Reply to Ideas how to make amends

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Ideas how to make amends"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

First, [b]OP's cheating isn't abuse[/b].  People need to stop throwing that word around. (It's like "infidelity" or "affair".  Now there's "financial infidelity" too!  Is that "abuse"?)  [b]It cheapens the seriousness of abuse[/b].  What he did may have been mean or thoughtless or selfish.  It may have made his wife feel bad.  But [b]calling it "abuse" is ridiculous[/b].

Second, seeking validation outside of the marriage is pretty normal.  Lots of people want to feel the excitement of new relationships, of relationships not bogged down in the day-to-day.  Totally normal.  Would have been good for OP to avoid going to another woman for that validation and excitement and find a way to get that in his marriage.  That's obviously harder to do, but if you've made the vow, it's the right thing to do.  But to suggest that he's some abusive monster for doing it is over the top.

Third, PP is right that, in the end, it comes down to a decision on both sides as to whether it is worth the work.  OP can decide whether he wants to stand by if his wife is taking forever to get over it, and his wife can decide whether she finds it worth her time and energy to do the work to get over it.

Finally, I think PP's defensiveness is blinding her to the fact that the cheating may, in fact, be about things missing from the marriage.  Might not be anyone's fault, but I do believe that working on understanding what was missing can help strengthen the marriage.  But for that to happen, the cheated upon person has to be willing to get over it.  
[/quote]

This seems to be your argument -- that labeling what you view as a lesser transgression (infidelity) with the label of what you view as a more serious transgression (abuse) cheapens the label of abuse.

I just want you to know that your line of thinking has been applied to many behaviors that we now label as abuse.  Getting punched in the face by your husband was abuse, but an open-handed slap or a punch that left no mark was not.  Getting yelled at and having plates broken was not abuse because the perpetrator didn't touch the victim.  Many people argued that there was no such thing as emotional abuse and that labeling "relationship problems" as "abuse" was to cheapen the value of the word abuse.  Many people argued that including date rape in the definition of rape cheapens the word rape.

I don't agree with this line of arguing.

Abuse is a form of control by one partner over another.  Consistent lies, secrecy and manipulation are forms of emotional abuse because they take away agency from the victim.  By hiding the real facts of the relationship, the victim is unable to make decisions about her life and participation in the relationship that the perpetrator disagrees with.  Infidelity is also abusive in the sense that in a marriage (usually) the spouse has consented to sex on the basis of monogamy.  When the cheating spouse breaks this vow of monogamy and continues to have sex with the victim spouse, the perpetrator is having non-consensual sex.  That's rape.  Although the OP didn't go this far, the contract of marriage assumes certain obligations in terms of time and attention toward the other partner and away from others.  It's that bargain that the OP has broken.  That's an abuse of trust, even if it didn't involve sex.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics