Why don't people leave their spouse instead of having affairs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understood this. If you're able to find other people that you prefer than who you're with, then what's the point of wasting everyone's time? I read these threads of how people miss their ex-APs so much and it's honestly hurtful to even read and I can't imagine what their spouses would think.

I just need this explained to me.

Because they don’t want to leave their spouse.

Cheaters are passive aggressive, would rather their spouse file and they just play along.

Instead folks, pull a Hillary Clinton. Stay with the fool, spend money like there is no tomorrow, do whatever the hell you want with your life, and let the media continue to report on your cheating husband while you live a kick @$$ life without him. net of losing the final election...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who legitimately is confused by this question is either 14 years old or on the autism spectrum.

This! Also, many cheated on spouses don't really care. As long as their family life is in tact, they're happy to look the other way.

They lose all respect for the cheater, write him off, and continue to devote their lives to their children, careers and extended family. Quite selfless.
Cheater was never supportive or really engaged with the family anyhow - only to goof around a few hours each weekend, and then do his job work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If my wife cuts me off from sex, why would I give her half of our assets?
AP is a much cheaper solution

much easier to quit on her than work on improving the marriage or yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like living with my children, and my wife enables that. She also enables me to come home to a nice, clean home and healthy meals prepared. I get to have the stable, married life as well as the excitement my AP provides. Why would I divorce? It would also be a big hit for me financially. Living in two separate homes would be far more expensive than the current arrangement. And like I said, there are benefits to living with my wife, even if I'm not interested in sleeping with her.

This just shows a lack of respect for your wife

And your point is??

So you don’t have respect fo your wife, you’re not attracted to her. Why not find someone else you respect and find attractive?

Is there any woman in your life that you actually love and respect or are they only good for what they can do for you? For whom you would be willing to stop cheating if they asked you to do so (e.g. your mom, daughter, sister)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understood this. If you're able to find other people that you prefer than who you're with, then what's the point of wasting everyone's time? I read these threads of how people miss their ex-APs so much and it's honestly hurtful to even read and I can't imagine what their spouses would think.

I just need this explained to me.

Because they don’t want to leave their spouse.

Cheaters are passive aggressive, would rather their spouse file and they just play along.

Instead folks, pull a Hillary Clinton. Stay with the fool, spend money like there is no tomorrow, do whatever the hell you want with your life, and let the media continue to report on your cheating husband while you live a kick @$$ life without him. net of losing the final election...

At this point in her life, why bother staying with him? Sure, she lost the election, but unlike most of us would be independently wealthy, have plenty of money for a nice home of her own. She has grandchildren. She will continue to earn money in many different ways. She doesn't need him. Is it just a case of, "he's a jerk but he's MY jerk?"

[Anonymous]

MONEY

[Anonymous]

Once upon a time it was easier for unhappy people to get out of marriages that just weren't working out. By the time many were at their wit's end, life took care of the situation for you.

A century ago if a man was unhappy with his wife chances are she'd die in childbirth and if not, she'd die of the flu or a toothache gone bad or she'd fall off a horse.
A century ago if a woman was unhappy with her husband, he'd die in battle, he'd die in an industrial accident, or also of the flu or a toothache gone bad or fall off a horse.

Walk around a cemetery from the 1700s. Most died before 30. No one even had an opportunity to tire of someone and get sick of their bullsh$t.

And if none of those things happen, the man could board a big boat that took him across the Atlantic or Pacific and never return. Not like anyone was going to track his credit card or recognize him in Australia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I never understood this. If you're able to find other people that you prefer than who you're with, then what's the point of wasting everyone's time? I read these threads of how people miss their ex-APs so much and it's honestly hurtful to even read and I can't imagine what their spouses would think.

I just need this explained to me.

Because they don’t want to leave their spouse.

Cheaters are passive aggressive, would rather their spouse file and they just play along.

Instead folks, pull a Hillary Clinton. Stay with the fool, spend money like there is no tomorrow, do whatever the hell you want with your life, and let the media continue to report on your cheating husband while you live a kick @$$ life without him. net of losing the final election...

