RSVP Blog

Oh, I'm with Amberlight, I've known heaps of psychologists through my job AND I've been their victim as the mother of a difficult child and quite frankly I think psychologists have worse mental health than the average maths teacher.

Posted by: waterbombe at May 20, 2008 8:34 AM

Amberlight @11.39 pm..thank you for sharing your story on this forum, and I am pleased to hear that you eventually received the treatment your son needed.
As you have pointed out,there are good and bad practitioners in all professions. With regards to counselling there are many options available..from someone who has done a counselling course, to the social worker who has completed some psychology subjects..to the clinical psychologist who spends 8 years on average studying psychology, the mind and human behavior. I personally think only the psychologist is equipped to counsel..but then I have an obvious bias.
I have a close friend who is a psychiatrist in private practise..and he tells me that the majority of his patients seek referral to him for marriage guidance, as opposed to ten years ago when he mainly saw patients with mental illness. Times and expectations are changing with consumer needs and expectations.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 20, 2008 8:17 AM

This is what lay people commonly refer to as "baggage" and what I know as projection of issues that have been repressed and not dealt with on an unconscious level. Then it surfaces years later..like on these blogs..and all that pain resurfaces.But you need to deal with it.

There are some great books on the market. One in particular is "Are you the one for me?" by Barbara De Angelo..a must read for any one about to embark on a new relationship.

With the community support, counselling and books that are available today, there is no excuse for not being able improve ourselves and the way we relate to others.

Unless you dont want to of course.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 20, 2008 7:45 AM

....and who, prey tell, Lynath is your battle against. I have not chosen to battle you. I am here to offer my opinions. It is you who attacks people. I have merely retaliated to your personal nastiness and slurs.
If it is a battle, it is a nonsense one. I, and others, have never said we disagreed that cheating is terrible and damaging. We have simply offered a more human face to the cheater with our understanding and empathy...and dare I say forgiveness.
You can waffle on endlessly about your battle, and all those wunnerful people who have come to your aid, but please don't include me in your childish, narcissistic games that make you feel supported and cherished here in fantasyland. I ain't playing:))

Posted by: istj54 at May 20, 2008 6:55 AM

Edward the 7th, was King from 1901 to 1910, so 9 years was all he got.

I hope Charlie gets a go, as I dont think he will be a rubber stamp.

Posted by: virgil at May 20, 2008 1:06 AM

Lynath,

I dont have to make any comments to make you appear foolish, bitter or twisted...your own comments are doing that for you....and now you are talking to yourself....and with all self-righteousness as well!!

On the issue of cheaters...you asked for 1 example of someone who retains their respect....I gave you 4. No-one says that cheating doesn't undermine certain individuals, but it doesn't seem to damage others either.

Anyway, if its that important for you to think you have won the debate....knock yourself out, your are boring me shitless!!

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 20, 2008 12:47 AM

Lynath, and others.
Just once in 30 years she said to me,
"last night you were a nasty drunk, not like you love" that is when I went onto the light beer, never argued with her, couldn't remember but trusted her enough not to argue. Thank God life was simple for me, with the right woman. To me that was what life was all about, having the right woman as my wife and the mother of my children.
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at May 20, 2008 12:36 AM

Waterbombe at 10.34pm: You are asking "Why have an affaire, instead of giving your partner a stiff-arm wake-up call?"

My last reply didn't go far enough. It only related to people like you and me. Getting outside our kind of people, why would other people have an affaire?

Have a look at my post below at 6:17pm on May 7th. I think it covers the ground, and yes, it tends to relate to people who are underdog-manipulative and/or circumspect.

More comfortable about sneaking behind their partner's back to get what they want, rather than making a fuss.

I'm guessing a mixture of low self-esteem, resultant low assertiveness skills, and a dash of self-centredness.

But as Perth has recently reminded us a couple of times, I only know about that stuff. I don't have a Licence to fix your mind, and charge you a few hundred for doing so.

Or $150 a fortnight for years, if you're more interested in making a living than fixing people asap, to give them a better life sooner, and give you time to take on more clients. Eric Berne calls that "playing Therapist".

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 20, 2008 12:19 AM

waterbombe at 10.34pm: Agreed with you the first time. Definitely. Now admitting it.

I go further - see the bottom paddock in mine at 12.29pm today, which suggested a way to start working on any marital problems, before they get half so bad.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 11:43 PM

financeman1 at May 19, 2008 9:24 PM
Welcome to the sand pit.
I think one of the attractions of semi anonymous blogging is it allows you to be slightly larger than life. It seems to allow a lot of the girls to reconstitute their virginity and the blokes to wax lyrical.
I'm not so pessimistic about bloggers opinions being unchangeable; we sometimes get testimonials from those who have had their eyes opened. I like to think that if the basis for a point of view is changed by some evidence the opinion will alter too. I don't think that is entirely forlorn.
Your relationship house rules about wearing a party hat when heading out are standard, or should be, FWB issue.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 19, 2008 11:42 PM

Hi Bob,
I certainly don't think that a person who has cheated and sincerely regretted the hurt that this caused others, is beyond redemption.
Everyone makes mistakes, we are only human, after all.
However, it seems that for some people, the only thing they actually regret about cheating on their partner, is the fact that they were caught and that resulted in some unpleasant consequences for them.
The fact that their actions have hurt another person is of no consequence to them and some people also try to blame their partner for their behaviour.
No matter how unsatisfactory a relationship is, no one "deserves" to be betrayed so deeply.
Surely as adults we are responsible for the choices we make in life?
No one else can "make" us do anything?

