a perception of reality predating his parents' divorce?

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

I can only tell you what he told me.

Which was that everything he thought to be true turned out not to be true.

Re: Welcome back E/O, leagl and Fringey: no one say the name "Penske" 3 times in a ro
 

Smashing. I look forward to being on the other side of a deal from you one day! :rolleyes:

Re: Weed, Whites and Wine
 

Ha. I was thinking of saying something like, "You mean a bunch of Klan members?" but wasn't sure it would be accepted in the intended spirit.