At this point in her life, why bother staying with him? Sure, she lost the election, but unlike most of us would be independently wealthy, have plenty of money for a nice home of her own. She has grandchildren. She will continue to earn money in many different ways. She doesn't need him. Is it just a case of, "he's a jerk but he's MY jerk?"

HIllary set Bill *free* to dick around?

Nah, much better to stay mum and let the world watch him keep cheating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once upon a time it was easier for unhappy people to get out of marriages that just weren't working out. By the time many were at their wit's end, life took care of the situation for you.

A century ago if a man was unhappy with his wife chances are she'd die in childbirth and if not, she'd die of the flu or a toothache gone bad or she'd fall off a horse.
A century ago if a woman was unhappy with her husband, he'd die in battle, he'd die in an industrial accident, or also of the flu or a toothache gone bad or fall off a horse.

Walk around a cemetery from the 1700s. Most died before 30. No one even had an opportunity to tire of someone and get sick of their bullsh$t.

And if none of those things happen, the man could board a big boat that took him across the Atlantic or Pacific and never return. Not like anyone was going to track his credit card or recognize him in Australia.

My great great grandmother grabbed the youngest two kids, left the rest with relatives, and took a boat across the ocean to find her husband. I sort of imagine her landing in America and just asking people if they knew him until she found him and then was like “You’re not getting away that easy, bub! Not without child support! Put down that goddamn beer and get back to work!” That’s my drunk history version of the family story, at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If my wife cuts me off from sex, why would I give her half of our assets?
AP is a much cheaper solution

This. My husband stopped having sex with me, then stopped working,and then developed a series of ailments that are excuses not to do any house work. So if I want to have sex, I'm supposed to give up half of my hard earned retirement . money, lose my home, and force my kids to live in a joint custody arrangement? No thanks. I've had enough taken away without my consent.

[Anonymous]

Since many women don’t marry for love, is it right to marry for money or just to have kids with someone you don’t love?

If the marriage turns sour, they will still get their fair share of family assets and 50/50 custody of kids.

It is amazing how deceitful, hypocritical and unethical women can be when it comes to manipulating men.

Marriage is truly the biggest gamble for a man, and a sweet deal for women.

[Anonymous]

My parents had an arranged marriage and no one cheated...5 kids and 55 years later they are super happy. I was brought up that marriage is a contract and arrangement among families or a union that you commit to. You honor yourself, your spouse, your family and friends that celebrates your marriage and your children. I don’t understand how anyone would jeopardize that or dishonor their family.

[Anonymous]

That’s because wives used to honour the ‘have and hold’ or affection/ sex part of the contract. Why should the husband stay faithful when the wife broke the contract first?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My parents had an arranged marriage and no one cheated...5 kids and 55 years later they are super happy. I was brought up that marriage is a contract and arrangement among families or a union that you commit to. You honor yourself, your spouse, your family and friends that celebrates your marriage and your children. I don’t understand how anyone would jeopardize that or dishonor their family.

That's just it, many marry the wrong person and are stuck. Family doesn't mean a lot to man people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men love their wives and don't think cheating is bad.

Women are stuck and can't afford to leave.

most stupid generalization

Why is cheating bad? The sexless wife gets to enjoy her vision of a happy family with the kids and a devoted husband, while the husband gets his sexual needs (not to be confused with love for his wife) met elsewhere. She is also not affected by the risk of STIs, since they no longer have sex.

Guess cheating is only bad and blamed on the husband when the wife finds out and realises the outcome of her denial, but refuses to accept that she caused it.

Because most cheaters are still having sex with their spouse, not why they cheat. Therefore your reasoning is ridiculous. Just because that's your case doesn't make it everyone elses.

It's the other way round. According to DCUM and real life where the 80/20 rule applies - 80% of cheaters are deprived of sex at home, while 20% of cheaters still have sex with their spouses.

It's actually 50/50 and don't ask me to post the research I've done it 100's of times on this forum, but a few incels don't want to know most dudes are getting it by multiple women.

Sorry but you cannot post untrue stats, then walk away. I have been reading DCUM for years and never (once!) seen your (claimed) research showing 50% of men cheaters are sexually satisfied at home. Only a woman could think that (most) men cheat for any reason other than the obvious "just wants more sex". Because an entire population of men are telling you that's exactly why we cheat.