Ah, the inevitable condescension of one who has convinced himself of the correctness of his life choices.
Perhaps I misjudged your motivation, but there are plenty of weak little men out there who are alone and blaming their exes for their failed marriages because they think getting married entitles them to unconditional love.
Having said that, women aren't exactly the powerless little followers you seem to think they are. It takes two to tango. A man can't take full responsibility for the success of his marriage.
Of course it takes two to tango. Nowhere do I suggest that women are powerless little followers, quite the contrary in many respects. (If there's any truth in that then it applies to us men, especially when it comes to pvssy.) All I'm saying is stand up and fight to win your woman back. (As to condescension - apologies, none meant. Apols for any bad phrasing on my part.)
@arthur.I think you're confusing your own marriage to a real situation of infidelity.The dynamics change when you're on the receiving end of an xtra marital affair.The very thing that you hold sacred becomes compromised irrespective of how devoted you are.
Its like having a faithful hard working irreplacable employee steal from you.Even if the person promises to never do it again and you decide to keep him you'll never view that person in the same light.
This insecurity based on failed trust makes it unfeasable to continue the union.
We all fall short of the trust others have in us. I am Exhibit A. But that's not reason enough to end the whole thing. Healing and renewal is possible - there's ample evidence of that from many a marriage where the wronged spouse didn't give up, and after the serious wobble went on to depths and joy neither imagined before they were so deeply challenged. As to the stealing employee analogy: there's no vow of perpetual fidelity with an employee - it's always conditional. In my own view, the marriage vow is unconditional - that's what makes it different from anything else we do, which is why almost all societies in all of history have invoked the most solemn ceremony and ritual to express that "sacredness" as you call it. And yes, sex is so powerful and so important it needs strong bonds to contain it, or it spills outside the marriage and contaminates. (Of course I know that today others have a different view.)
So in your opinion... is a woman that gets married to a man that she firmly does love and believes is "the one" at the time of marriage, only to find out that her loving husband loves nothing more than to use her as his personal punch bag over and over again, wrong to want to get divorced?
Physical abuse is of course a terrible violation, and it can (and perhaps should) lead to a temporary or even long-term (if serious or persistent) separation of bed and board. But even when living separately, they are still spouses, and in some fundamental way remain open to reconciliation and resumption of conjugal life. It doesn't follow that I am free to dissolve the bond and leave to marry or fvck someone else. Indeed, the whole point of getting married (as opposed to just cohabiting) was that nothing other than death would end the marriage. Again, that's why getting to know someone thoroughly
before marriage is so important, so you can spot and raise and discuss character and personality flaws with frankness. Money, sex and power. It's very very serious stuff.
I admire your wanting to make things right etc but I cannot think that the logic of "no way out" is the correct one. I have been married for 15 years and as you mentioned there has been "tests" on my side of the fence and so I can only think that my wife has endured the same. I have remained faithful and will try my utmost to carry on doing so. I can only hope that my wife has done the same but if i do find out that she has been unfaithful, it will be the end of the marriage. This will not be a surprise to her and if the roles are reversed I will also not be surprised for her leaving me. When we got married we both told one another that if it did happen it was goodbye.. No stories "of I was drunk and did not know what i was doing" or such like, no remorse basically no excuses. So in essence I supposed this is another little verbal clause we added to our vows.
Yeah, it's not easy, as you rightly point out. All I can say is we both know we can and do and will make mistakes, even very grave ones, and that's a huge risk. The deeper the commitment the greater the pain of infidelity, as you well know. But in our marriage we both agreed that only death could undo our bond - there is no tacit or express codicil that adds any conditions. We both know that we meant it with all our might all those years ago, and we both know enough of life and its brokenness (she's a clinical psychologist) that any subsequent failure comes from a shallower place than that original commitment, and so the commitment
must trump any failure - it's implicit in the original commitment. I don't mean this in any condescending way.
