Anonymous
10/09/2025 15:08
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Who had this alleged affair?
Presumably you can read.
I can. Can you? Where does she say it was an affair? Clearly she said it started after she separated from her husband and told him they can both start seeing other people. So please point me to the post that explains how that’s an affair.
You’re the one who implied an affair.
More nonsense from you. No, I didn't and neither did OP. Telling him she wants to separate and start seeing other people is the end of the relationship. His (and I assume you have the same controlling tenancies) tantrums don't work any more.
Anonymous
10/09/2025 14:37
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Who had this alleged affair?
Presumably you can read.
I can. Can you? Where does she say it was an affair? Clearly she said it started after she separated from her husband and told him they can both start seeing other people. So please point me to the post that explains how that’s an affair.
You’re the one who implied an affair.
Anonymous
10/09/2025 14:36
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Why is it her problem if STBX is triggered? They are separated and getting divorced and the house was paid for with her money. If he stops demanding to know who she's with and when and where, he'll have no opportunity to be triggered. She needs to just say, in no uncertain terms, "Larlo, we are separated and about to be divorced. My dating life is not your business. I wish you the best. Now, is there something related to the kids you wanted to discuss? Because if not, I have to go. Bye!"
It is her problem because she came here and said it was. And she claims she wants to "still be friends with him" and "maintain a warm and friendly relationship".
Anonymous
10/09/2025 14:33
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are making your divorce harder by dating before it’s final. It’s literally adultery. Aside from any possible legal consequences, you are making it more contentious and you are not just reducing his incentive to cooperate but actively making him angry. All this is foolish in the extreme.
It's literally NOT adultery; their terms were that both parties could see other people.
They were still legally married, so it is literally adultery, dolt.
Lot of namecalling from someone who 1) can't read; and 2) doesn't understand how "consensual nonmonogamy" works. Dolt.
"consensual nonmonogamy" is not a legal status of any kind. A marriage certainly is. Dolt.
And that aside it doesn't sounds like OPs STBX actually consented to it. She unilaterally declared she was doing it, and he's very obviously not ok with it.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 23:51
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Why is it her problem if STBX is triggered? They are separated and getting divorced and the house was paid for with her money. If he stops demanding to know who she's with and when and where, he'll have no opportunity to be triggered. She needs to just say, in no uncertain terms, "Larlo, we are separated and about to be divorced. My dating life is not your business. I wish you the best. Now, is there something related to the kids you wanted to discuss? Because if not, I have to go. Bye!"
Anonymous
10/08/2025 23:41
Subject: Re:Setting boundaries with STBX?
Regardless of what’s legal and what’s not, whether this is adultery, whether OP wants to be friends with STBX, shouldn’t the bottom line be whether OP is being a decent human? She admits STBX isn’t a bad guy, and she was married to him for a long time. Doesn’t basic human decency require that she not entertain her new guy in a house still co-owned by STBX, especially when she knows that STBX is triggered by this new relationship? Seems like STBX deserves at least that amount of courtesy and respect.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 21:48
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
This is like those NYT recipes where you see a recipe for beef chile or something, and then there are all these comments underneath like, "this is a great recipe, I made it with chicken and rice and paprika instead of beef and beans and cumin and wow, what a winner," or "this recipe is terrible! I made it with tofu and banana peels and it was just no good at all!"
Some people just want to say what they want to say, whether or not it has any relevance to whatever the initial query from OP was. Unfortunately, in this case it's the "cheaters should rot" lady who keeps popping up.
Some people just want to say what they want to say, whether or not it has any relevance to whatever the initial query from OP was. Unfortunately, in this case it's the "cheaters should rot" lady who keeps popping up.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 20:24
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Who had this alleged affair?
Presumably you can read.
I can. Can you? Where does she say it was an affair? Clearly she said it started after she separated from her husband and told him they can both start seeing other people. So please point me to the post that explains how that’s an affair.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 20:00
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Who had this alleged affair?
Presumably you can read.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 19:57
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Who had this alleged affair?
Anonymous
10/08/2025 18:32
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Sock puppet store is out of stock due to this thread.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 18:25
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:OP here. Wow, some of you are making a lot of erroneous assumptions. (Projection?) No, I did not start seeing new guy before I was separated. And no, STBX is not "paying the mortgage" on the house we legally own jointly: I've been supporting STBX for years (a major reason for the split) and my income pays the bills. And although this is DCUM, some of you must live in beknighted states in which "adultery" includes relationships after a separation and has negative legal consequences during a divorce. Thankfully, that is not the case in DC, VA or MD.
I am trying to figure out if there is a way to still be friends with STBX. Our kids are grown but obviously we are going to have to see each other from time to time and with kids in common talk from time to time, because financial questions and health issues and so on will come up where it would be good for both parents to be able to talk. My own parents divorced but managed to maintain a warm and friendly relationship through their own remarriages. I am trying to figure out how to get there with STBX.
I recognize it may not be possible, but that is why, while I want to set boundaries, I also don;t want to just completely excise him from my life. He is my kids' dad and a decent human most of the time. Messed up in some ways, sure, but we all are. That's what I'm struggling with: drawing the line in the right place, where there is respect for boundaries without complete inability to have normal conversations. I realize it may just be too soon.
I'm a PP who responded that you should tell him you don't want to discuss it with him. Don't let the DCUM fantasists get you down.
Maybe you and STBX will have a friendly relationship in the future, but it's probably not going to happen right now while he's still trying to process that the divorce is actually happening. I'd be polite but distant.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 18:10
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You are making your divorce harder by dating before it’s final. It’s literally adultery. Aside from any possible legal consequences, you are making it more contentious and you are not just reducing his incentive to cooperate but actively making him angry. All this is foolish in the extreme.
It's literally NOT adultery; their terms were that both parties could see other people.
They were still legally married, so it is literally adultery, dolt.
Lot of namecalling from someone who 1) can't read; and 2) doesn't understand how "consensual nonmonogamy" works. Dolt.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 18:09
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What does Starbucks (STBX) have to do with this situation ?
Starbucks closed down today at $80 per share.
OP is at fault for committing adultery.
I love when idiots latch onto fiction in their head instead of reading. It's my fave.
The only idiots in this thread are those pretending that the OP is not committing adultery. She separated at the same time that her lover separated from his wife. Only an idiot would believe OP's false claim that the adulterous affair didn't start until after the separation. Regardless,adultery is adultery when one is still married but has sex with another.
That. Comment. Wasn't. From. OP.
And no, that's not how adultery works. Plenty of married people have consensual non-monogamy agreements that make relationships with other people NOT adulterous in nature. Sorry you can't wrap your wee head around it, but that's reality.
Anonymous
10/08/2025 17:29
Subject: Setting boundaries with STBX?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:On a more serious note: I do wonder about the posters who display zero empathy. Let's say someone *did* have an affair! I doubt they feel proud about it. My bet is that most people who have affairs feel terrible about it. But I also think even good people make mistakes and behave badly sometimes. That doesn't make them terrible people. It makes them decent people who did something wrong. And we don't know what the circumstances were that led them there.
To the super-Christians on this and other threads whose attitude is: "This person is an adulterer and therefore just a disgusting bad blameworthy person in every way, i hope they rot!" - whatever happened to Christian charity? To letting he who is blameless cast the first stone?
Or maybe it's just the Taliban joining DCUM?
I don’t think she should rot but I certainly don’t believe in what she is doing with impunity.
Oh cool, what would you consider appropariately punitive?
I don’t know. And what’s “cool?” It’s not a “cool” or “uncool” thing.