If a person is not willing to take responsibility for their behaviour and the fact that this has hurt someone else, then aren't they just going to go through life continually leaving bruised and broken people in their wake? Future partners, their children, betrayed friends?
A peson who has cheated in the past, is not necessarily always going to cheat on a partner of course, they can change but to change you have to take ownership of and responsibility for your actions.
Looking for excuses and blaming someone else every time you behave poorly, is not going to result in any personal growth or change the way you cope with the ups and downs of life and relationships.
You can't change what you don't acknowledge. (Isn't that Dr. Phil's Mantra?)

Hi Marcus,
Re your post @ 12:01. I don't believe that my views are based on Moral Absolutism.
I just believe that we should go through life caring about our fellow inhabitants of planet earth and causing as little pain to others as possible.
I have always taken responsibility for my own behaviour. Of course, that doesn't mean I don't make mistakes or inadvertantly hurt others wthout meaning to, but I try my best to treat others with the same consideration and respect that I would like others to treat me.
Maybe, that is because of my upbringing. (A point mentioned by femalepersuasion)
My mother refused to take any responsibility for her behaviour, and I saw the pain and hurt that she inflicted on others and the unbelievable lies she told to avoid any negative consequences.
Which only resulted in more hurt to others as she would even spread malicious rumours and untruths about people who had only tried to help her, to justify her appalling behaviour.
My angst about cheating is only because I fail to see the justification in hurting another person, simply to meet personal gratification.
I would find it hard to live with myself if I knowlingly and deliberately deceived, and by doing this, hurt someone who loved me.

Femalepersuasion @ 9:31 AM
No not at all, that would be quite ridiculous.

However, I have met a few psychologists who may have read all the theory, but had none of the life experience to actually understand someone's reality.
For example, the young psychologist, unmarried and having no children of her own, who helpfully informed me when I sought assistance with my hyperactive toddler, that I was trying "to break the cycle of violence" that I had experienced while growing up.
Yes, surprisingly, that was why I was there and not belting my son black and blue as my mother had done to my sister!
After 'analyzing' me, she informed me and my husband, that I was an "unfulfilled mother", (just the ammunition my husband needed to justify his opinion that I was somehow mentally unstable; his favoutite saying for months was "Even the psychologist said..........") but she never actually helped me with any strategies that I could use to deal with my son's behaviour!

Psychology also 'helped' when I went to CAMHS with the same child, aged 7 who was coming home from school disressed with his clothes covered in soap and who insisted I put disinfectant in the washing machine when washing his clothes.
That was apparently my fault again because working 2 night shifts a week, with 2 other children under 3, my son was angry because I obviously didn't have time for him! This 'diagnosis' was made however, without the counsellor actually ever speaking to my son, just visiting my house at 9:00AM in the morning after I had come home from my second night shift, and my 2 little ones were trying to get my attention after spending the day before with their paternal grandmother.

Finally at age 11, my son got the help he needed from a psychologist at the WCH in Adelaide, who recognised he had OCD. And who strangely enough, didn't blame me for his problems, but helped him (and trusted me to help him as well) to overcome his difficulties with several months of therapy.
That same young man is now on his second overseas trip, backpacking by himself through 5 different countries.

I have read that OCD can run in families. Interestingly his father is a hoarder whose 40x20 foot shed is so full he can only just walk through it (can't actually work in it!), who can't put the car in the carport due to all the stuff he has in it, and who has a study so full that he can't actually use it. Apparently hoarding is a form of OCD.
But as his father was never 'analyzed', that was never picked up, so it must have been me who, because I has a traumatic childhood, was the problem parent!

So if I appear a little cynical about psychology and psychologists, I am!!
Even though I find psychology very interesting, I feel that there are some psychologists who think that they are "the experts", and that people who have troubled pasts must automatically have long-standing deep-seated problems and little insight into their own psyche.

ISTJ @ 6:12 PM,
Lynath may not have been nice to you, but
what exactly is your reason for that "below the belt" comment?

Posted by: amberlight58 at May 19, 2008 11:39 PM

Hi Lynath, in response to your post at 10:34, no it has never been an open relationship because the ladies all had a different view on cheating to myself. I also assume that in order to have an open relationship the other person would be aware that their partner was seeing other people, which would definitely violate my "ostrich" rule.

However I respected their rules just as they respected mine, so no cheating was done by either side. As you said "changing the rules" can only be done partway through the relationship if both partners agree, and the chances of your partner just saying "yeah go ahead and have a bit on the side" are roughly the equivalent of George Bush growing a brain and solving the problems in the Middle East.

Posted by: financeman1 at May 19, 2008 11:33 PM

Bob, well said, Who did cheat on whom in the Charles and Di saga?
Your Ps is food for thought too, for as Packer was dying, it was his first wife who was by his side. When JfK died, Jackie was by his side, am not sure about Churchill. I somehow think that the relationship between some couples transcends the physical and their emotional bond is so strong that affairs by one or the other cannot break those bonds, just as some couples can be faithfully and exclusively married for 50 years, but there is no joy, no love and great loneliness, just a marriage of unhappy convenience.

Posted by: kianee at May 19, 2008 11:30 PM

Waterbombe, maybe those who do cheat in a relationship find burying their head in the sand a better option than confronting and addressing their problems in the first place............K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 19, 2008 11:12 PM

OG tonight: I admire the Prince of Wales for that, but he would be able to do very much less for those causes, once he was King and harnessed directly behind the UK parliament's behind.

His father was able to speak out on a number of social issues that his mother could never broach.

As to Perth and her reality: As I said somewhere, perhaps today, I am so glad that she and ooolala do exist (to name a couple of RSVP resident identities, not quite at random, eh?)

By defining them as glove puppets (not just crude sock puppets like Agro) who are actually scripted by a bloke, I can enjoy pretending to brawl with them in a way that I would be constrained from, if I believed they were real women.

If they were real women, they'd have the choice of reacting to my words in different ways than they do.

And if they are actually real women pretending to be puppets pretending to be real women, they're even cleverer than I realised, and I'm even more attracted to engaging them in a little street theatre.

It's all about having a bit of harmless teasing fun with thick-skinned worthy opponents. Which appeals to the playful person hidden away inside the dinasour.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 11:06 PM

Lynath: Dont worry, the troops are still in the mist to back you up.
Your doing very well. Your the one with the big canon, and thats why they are all screaming as they shoot all their little arrows at you like little mice trying to avoid the trap of what they know is their own destination for doom.
Go Waterbombe, Go Lynath, Go Amberlight, shoot all the screamers down. They are building their own days of enlightenment, which could only be experienced with pain.
Wouldn't they hate to be the victim?

Posted by: lonelyheart44 at May 19, 2008 10:34 PM

Could someone shed a bit of light on this....I asked earlier, so sorry to be repeating myself, but I really don't get this....... if your partner is unhappy, why do they not just leave, even temporarily, to force a confrontation? Wouldn't something like "I'm not happy so I'm going to Mums/my sister's/my friend's place for 3 months" make you sit up and think "Crikey, my relationship is in trouble! I better do something about it!". Can't we all do that? Why do some people have to have sex with someone else and THEN move out? (Couldn't they just move out without the sex and save us the pain?)

I honestly don't think there is a justification for cheating...it's easy to say "This isn't working. I'm out of here for a few weeks" if you want to give your partner a serious wake up call. Why do so much damage?

Posted by: waterbombe at May 19, 2008 10:34 PM

financeman1 so you do that with no hidden charges or costs to either of you?

apparently you have an open relationship and the ground rules are set(although I did notice you said "my rules" )
That is different to making an agreement to monogamy and then changing the rules when it suits without one party consenting to the change.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 10:34 PM

greg07 thankyou for the insight.
I understand that affairs are so enticing initially because they are thrilling and sexual based encounters. without the hindrance of any day to day realities getting in the way. eg there are no bills to pay no sick or fighting children and no partner who is no longer a novelty.
as you say you exited the affair because you knew it was just physical, and as such had no need to both with issues of trust and commitment. However, if you had tried to take the affair to an ordinary relationship level then things would no doubt have been quite different given a little time and those issues would have become important.

Many a wife has ridden out an affair or multiple. Problems arise when the other person starts to make ultimatums and demands or threats in order to bring the situation to a head.
I had an issue with the turn a blind eye scenario though, I found it impossible to compromise my own integrity initially and definitely so ongoing, so therefore that was
not a sustainable option for me.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 10:29 PM

Ah, Og that is where you are incorrect.
I don't think l have said l am anti royal.
I am in fact a Pom.
Having been brought up by a monarchist mother and father, l have some knowledge of things royal..
I think that Queen Elizabeth is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't, no matter what she does.
No doubt that the stiff upper lip has cost the royals many a supporter.

The circumstances surrounding her ascension to the throne have formed her lifelong duty to Crown and Country, sometimes seen wrongly in the eyes of many, Diana's death being the perfect example.

However l think that at the end of her life, whenever that may be, there will never be another reign to match hers.............K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 19, 2008 10:24 PM

financeman at 9.24pm: Welcome to the ego exhibition. Good on you for opening with a minority viewpoint.

If you can find a lady ostrich, you can both take it in turns to look away while the other one sneaks off for a bit on the side. If that's a good idea.

So glad to see you're into "pointy hats". So was my son. He'd have been 42 last week.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 10:20 PM

Bob; I have said I am involved with this subject on another level not just on a personal experience level. I have not said what that involvement is.(and won't)You have made your own conclusions and once again made foolish statements designed to belittle me or make me appear foolish in order to lessen my opinions.

The Diana story as Kaz has already pointed out is wrong.
That they later agreed to have some form of open marriage given their unusual circumstances was an open agreement.
I disagree that the cheaters have retained the full measure of respect and dignity.
How many Clinton and Monica jokes abound? What about the parodies in song and verse and comedy sketches.. No cigar is safe from a smirking sniggering reference to something a little grubby.
Same for all of them.
The lesser known suffer a more subtle loss of respect in the community in which they live or the workplace. They will always be followed by whispers and innuendo and definitely a lack of respect. There previous good is forever tainted.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 10:13 PM

Virg, in you two posts in the 8 pm's
Sorry to disappoint you but I agee wholeheartedly. Charles is the only potential world leader to properly address the world crisis on the ecology as he has done for years. It was Clinton that decided me to give up smoking.
Kaz @ 9.20 pm
yep like Vic, hung on till Anility struck.

Finance@ 9.24 Well said sir, and on behalf of Marcus we welcome you, LOL. Liked that one Ladies, betcha,lol

Posted by: oldergent at May 19, 2008 10:12 PM

Dear Diary,
It has been a wet and dreary day today. All was quiet for some time in the early hours, but since then there has been occasional rounds fired and a few vicious assaults on my position.

I have been under fire on several fronts for days (possibly weeks) but will never give up. One of the enemy tried to lure me out of the trenches with various diabolical insults and may have wounded Amberlight,but I held fast as I was hoping more reinforcements were on the way...and I could see the enemy was also short on ammunition. They are very cruel and have caused me to wear out two manicures while engaging with them, but I will continue to do what I must...
Relief has finally arrived tonight ..I can hear the roar of the Waterbombe ....

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 9:52 PM

Kaz, I'm with you. I don't think E2R would be too keen on that Camilla becoming Mrs King. Not with their respective values.

The Duke of Windsor chose divorcee Mrs Simpson over the throne, and did an enforced bunk. Prince Charles has got his divorcee Mrs P.B. (now finally street legal instead of on the side) without having to do a bunk. Yet.

Pastor, if we're talking abdication, when E2R finally hangs up her spurs at 90 or 100, I'd like to see creaky old Charlie make an honest Royal of himself at last by saying Pass, so that the king hat goes straight to his kid. How about that?

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 9:48 PM

Waterbombe @5.11 pm
There are 3 definitions . Simply for all the jargon "you bloody did it"end of story.
TW. The second time in memory Sondheims song has been mentioned without the last line :"don't bother their here"unfortunately they "the clowns" are usually misdirected in their critisims and delusions, as in Virgils perception that you and I are as 1 person. We both know and are undoubtably relieved he is in fairy land again. Get over it Bill, Perth is real until you can prove she is not, conjecture is not proof. As I can see it, nothing you say or do is going to change her opinion of you, so you are free to ignore or continue to make a fool of yourself.
Bob @6.21
Finally you put into words what I have been wanting to say, cheating is in the mind of those that perceive they have been cheated upon.
Grego7,@ 7.58
True, I have seen that several times in mates.
but try to get that over to the poor others who are the perceived victims.

Kaz,
Pretty obvious you don't like the Royals but heaven forbid we ever have to elect a pollie or an ex pollie for president. Then we can put our heads between our legs and kiss this country and all it stands for,"as we know it" goodbye. As to Di, "Virgin"? try Earls Court. Our Virg would have been more of one.
Cheers OG.
Of course Karina I have kept a hard copy, you have been good but let this one float

Posted by: oldergent at May 19, 2008 9:47 PM

Femalepesuasion I know you are not laying blame personally. I was referring(not very clearly) to some counselling techniques or ideas which in my opinion still seek to force the victim to accept blame for the betrayal and ask them to stop laying blame while somehow forgetting that the cheater needs to first accept full responsibility for their choice and actions.
Unless the cheater does that then there is no hope for saving the relationship.
Again it comes back to reason and justification. The reason the relationship was in trouble was one thing. Those reasons can never be used as justification for an affair.
That is never going to prevent affairs happening, but the fact remains there is never any justification.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 9:29 PM

I'd like to thank all of you for restoring my faith in the human race. As a new blogger, and a new RSVP member, it's refreshing to find that the same petty character flaws we find in people each day are replicated online, except in a far more vicious and personal manner.

I'd always viewed these types of blogs as an excellent way to air an opinion and then discuss it, but I've yet to find a person who would accept my point of view after I/they made a personal attack (maybe some of those with more age and experience have found differently?).

Everyone has their opinion, which is never wrong, it's only THEIR opinion. They are entitled to believe anything they want, even that the earth is flat, and no amount of attacking them will change that view, so why bother?

From my own point of view I have a slightly different point of view on the whole cheating perspective. My rules are that my partner can do whatever she likes but (a) the guy involved has to wear a condom if they're having sex and (b) I don't ever find out about it.

This attitude seems to remove most of the temptation to cheat, because it's no longer "forbidden". I also don't want my partner feeling guilty because they had a drunken pash with someone, and I DEFINITELY don't want to know about it!

Say what you like about the ostriches but they have a great philosophy, until the truck hits them they never see it coming!

Posted by: financeman1 at May 19, 2008 9:24 PM

He has had a pretty rough trot, any decent mum would have retired years ago.

Posted by: virgil at May 19, 2008 8:44 PM

Virgil, the circumstances in which Queen Elizabeth came to the Crown, and her dedication to her duty show that most likely she will never abdicate in favor of Charles.......................K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 19, 2008 9:20 PM

Perth at 7.20pm about mine at 6.27pm: Oh yes! You are so right!

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 8:56 PM

What about Bill Clinton?
He retained respect after cheating, (on several occasions?) and compared to "dumber than a rock" Bush is way in front, in the respect stakes.

Posted by: virgil at May 19, 2008 8:48 PM

Not that I wish to see the demise of the Queen, but it would be great to see Charlie become King.

In his acceptance speech, he could borrow word from Ted Whitten and Jon Brown and say "we stuck it right up them "

He has had a pretty rough trot, any decent mum would have retired years ago.

Posted by: virgil at May 19, 2008 8:44 PM

Not that l am one for specifics but Bob, you have the Charles and Di thing a tad skewed... His affair with Camilla was happening before and after his marriage to Diana..... He reportedly spent the night with Camilla at his London home 2 nights prior to his wedding..... l doubt that tiddlywinks or a game of chess was on the agenda......

He also exchanged gifts with her, hers to him was a set of cufflinks which he wore on his honeymoon. All documented by royal biographers....... with approval from Charles.

Her Maj, Queen Elizabeth, rarely acknowledges Camilla, even after her marriage to Charles.
Ahh, nothing like the aristocracy...........K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 19, 2008 8:08 PM

greg07 I am very interested in your comment " .I at least had the good sense not to stay with the person I had the affair with "
What did you actually think of that person at the time of the affair and afterwards?
Did the attraction disappear immediately the affair was discovered and the exit from the marriage accomplished?

Lynath, sorry for the delay in my response.After it hit the fan and the marriage was exited the "affair" continued for some years. Mainly because the physical side of things was pretty good, dare I say,fanatstic. I think you have a view that couples in an affair cant trust each other. That is not so.The "affair" finally ran its course and we parted on good company.It was good sense by me because it was a realtionship basied on purely the physical.

I suspect that most affairs are physically based ( Yes I know that good sex really occurs in the head not the nether regions ) but I cant imagine anyone had an affair in which they did not enjoy the sex.

That does not excuse the betrayal.but I suspect some men are just motivated by the physical. In such cases the "smart" wife would be better to ride it out rather tahn over-reacting.

The emotional involvemnt of sex for men is after all fundamentally different from that of women.
rgds grego

Posted by: grego7 at May 19, 2008 8:02 PM

greg07 I am very interested in your comment " .I at least had the good sense not to stay with the person I had the affair with "
What did you actually think of that person at the time of the affair and afterwards?
Did the attraction disappear immediately the affair was discovered and the exit from the marriage accomplished?

Lynath, sorry for the delay in my response.After it hit the fan and the marriage was exited the "affair" continued for some years. Mainly because the physical side of things was pretty good, dare I say,fanatstic. I think you have a view that couples in an affair cant trust each other. That is not so.The "affair" finally ran its course and we parted on good company.It was good sense by me because it was a realtionship basied on purely the physical.

I suspect that most affairs are physically based ( Yes I know that good sex really occurs in the head not the nether regions ) but I cant imagine anyone had an affair in which they did not enjoy the sex.

That does not excuse the betrayal.but I suspect some men are just motivated by the physical. In such cases the "smart" wife would be better to ride it out rather tahn over-reacting.

The emotional involvemnt of sex for men is after all fundamentally different from that of women.
rgds grego

Posted by: grego7 at May 19, 2008 7:58 PM

Amazing how the dinosaur typing has speeded up, gone from half a page per afternoon to monumental speed including punctuation. Some people will do anything to get attention from their imaginary 'friends'.

Posted by: iaminperth at May 19, 2008 7:20 PM

Good points about JFK and Prinncess Di, Bob. They did retain respect even though they were cheaters, that's true. But what I still don't get is, if your partner is unhappy, why do they not just leave, even temporarily...to force a confrontation? Why use sex with someone else to force you to a realisation that something is wrong? I mean, they just don't seem to have much in the way of guts if they do that.

Posted by: waterbombe at May 19, 2008 7:08 PM

iaminperth at 3:45pm posted:

"No Persuasion, Not directed at you at all, directed at the old dopey one who thinks that by proof reading someones essays he can become a psychologist. Probably if he watches Greys Anatomy enough he may become a brain surgeon. If he were anything of a psychologist he would not be so angry all the time and also stretching the truth so many times for want of a better word. Just feel sorry for him and let him rant and rave, he's obviously got nothing better to do with the rest of his life."

Oh Perth, you are so delightfully haughtily supercilious. It's even nicer than if you talked dirty! So rubbish me some more! Please pretty please!

It's not just the attention - I can get that from TLD - it's being put down so skilfully that appeals to me. Come on now - I'm waiting!!

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 6:27 PM

Lynath,

Funny thing is we are both arguing that cheating is wrong....I dont think that there is a dispute there. Difference is you see it as black and white and I see shades of grey.

Example is Chalie and Di, but think about this. Charles was forced by duty to give up the woman he loved because she was not acceptable to the establishment....everyone in the world knew this to be the case. He marries Diana who admits she knew he didn't love her before the wedding .

Finally, she has an affair because she is in a loveless marriage...he then too has an affair...the marriage ends.

So Lynath...who cheated whom in this situation.....shades of grey? Charlie seems to cop all of the flak about this whole sordid tale; but everyone knew he loved someone else before he got (was forced to get) married.

Bob

PS I might add to Diana; JFK, Winston Churchill, Kerry Packer (though apparently Ros knew about it),

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 19, 2008 6:21 PM

My very, very last words on this topic...sometimes....yes sometimes...it is the victim's fault and they need to look to their own behaviours to understand why people treat them a certain way..

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 18, 2008 10:22 PM "...I can understand why someone would start working nights rather than coming home!

Posted by: istj54 at May 19, 2008 6:12 PM

Lynath,

Sorry if I misconstured that you are some type of counsellor...I assumed that you meant you were running those seesions you spoke about, not attending them as a patient.....someone mentioned 10 years earlier...is that true? If so, move over Marcus, I think your longevity record has just been busted.

The problem for you Lynath is that you cant let go of your angst, so enjoy the life that you have...though I cant see how you can whilst hanging on to angst.

Name one cheater who has retained respect and dignity....try Pricess Diana....and self-confessed at that!!

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 19, 2008 5:51 PM

Dictionary definitions for today: (second try)

circumscribed - restricted, as in alcohol intake of designated driver.

circumspect - cautious, watchful, maybe even sneaky, as in making sure your two women don't ever find out about one another.

circumpect - late worm, attacked by a ring of early magpies.

Is that OK now, Carina? Just trying to lighten things up a bit....

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 5:44 PM

lifebegins47 at 2:08pm: Karina has just beaten me to the draw. No no no no Yes! We all LOVE the puppets. Leave them be.

They are the source of at least half of the fun on these blogs, whether you believe in fairies like Virgil and fantasise meeting them, or just brawl with them as I do.

Look at what Perth was justsaying to me at 3.45pm. What real person would say that? And if they did, it would be quite offensive, eh?

But if I believe she's a puppet, I see it as a scripted reply to what I'd said, it becomes a phoney war. I can get quite nasty back, and that's fun. A big relief from being my Mum's 'good big boy' all the time, and 'setting a good example' for my orphaned much-littler brothers..

The puppets have life because we talk back to them. I remember Eastof waxing ecstatic a week or two ago, because someone had finally legitimised her by replying to her.

So as well as us needing them, they need us. But we need them more, because there are more of us to be entertained.

If Mr S retired his whole troupe, including the couple I'm not sure of yet, it would be a great loss, and you'd be stuck mainly with serious people like FP, istj, TLD and me, taking it in turns to write long and heavy on serious topics like cheating.

The SBS doco, without the Tom and Jerry cartoon for comic relief. Bring in the clowns!

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 5:29 PM

Of course the aftermath of a betrayal can be positive...the betrayed person can get rid of a cheater who would cause even more heartache in the future, and be free to find a more honest person for a relationahip.

And there are plenty of monogamous abusive relationships. So its not cut and dried, black and white. It's not monogamy or multiple partners that is the issue here, it's dishonesty.

Cheating is done without the partner's knowledge, isn't it? Otherwise it's called an "open relationship". If you want to have multiple partners, why not just tell your main partner that and take whatever consequences there are? They may stay; they may leave you. Either way, you've been honest. It's the dishonesty that is morally wrong... I think that's the main point. Dishonesty takes 2 forms: by comission (you lied) or omission (you didn't volunteer the truth when you knew it would matter) . Some people seem to be saying that omission can be morally ok because 'what you don't know can't hurt you'... nup. The definition is you didn't volunteer the truth when you knew it would matter. If you acted in your interests at the expense of your partner's interests then you damaged someone to gain an advantage for yourself. Hardly behaviour worth respecting.

Posted by: waterbombe at May 19, 2008 5:11 PM

TLD at 3.48pm: Thank you for your very kind words. Feedback like that makes the long laborious grind of authentic essay-writing worthwhile. Even for two-finger typists.

And I don't think it's the age. I believe it's the experience of what worked and what didn't, and some wisdom from carefully reviewing our own experiences and others'.

I thank RSVP very sincerely for giving me in the blogs so much fly-on-the-wall access to a wide range of others' experience and their resulting wisdom. Including some first-post jewels from newbies.

And I specially thank you and the half-dozen others who are the intellectual and emotional core of our deeper discussions. Including Marcus, when focussed on the brains that are in his head.

You have changed my thinking more in the last 6 months than anything else has in the last twenty years. So I'm keeping my ears open, and my values ready for ongoing upgrades at any moment.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 4:50 PM

Lyneth..I am not blaming anyone at all. Psychology in relationship counselling deals with first understanding ourselves. Everone needs to be able to do this to navigate relationships, deal with conflict and understand intimacy in order to be able to relate.
Each person is unique and each marriage partnership is unique. Because of this, the ways to improve a partnership are many and varied. The way you and your partner go about working on your relationship will be different to the way another couple might. There is no right or wrong. However, both partners need to be willingly involved and for this to occur their needs to be self awareness on both parts, or at the very least a willingness to look at our own ways of relating and behaving within love relationships.

A lot of people have the mistaken view that counselling deals with getting the relationship back on track..but it is more than this..you cant do that unless you yourself are aware and are prepared to stop laying blame.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 19, 2008 4:39 PM

Dictionary definitions for today:

restricted, as in alcohol intake of designated driver.

cautious, watchful, maybe even sneaky, as in making sure your two women don't ever find out about one another.

Peace and love to all (or ask for a smiley face, if you're picture-it rather than literate.)

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 4:15 PM

Just4funover40 the emotional versus the no strings attached was done to death on the Friends with Benefits blog.

Marcus I am not sure what reality you live in(Wikipaedia World?) but I am happy to live in the one where we all enjoy living and following the basic guidelines for social harmony..eg The Ten Commandments and versions of depending on where and with whom the accident of birth has deposited you in the world.
The 5o years I have so far spent have been made all the more pleasant by the general adherence to laws and general social politeness.It is because of this order that we are the privileged, happy, lucky country I believe.
Therefore it is in the context of the actual world we live in, the world where we have accepted the rules and constraints in order to survive and progress as a group that informs our stand on the act of betrayal.

There are more than adequate reasons which prove betaying someone is morally reprehensible and unjustifiable.
Emotional and psychological abuse is the first. You would probably say you don't support physical abuse, so why is this different?
It would be interesting to have some statistics on suicides and crimes of passion which are a direct consequence of betrayal, and it is not always the betayed involved quite often it is the spurned intruder into the relationship. If you don't believe that betrayal has far reaching serious consequences then think again.

Can you think of one public figure who has retained the respect and dignity they once had when they are caught out as dishonest cheaters? Integrity is something to be valued very highly.
All you sor called instances of justification are of course in support of the cheaters. That is what they do ..try any method to justify their weakness at the expense of others. In my world abuse is never justified.

I do not doubt that the aftermath of a betrayal may end up being positive for the betrayed , and that some monogomous situations are negative. The point is that we have as much choice as we want to change our situations if we are unhappy. Abuse should never be one of them.

.FP I am concerned about your comment "the role of the psychologist is to help you discover why you react in that way..and to question whether you have developed your *self* enough to be able to create a rewarding relationship."

Another ';blame the vicitm" idea. For anyone to be told they may have a problem with their 'self' and ability to create a rewarding relationship when they are not the one doing the cheating, lying and betraying...seems a little wrong to me.....
great justification though for the cheater
"You were not developed enough to create a rewarding relationship so you forced me to do it"

timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 12:25 PM
that was a great post. I admire the extra 20 years of wisdom on some of us evident therein.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 19, 2008 3:48 PM

No Persuasion, Not directed at you at all, directed at the old dopey one who thinks that by proof reading someones essays he can become a psychologist. Probably if he watches Greys Anatomy enough he may become a brain surgeon. If he were anything of a psychologist he would not be so angry all the time and also stretching the truth so many times for want of a better word. Just feel sorry for him and let him rant and rave, he's obviously got nothing better to do with the rest of his life.

Posted by: iaminperth at May 19, 2008 3:45 PM

Hi lifebegins47,
I wish I could, but unfortunately if I go down that path it will probably cause a lot of distress on the blog. Feel free to suggest other blog topics though
Cheers,
Karina

Posted by: rsvpproducttest3 at May 19, 2008 3:39 PM

Malsie, Timewarp..thanks for clarifying the comments. For me this highlights how posts can be misconstrued and meanings misunderstood when none are intended for two simple reasons..firstly that not everyone reads all the comments made over the past couple of days..and secondly..that comments are made on the posts without reference to who they are aimed at, which can cause confusion.

So apologies IaminPerth.

As for you Abckenny....you think I have an ego because I question comments that could be directed at me because they detail qualifications that I happen to have..straight after I have posted.

And you say you are looking for a woman who says what she means..and means what she says?? Are you sure about that??

Maybe you might jump to the same conclusion if someone posted a comment right after yours, not mentioning you by name for instance,,,but directing it at a 5ft 8"man with high school qualifications..maybe you would presume it was directed at you.

And please do not tell me what I need to pay attention to.How patronising are you? I make my own decisions as to how much of the blogs I choose to read.

