From: fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter)
Subject: Re: Peeking through the curtain
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 03:23:53 GMT

barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>question needlessly, though. Try this idea on, and see how it fits:
>instead of drawing a hypothetical causal chain of affair --> divorce

I never mentioned divorce. I've only talked about the hurt and pain caused
to the spouse and the kids.

>The effect on their lover's spouse, by contrast, can only be guesswork.

This is not true. If the relationship is open, which is verifiable,
you know the effect. And it's not a problem.

If the relationship is *not* open, then it is *not* guesswork as to the 
effect on the lover's spouse (and kids) when they find out. If the
spouse (and kids) don't find out, there still is some effect because
the cheating spouse won't be able to spend as much time with them (because
she/he will have to spend some time with this third party).

>When an affair works out badly, know who is most often the biggest victim? The
>third party.

Good.

>	Your archetypal affair seems to be some sleazy back door man who
>spots a confused, unhappy wife and uses her confusion to get into her
>pants.

Actually, I never said this, and my examples had a woman being the other person.
Are you sure you aren't feeling a bit guilty here ?

>In article <1992Apr9.020355.20800@mks.com> fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:
>>I once lived (platonic
>>room-mates) with a woman who seemed to only date married men. She never
>>knew they were married when she first met them, but she eventually figured
>>it out.
>
>	This is interesting already. So far it sounds like she'd get a
>clean bill of moral health from you, Fred. She was lied to, she didn't
>fool around with married men intentionally.

She continued fooling around with them after she found out they were married.

>>And she usually got back at the men by trying to give the wives
>>involved a nervous breakdown.

She did this when she tired of them and they were still interested in her.

>>It was all a game to her. She had a blast.
>
>	Now, here's where I get confused. You're clearly grouping her with
>the "assholes", those that don't respect others' marital vows, but why??

Actually, she was an asshole for other reasons as well, but I won't go into
that. But she didn't respect marital vows. She went out with men that were
married. She may not have known from the start that they were married, but
she could only play stupid so long before she figured it out. And she
then continued going out with them.

>What did she do? By your own description she got involved with these men
>without _knowing_ they were married. And while you don't give the
>timetable, you imply that turning these men in to their wives is virtually
>the first thing she does when she discovers they _are_ married.

It wasn't the first thing she did. She enjoyed playing dectective,
tracking down where he realy lived, worked, etc. 

>	What game is she playing, Fred? She sounds like a victim to me.
>She was lied to and seduced, and when she discovers this she takes revenge.

She was lied to. She was not seduced. She (in this case) was not taking
revenge. She didn't believe that he had moved out on his wife (and his
two children, both of them under two years old at the time) without telling
the wife. She was calling to see if he had lied to her. She had gotten herself
mad (because she believed he lied to her again) and took it out on the wife.

>	You say the husband had moved out? They were separated? And you
>still think it's immoral for a third party to become lovers with either of
>them?

The husband moved out on his wife two months after he started going out with
Judy. He didn't move in with her (thank God; I was still living there and
the appartment was small) - he moved back in with his folks. He didn't want
to be seen in public with Judy because (so he told Judy) if a judge (for the
divorce) thought another woman was involved, he'd pay much larger alimony
payments.

> I'm having more and more difficulty relating this anecdote to the
>subject we were discussing.

Try harder.

>	And, finally, the matter of informing on the cheating spouse. I'm
>curious, Fred: if someone's spouse is cheating on them, do you think it's
>better if they know, or are in the dark? I think it's better they don't
>know, and I don't approve of what your former roommate did, but I wonder
>what you think?

I believe in honesty and in people knowing the truth about matters that
pertain to them. But the way Judy picked to let the wife know about
the affair was seemily calculated to cause as much pain as possible.

>but the villain your summary of her character portrays?

Because she was a mean, petty, nasty, manipulative liar. But that's neither
here nor there, since we weren't discussing her personality, but the fact
she's the 'other woman'.

I notice that you ignored my other example. My friend and her kids.

	fred
-- 
Disclaimer: everything I post is my *personal* opinion and does not represent
or reflect the opinion of the company which employs me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. R. (Fred) Walter, Mortice Kern Systems Inc.,	Internet: fredw@mks.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles