Ok, I'll play along.

So if cheaters aren't as bad as rapists, how bad are they? Worse than a robber? What about worse than someone who steals food because he's hungry? Worse than the mom in the General Parenting forum who shunned a family from a neighborhood play date because the kid has special needs? Worse than someone who cheats on their taxes?

Honestly, I couldn't care less. People can cheat all they want since it has zero impact on me. Just flaming the fires to see what folks think. And candidly, I'm a bit surprised how blasé everyone seems to be about this. I had no clue there were so many miserable people in the DMV. It's sad.

Cheaters are now being compared to rapists. GTFOH!

Way to deflect. People who have affairs deserve to be put down. Their actions certainly should not be celebrated or revered. If you don't understand that, then your moral compass is broken.

Sorry, but cheaters aren't on the same level as those of us who don't cheat. The same can be said about robbers, rapists, murderers, etc. Do you feel compelled to call me out for being too judgemental or sanctimonious if I make a provocative comment about the Boston Bomber? What about a frathouse rapist? Or a rioter who burns down a CVS in West Baltimore?

There are good people and bad people in this world. And while there are different levels of "bad," the reality is that people who have affairs fall into the "bad" camp. Sorry if the truth hurts. If you are so miserable in your marriage, then separate or come to an agreement and have an open marriage. But don't fool yourself into thinking that affairs are perfectly acceptable and that you are a super fabulous person...because you aren't. You are broken, and you should try to fix yourself...and worry about why you are having an affair instead of ponder if your affair is making you insecure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really matter? You dodged a bullet. He cheated. You cheated. You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? Bring it up with a therapist and report back.

Sanctimonious. "making a show of being morally superior to other people."

I wasn't being sanctimonious (because I don't have any interest in comparing myself to random strangers or anyone really).

Rather, I was pointing out (how bizarre it is) that she is concerned with feeling insecure rather than her poor decision making. I think she needed to reevaluate her priorities, and a therapist is likely needed (since she seems incapable of figuring this out on her own).

Eliminate this "You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? " and your rebuttal works. Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position.

Wrong, pp. That statement is perfectly legit. Sometimes the truth hurts. But the truth is that having an affair is a big statement about your moral code...regardless of how common affairs seem to be in DCUMLandia. If an affair didn't say something about your character, then Bill Clinton's character would not have been called into question.

I stand by my statement...Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position. There is truth and there are statements meant to demean and elevate yourself.

I have no need to elevate myself...because I would never have an affair. Affairs are wrong. Period. You can continue to call me sanctimonious if you like. But as we've both pointed out, the sanctimonious person puts others down to feel better about themselves. I have no need to do that. A person who has an affair on the other hand might feel the need to deflect. And you are deflecting by throwing rocks at me. That's fine. Continue if you must. Gentle suggestion: time might be better spent focusing on yourself.

You can say affairs are wrong without the alley cat business. Not sure if you're unable to see that or simply unwilling. One's a rational statement. The other is aggressive. It's the aggression that causes you to lose ground when making an otherwise perfectly legitimate and accurate point.

Well said.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really matter? You dodged a bullet. He cheated. You cheated. You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? Bring it up with a therapist and report back.

Sanctimonious. "making a show of being morally superior to other people."

I wasn't being sanctimonious (because I don't have any interest in comparing myself to random strangers or anyone really).

Rather, I was pointing out (how bizarre it is) that she is concerned with feeling insecure rather than her poor decision making. I think she needed to reevaluate her priorities, and a therapist is likely needed (since she seems incapable of figuring this out on her own).

Eliminate this "You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? " and your rebuttal works. Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position.

Wrong, pp. That statement is perfectly legit. Sometimes the truth hurts. But the truth is that having an affair is a big statement about your moral code...regardless of how common affairs seem to be in DCUMLandia. If an affair didn't say something about your character, then Bill Clinton's character would not have been called into question.

I stand by my statement...Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position. There is truth and there are statements meant to demean and elevate yourself.

I have no need to elevate myself...because I would never have an affair. Affairs are wrong. Period. You can continue to call me sanctimonious if you like. But as we've both pointed out, the sanctimonious person puts others down to feel better about themselves. I have no need to do that. A person who has an affair on the other hand might feel the need to deflect. And you are deflecting by throwing rocks at me. That's fine. Continue if you must. Gentle suggestion: time might be better spent focusing on yourself.

Ok, so, you take rude and demeaning shots at someone and it's not to elevate yourself. The way you write says otherwise and is unnecessary to make a point.

Anonymous wrote:My AP of five years often felt insecure early on. I worked hard to reduce her insecurity (frequent contact, trips away, etc.)

That's really thoughtful. You sound like a good man. I'm going to screens hot your post to my AP.

My AP of five years often felt insecure early on. I worked hard to reduce her insecurity (frequent contact, trips away, etc.)

Well I think cheating on your spouse is a pretty asshat move. Ymmv.

Anonymous wrote:I think the blasé attitude about affairs requires the provocative wording. Ymmv.

"Provocative." Is that what the kids are calling "being an asshole" these days?

I think the blasé attitude about affairs requires the provocative wording. Ymmv.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really matter? You dodged a bullet. He cheated. You cheated. You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? Bring it up with a therapist and report back.

Sanctimonious. "making a show of being morally superior to other people."

I wasn't being sanctimonious (because I don't have any interest in comparing myself to random strangers or anyone really).

Rather, I was pointing out (how bizarre it is) that she is concerned with feeling insecure rather than her poor decision making. I think she needed to reevaluate her priorities, and a therapist is likely needed (since she seems incapable of figuring this out on her own).

Eliminate this "You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? " and your rebuttal works. Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position.

Wrong, pp. That statement is perfectly legit. Sometimes the truth hurts. But the truth is that having an affair is a big statement about your moral code...regardless of how common affairs seem to be in DCUMLandia. If an affair didn't say something about your character, then Bill Clinton's character would not have been called into question.

I stand by my statement...Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position. There is truth and there are statements meant to demean and elevate yourself.

I have no need to elevate myself...because I would never have an affair. Affairs are wrong. Period. You can continue to call me sanctimonious if you like. But as we've both pointed out, the sanctimonious person puts others down to feel better about themselves. I have no need to do that. A person who has an affair on the other hand might feel the need to deflect. And you are deflecting by throwing rocks at me. That's fine. Continue if you must. Gentle suggestion: time might be better spent focusing on yourself.

You can say affairs are wrong without the alley cat business. Not sure if you're unable to see that or simply unwilling. One's a rational statement. The other is aggressive. It's the aggression that causes you to lose ground when making an otherwise perfectly legitimate and accurate point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really matter? You dodged a bullet. He cheated. You cheated. You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? Bring it up with a therapist and report back.

Sanctimonious. "making a show of being morally superior to other people."

I wasn't being sanctimonious (because I don't have any interest in comparing myself to random strangers or anyone really).

Rather, I was pointing out (how bizarre it is) that she is concerned with feeling insecure rather than her poor decision making. I think she needed to reevaluate her priorities, and a therapist is likely needed (since she seems incapable of figuring this out on her own).

Eliminate this "You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? " and your rebuttal works. Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position.

Wrong, pp. That statement is perfectly legit. Sometimes the truth hurts. But the truth is that having an affair is a big statement about your moral code...regardless of how common affairs seem to be in DCUMLandia. If an affair didn't say something about your character, then Bill Clinton's character would not have been called into question.

I stand by my statement...Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position. There is truth and there are statements meant to demean and elevate yourself.

I have no need to elevate myself...because I would never have an affair. Affairs are wrong. Period. You can continue to call me sanctimonious if you like. But as we've both pointed out, the sanctimonious person puts others down to feel better about themselves. I have no need to do that. A person who has an affair on the other hand might feel the need to deflect. And you are deflecting by throwing rocks at me. That's fine. Continue if you must. Gentle suggestion: time might be better spent focusing on yourself.

My ex husband's affair bred insecurity in our marriage while we failed to fix it......that was you????? Way to go!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really matter? You dodged a bullet. He cheated. You cheated. You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? Bring it up with a therapist and report back.

Sanctimonious. "making a show of being morally superior to other people."

I wasn't being sanctimonious (because I don't have any interest in comparing myself to random strangers or anyone really).

Rather, I was pointing out (how bizarre it is) that she is concerned with feeling insecure rather than her poor decision making. I think she needed to reevaluate her priorities, and a therapist is likely needed (since she seems incapable of figuring this out on her own).

Eliminate this "You both have the morals of alley cats and you are worried about feeling insecure? " and your rebuttal works. Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position.

Wrong, pp. That statement is perfectly legit. Sometimes the truth hurts. But the truth is that having an affair is a big statement about your moral code...regardless of how common affairs seem to be in DCUMLandia. If an affair didn't say something about your character, then Bill Clinton's character would not have been called into question.

I stand by my statement...Shots like that are meant to demean while you float above in a morally superior position. There is truth and there are statements meant to demean and elevate yourself.

NO, you realized what is real + true.

If your partner was already cheating on his S/O to spend time alone w/you, then he most certainly would have no qualms in the future doing the same thing to you.

People cannot change their true colors, nor can they successfully hide them.

He showed his true colors early on. You know he is a liar, a betrayer and a cheating rat so your good common sense told you to ditch this guy and wait for someone w/at least an ounce of integrity.

This guy had NONE.