How would you move forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not sound at all like a bad arrangement to me. These other posters are just narrowminded.

It limits the pool of other partners. That’s really all.

Yes, other partners would need to have own place for sleepovers. But if they are ok with temporary 2-3 months dating, then it shouldn't matter. I don't see how a long term relationship can emerge from this

OP here. spouse and I live in separate homes. And follow a custody schedule. There is no jealousy between us regarding new partners, so sleepovers are not an issue.

[Anonymous]

OP, ymmv, but I will tell you as someone who’s watched a few friends “live” with this arrangement it’s pretty depressing to watch from the outside. Your description of family no-man’s land is pretty accurate. New partners are scared off (rightly so) as you’re still married, kids have some degree of confusion (rightly so) as mom and dad remain married, and your own emotional self doesn’t take the understandably scary and difficult steps you need to take to grow. Again people will feel differently here, but I don’t believe that avoiding setting inevitable boundaries, even difficult ones, serves anyone in the end.

[Anonymous]

I don’t see the problem as long as you are able to find people that don’t mind dating married people (assuming that you want to date.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t see the problem as long as you are able to find people that don’t mind dating married people (assuming that you want to date.)

Not sure if you’ve dated in mid-life but to say it’s challenging to meet quality partners is an understatement. Further limiting that pool to those unconcerned about investing in an LTR with a married person reduces the depth of that pool to a puddle that would disappear in a single paper towel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not sound at all like a bad arrangement to me. These other posters are just narrowminded.

It limits the pool of other partners. That’s really all.

Yes, other partners would need to have own place for sleepovers. But if they are ok with temporary 2-3 months dating, then it shouldn't matter. I don't see how a long term relationship can emerge from this

OP here. spouse and I live in separate homes. And follow a custody schedule. There is no jealousy between us regarding new partners, so sleepovers are not an issue.

Then you really don’t need to divorce

[Anonymous]

as a single man, i'd only be having sex with you. thats it. You'd never have a chance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:as a single man, i'd only be having sex with you. thats it. You'd never have a chance

Curious as to why? One question that comes to mind is if people think OP and spouse are divorced or married. If her family and friends think she divorced, I don’t see the issue in dating her. Most middle aged people aren’t dating for marriage, so this isn’t a big deal. And even if they are, OP can get divorced if she finds someone who she wants to marry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It does not sound at all like a bad arrangement to me. These other posters are just narrowminded.

It limits the pool of other partners. That’s really all.

Yes, I would not touch either of you with a ten foot pole. What a f g disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, ymmv, but I will tell you as someone who’s watched a few friends “live” with this arrangement it’s pretty depressing to watch from the outside. Your description of family no-man’s land is pretty accurate. New partners are scared off (rightly so) as you’re still married, kids have some degree of confusion (rightly so) as mom and dad remain married, and your own emotional self doesn’t take the understandably scary and difficult steps you need to take to grow. Again people will feel differently here, but I don’t believe that avoiding setting inevitable boundaries, even difficult ones, serves anyone in the end.

I don’t see how putting kids through the pain of divorce is preferable to this so called confusion. More than anything kids need a stable healthy family. If they can find away to get along enough to do family activities together, even if they can’t live together, that is of benefit to their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, ymmv, but I will tell you as someone who’s watched a few friends “live” with this arrangement it’s pretty depressing to watch from the outside. Your description of family no-man’s land is pretty accurate. New partners are scared off (rightly so) as you’re still married, kids have some degree of confusion (rightly so) as mom and dad remain married, and your own emotional self doesn’t take the understandably scary and difficult steps you need to take to grow. Again people will feel differently here, but I don’t believe that avoiding setting inevitable boundaries, even difficult ones, serves anyone in the end.

I don’t see how putting kids through the pain of divorce is preferable to this so called confusion. More than anything kids need a stable healthy family. If they can find away to get along enough to do family activities together, even if they can’t live together, that is of benefit to their children.

They already live in separate houses so to the kids they are basically divorced already. Going through with the actual divorce legally would not be hurting the kids because they already living that way the advantage would be there, keeping their wealth intact by staying married— but they are essentially already living like they are divorced and the kids already know that so there’s no additional pain going through an actual divorce process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, ymmv, but I will tell you as someone who’s watched a few friends “live” with this arrangement it’s pretty depressing to watch from the outside. Your description of family no-man’s land is pretty accurate. New partners are scared off (rightly so) as you’re still married, kids have some degree of confusion (rightly so) as mom and dad remain married, and your own emotional self doesn’t take the understandably scary and difficult steps you need to take to grow. Again people will feel differently here, but I don’t believe that avoiding setting inevitable boundaries, even difficult ones, serves anyone in the end.

I don’t see how putting kids through the pain of divorce is preferable to this so called confusion. More than anything kids need a stable healthy family. If they can find away to get along enough to do family activities together, even if they can’t live together, that is of benefit to their children.

They already live in separate houses so to the kids they are basically divorced already. Going through with the actual divorce legally would not be hurting the kids because they already living that way the advantage would be there, keeping their wealth intact by staying married— but they are essentially already living like they are divorced and the kids already know that so there’s no additional pain going through an actual divorce process.

I disagree that they live as a divorced couple. They live as in between as op stated. Divorced people don’t help one another build wealth, work together, have a friendship, or do things as a family. Marriage is more than just living together. They seem half in half out. The half in is beneficial to their kids emotionally and financially. The children may inherit a business and they inherit family memories, those are valuable, even if they are doing it in a non-traditional route. Better than living together and fighting like crazy, and better than truly being divorced and not working as a team.