Thoughts on the “other woman”?

[Anonymous]

Obviously, the party that took vows is wrong. The "other woman" is also guilty of being a terrible person, though - as a person (married to someone else or not), you should be guided by trying to do no harm to others. That's the basic human contract.

[Anonymous]

Takes two to tango

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are right, of course.
The sin is equal on both sides.

no, she’s not right, there’s no sin and the fault is not the same, and I’m genX.
again, marriage is not what the religion is trying to make out of it, not all people get religious weddings and vows or whatever you call them or just follow the custom more or less and get dress and bands and say some vows of their own or whatever, without believing in their meaning in fact, in the end it’s just a partnership and only the two partners can set the terms, there are partners that say ‘you can do whatever you want, I just don’t want to know about it’ or like what’s-his-face mariah’s ex in polyamorous relationships having kids with multiple women at the same time and they are all ok with it, or people that have open relationships or the relationship is over and they are in the process of separating or living apart like shakira but giving the kids more time to adjust until one of them gets serious in another relationship and only they know of their arrangement and if he’s starting another relationship and says I”m single and ready to mingle then who’s the other woman to say not so … yes, lots of men lie but some don’t, again like shakira’s ex who was living apart indeed, some get second thoughts about the breakup, figure out new relationships are as difficult as the ones they had and try going back
I think adam was just trying to have his cake and eat it too and that girl with her dumb excuse about Hollywood, what has Hollywood to do with it, that’s happening everywhere

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, the party that took vows is wrong. The "other woman" is also guilty of being a terrible person, though - as a person (married to someone else or not), you should be guided by trying to do no harm to others. That's the basic human contract.

They don't think they're doing any harm. Because the one breaking their vows is convincing them that they're not. They're not having an affair with a married man -- they're having a relationship with a man who, according to him, is only technically married.

There was a thread on DCUM recently where someone asked what was so wrong about getting involved with a separated man. Almost everyone said it was fine. Hardly anyone said it was not okay because a separated man is still a married man (and likely to be lying about his marriage).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People,of all ages but particularly the young, currently have this weird contractual view of relationships and see consent as the sole highest arbiter of whats right and wrong. Since the unmarried woman was under no contractual obligation to anyone nor to honor fidelity, she therefore did nothing wrong morally.

This is, of course, nonsense and obviously false, but consent morality is the dominant sentiment in society. “Vows” and “sexual restraint” are completely old fuddy duddy ideas gone the way of the dodo.

You are contradicting yourself. The other woman didn't take any vows. The married man did.

But everyone knows married people take vows and they, the other spouse, and their children should be left alone out of respect for not just the individuals but the institution of marriage and family itself.

You don't have much of a marriage if you're counting on total strangers to keep it together for you. It's on you and your spouse to do that.

This is stupid. It’s a [former] social contract. No different than having the very normal expectation that your neighbors will respect your property and won’t steal your TV when you’re not home, or that a teacher won’t molest your child at school. No one needs to be beholden to an explicit contract of consent to know what’s right or wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know about this situation but I feel like I am less likely to judge the other woman in cases of celebrity because there’s an imbalance of power there that makes me feel icky. Monica Lewinsky is an extreme example of course but I honestly can’t blame her at all so whether I would blame this TikToker would depend on more details of the situation than I know.

You again?

Your “power imbalance” talking points are sooooo weird.

I mean, don’t women have any agency?

“I knew it was wrong to sleep with a married man a million years older than me, but what could I do? He’s a celebrity!”

Zero sympathy for anyone who tries to defend their actions. They should just own it: he was rich, and it was fun…until it wasn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People,of all ages but particularly the young, currently have this weird contractual view of relationships and see consent as the sole highest arbiter of whats right and wrong. Since the unmarried woman was under no contractual obligation to anyone nor to honor fidelity, she therefore did nothing wrong morally.

This is, of course, nonsense and obviously false, but consent morality is the dominant sentiment in society. “Vows” and “sexual restraint” are completely old fuddy duddy ideas gone the way of the dodo.

You are contradicting yourself. The other woman didn't take any vows. The married man did.

But everyone knows married people take vows and they, the other spouse, and their children should be left alone out of respect for not just the individuals but the institution of marriage and family itself.

You don't have much of a marriage if you're counting on total strangers to keep it together for you. It's on you and your spouse to do that.

This is stupid. It’s a [former] social contract. No different than having the very normal expectation that your neighbors will respect your property and won’t steal your TV when you’re not home, or that a teacher won’t molest your child at school. No one needs to be beholden to an explicit contract of consent to know what’s right or wrong.

TV has no control over being stolen or not. Men are not property. Cheating often happens when OW is married herself. Nobody owes you to keep yoir family intact even your own husband if he wants an exit .

[Anonymous]

It seems pretty clear that he told her his marriage was staying together for press issues only. Is it a dumb thing to fall for? Sure? But people in their early twenties are not notoriously brilliant.

So what is the point of the OP? He’s totally more wrong but can we make sure we don’t forget to beat up on the woman too? I feel like that’s a really weird and misogynistic take.

[Anonymous]

Women who date married men probably have self esteem issues.

Men who cheat on their wives are much sleazier in my book, in that they are lying repeatedly to someone they claim to love, for sex.

If there is a considerable age difference, it is more pathetic , because the guy should have matured beyond putting another notch in his belt , and have more perspective on what matters in life. (Hint:it is not breast implants.)

Young women are easy to manipulate and may fall for flattery and being swept off their feet by powerful men.

She is potentially hurting a person she has never met (whom he may be badmouthing). He is hurting the people who he promised to honor in front of their families, who gave birth to his children and he is threatening the welfare of those children. Absolutely NO comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't see what all the fuss is about to be honest. The media should let Levine and his wife sort out their problems in peace.

Totally agree. I mean, he's Adam Levine, voted sexiest man alive. Who is remotely surprised he isn't faithful. I would place my life fortune that all super attractive men cheat at least some of the time.

My theory is that attractive men cheat less because they are secure (i.e., not shocked that they have a sexual opportunity). Men who are insecure need the ego boost that comes with some young thing thinking they are “all that .”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People,of all ages but particularly the young, currently have this weird contractual view of relationships and see consent as the sole highest arbiter of whats right and wrong. Since the unmarried woman was under no contractual obligation to anyone nor to honor fidelity, she therefore did nothing wrong morally.

This is, of course, nonsense and obviously false, but consent morality is the dominant sentiment in society. “Vows” and “sexual restraint” are completely old fuddy duddy ideas gone the way of the dodo.

You are contradicting yourself. The other woman didn't take any vows. The married man did.

But everyone knows married people take vows and they, the other spouse, and their children should be left alone out of respect for not just the individuals but the institution of marriage and family itself.

You don't have much of a marriage if you're counting on total strangers to keep it together for you. It's on you and your spouse to do that.

This is stupid. It’s a [former] social contract. No different than having the very normal expectation that your neighbors will respect your property and won’t steal your TV when you’re not home, or that a teacher won’t molest your child at school. No one needs to be beholden to an explicit contract of consent to know what’s right or wrong.

TV has no control over being stolen or not. Men are not property. Cheating often happens when OW is married herself. Nobody owes you to keep yoir family intact even your own husband if he wants an exit .

A lot of women seem to think their husband is their property and that an OW “steals” it.

[Anonymous]

I think the issue with the Adam Levine thing is that the OW is being talked about in the same way as Harvey Weinstein victims. Really dilutes things.

[Anonymous]

Neither of them are moral or good people but I’d focus on his bad behavior due to his age, celebrity, and marriage status. She cheated but who cares? She’s a young, unmarried nobody. He should have been more responsible but chose to behave like a disgusting POS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are right, of course.

The sin is equal on both sides.

I don’t think the sin is equal, no. The other woman is clearly not doing the right thing, but she’s mostly hurting herself. The DH is the actual problem. If my DH cheated I would be mad at the OW but I am not her responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the issue with the Adam Levine thing is that the OW is being talked about in the same way as Harvey Weinstein victims. Really dilutes things.

Yes this! She is not a victim!