Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you man died in a car accident today, would you go to the funeral?

I don't know. I wouldn't want to do anything to compound his wife's grief. I'd have to think hard about that.

What do you mean "compound his wife's grief"? Would you try to stake a claim to his assets? Show up to his funeral? Ask her for your rent money?

If he died, it would just be...over. Done. There really would be nothing left for you. You do get that, right?

Huh? Of course I wouldn't stake a claim to his assets. I don't know why you'd even think that? Someone asked if I would go to the funeral and I just said I'm not sure.

The mourners at his funeral would be her circle of friends/family/support not your's. You do understand that, don't you?

Not necessarily. A funeral is for saying goodbye to someone you care about, too. The deceased has old and new friends, colleagues, and family that may wish to attend to acknowledge his passing. That's why the obituary is published in the paper.

Generally the family is publishing the obituary in the newspaper to inform old *friends*, *colleagues*, *neighbors*, *church members* and the like that the death has happened. I think it is pretty obvious that illicit mistresses are not included in the invite....and that the family is not going out of their way to notify such persons of the death.

That does not mean that mistresses do not have a right to their grief. It is just that theirs is a more private grief, just like the relationship that they had with the decedent was private not public.

I have attended many funerals. Frankly, people often do not ask someone there what their relation to the deceased is. Anyone who happens upon the obituary notice could attend, and unless they appeared homeless or caused a disruption, people let them be (unless it involved a famous person).

You seriously think she would remain stoic, not make a scene, not sob uncontrollably? Yes, she would call attention to herself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
She has a somewhat formalized pecuniary relationship with her guy. Many, many women go after an affluent professional for the same reason. You may not have done so but it would be naive to think that is not the motivation of many women especially in this town.

And many men choose to *marry* them anyway. Please don't equate married couples with what the Op is doing. It isn't the same thing. At all. Op's boyfriend already has a wife and it ain't her.

So if the guy who is providing for OP were not married, it would change your opinion of her? Fault the husband by all means but don't blame the OP for doing what millions of women do when they marry a guy because he has money. Not just in the US but pretty much all over the world.

If Op was just single and just sitting back and letting her rich boyfriend support her, I think that would be unwise. He could dump her tomorrow and where would she be? If Op was married to the guy and they, as a committed couple, decided that it would be best for Op to stay home that would be a team decision on both of their parts.

And if the wife decided that she did not want to work because she would rather stay at home although she has no children because her husband can provide for the sort of lifestyle she expects that would make her a ......... by your definition?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if your boyfriend divorced his wife, would you want to become his fiance or future wife?

She already said she didn't want to because she doesn't want kids.

OP is being disingenuous because if she could marry him she would.

How do you know what she thinks? Or would do?

She already said she didn't want to because she doesn't want kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if your boyfriend divorced his wife, would you want to become his fiance or future wife?

She already said she didn't want to because she doesn't want kids.

OP is being disingenuous because if she could marry him she would.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if your boyfriend divorced his wife, would you want to become his fiance or future wife?

She already said she didn't want to because she doesn't want kids.

Anonymous wrote:OP, if your boyfriend divorced his wife, would you want to become his fiance or future wife?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you are pretty awesome.

You have this entire board in a tizzy about something that may or may not be true. I guess many on this board are thinking there but for the grace of God go I (being the wife that everyone feels is being wronged)

Or some of us find the scenario interesting because we have had no experience with it in real life.

And hopefully never will. My parents raised me with too much self-respect to share a man with another woman.

In my early 20s- the last thing I wanted was a used, loser with a wife and kids.

OP sounds like a prostitute. Sex for $ and gifts.

Please........get off your high horse.

How many women would end up with a financially well-placed guy if he were not so situated? Sure in those instances it is not a formal payment for sex but part of the reason many women go for a guy is because of his job and what he earns.

She doesn't sound LIKE a prostitute. She IS a prostitute.

What do you call a woman who marries a guy for his money? Why do you think Wendi Deng married Rupert Murdoch? Why do you think Donald Trump's wife married him? Was it their good looks? Their incredible charm? Or was it for their money? And what does it make them?

Sounds like this team decision is exactly the arrangement the guy has with his wife.

Anonymous wrote:She previously said her dog was not small enough to put in a purse. How big is a cockapoo?

Disbelief? No, fear.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you man died in a car accident today, would you go to the funeral?

I don't know. I wouldn't want to do anything to compound his wife's grief. I'd have to think hard about that.

What do you mean "compound his wife's grief"? Would you try to stake a claim to his assets? Show up to his funeral? Ask her for your rent money?

If he died, it would just be...over. Done. There really would be nothing left for you. You do get that, right?

Huh? Of course I wouldn't stake a claim to his assets. I don't know why you'd even think that? Someone asked if I would go to the funeral and I just said I'm not sure.

The mourners at his funeral would be her circle of friends/family/support not your's. You do understand that, don't you?

Not necessarily. A funeral is for saying goodbye to someone you care about, too. The deceased has old and new friends, colleagues, and family that may wish to attend to acknowledge his passing. That's why the obituary is published in the paper.

Generally the family is publishing the obituary in the newspaper to inform old *friends*, *colleagues*, *neighbors*, *church members* and the like that the death has happened. I think it is pretty obvious that illicit mistresses are not included in the invite....and that the family is not going out of their way to notify such persons of the death.

That does not mean that mistresses do not have a right to their grief. It is just that theirs is a more private grief, just like the relationship that they had with the decedent was private not public.

I have attended many funerals. Frankly, people often do not ask someone there what their relation to the deceased is. Anyone who happens upon the obituary notice could attend, and unless they appeared homeless or caused a disruption, people let them be (unless it involved a famous person).