I am also not interested in your opinion on how a man who doesnt know me , such as yourself, perceives my ego state from his own circumpect view on life.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 19, 2008 2:40 PM

bonny8 at 1:03pm: Good point, but to put your money where your mouth is, why not show your nice honest up-to-date photo, without demanding a kiss before a man gets to see what he's actually chasing?

I believe that only the more desperate or excessively-literate men bother at all with profiles that have the photo hidden.

To send a kiss out should involve an intention to meet the person at least once, and many bloggers have said that a lot of men kiss them and ask for their photo password, then when they've seen the photo, that's the sudden end of it.

Showing the photo up front can save both of you from disappointment later, once it is finally seen.

And the people who kiss you will then already know what you look like, and be OK with that.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 2:28 PM

I agree with Bonny that there is a lot more to cheating than physical acts in a relationship, but how far does deception go before its called cheating?
Have read the blogs for a long time and really good points are missed by those that continue age old, and topic transferred gripes. Karina can a blog be started for those that want to hash out once and for all who is real and not real, who is hiding and why and do thay have the right to do so, who is telling the truth and who isnt, let us know how it turns out...and the winner is???..
I for one take each comment at face value, dont care to over think them and enjoy new and refreshing comments.
So back to topic again...have been cheated on, have dealt with it and moved on, sadly its life and people make errors in judgement, often not really wanting to hurt the ones they love.
Thats how I chose to view it anyway.
Have a great day.

Posted by: lifebegins47 at May 19, 2008 2:08 PM

Marcus at 12.36pm: You talking about mine at 12.25pm today? Where I thanked you for adding another dimension to this discussion?

Real people pay no 'tention to manipulators' throwaway lines like yours at 12.36.

Get specific with your criticism of others' arguments like an intelligent adult, mate, or keep on with your illustrated main leisure activity.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 2:03 PM

FP at 12.08pm: Oh dear oh dear. Sorry they knotted themselves. Try starching them.

Those who study the blogs dispassionately and impersonally would have realised that the cat-owning puppy-lover and horse-rider (bareback?) was having a go at me, in response to mine of 11.47pm last night. My response to hers is under censorship at the moment.

Maybe I can put words into Perth's mouth (what fun to take turns) and reply with an amendment of what you just said to her:

"My comments were in answer to some points that Timewarp raised, not you, so your response seems inappropriate."

Peace and joy to all who enter here. I'm off to see a customer, as soon as the 4MBS jazz finishes. (Car radio died.)

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 1:41 PM

Wow, What an ego.Female persuasion.
I trust that you will pay more attention to detail if YOU do indeed counsel any one.Obviously perth was referring to old Bill not you.....then again they do say if the cap fits.

Posted by: abckenny at May 19, 2008 1:33 PM

It is beyond me why someone, perth in this instance, would get so upset by it being inferred you are a sock puppet. Perth it does appear to get up your nose by your continuing references. The old campainers often use the sock puppet thing to rattle those they feel will respond. Even those towers of virtue ie: lynath resort to this when all else fails. If you are a SP keep going the way you are, if not just ignore it. It will get bored and wander onto somebody else.

Troy

Posted by: troyohboy at May 19, 2008 1:30 PM

FP, I took iaminperth's comment to be directed at timewarp actually, not you - could be wrong, though.

Posted by: malsie at May 19, 2008 1:24 PM

Virgil at 11.26am: That's the right attitude!

Perth at 10.25am: I'm glad to see you differentiating between knowing something, which only lets you use the knowledge, and the further step of having a Ticket which proves that someone else believes you know it. That lets you charge people heaps, for using the very same knowledge.

I'd be a lot richer if I had a ticket for each of the fields where I happen to know as much as the average lowest-level professional does.

You are also correct about the slow typing. If I was being paid by the word, I'd be more tempted to hurry, to get a decent return on the time invested.

But when I'm doing it for fun I dawdle, and sometimes the phone rings and I'm interrupted for an hour or more in mid-sentence. Or I take a meal-break or read the paper for a bit, in the middle. I enjoy multi-tasking.

And if you're talking about my post late yesterday arvo:

timewarp1 at 5:54pm: "oohlala at 5.07pm: I see you're cooking red herring for dinner tonight. What's your recipe?"

1) Not a page. 2) Took me about 2 minutes, when I got home out of the wind and caught up on my blog reading since before lunch.
.............................................................

Perth at 10.30am: "Methinks the lady doth protest too much." Or was it a dose of Reality Therapy?
................................................................

OG at 11.13am: Thanks for the recipe. Next time a cold gets real with me, I'll try it.

Came home from cold, windy tennis last night with a sniffle, but excess bedding (a cot blanket above the hips, as well as the usual all-over surf towel) fixed it by morning.

Seeyez all.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 1:21 PM

Cheating, lets start at the beginning, How many have posted a 'Photo' that is years out of date, The best laugh I have had was when one man posted a photo that was so out of date it was silly and he must have lied about his age. his sounded ok when he talked on the phone but when I meet I had a job to keep a straight face, thats cheating and do they think they can get away with it, my photo is me out for they day with my daughter its a everyday photo and I think that is a honest photo and I am not cheating any one by showing it.

Posted by: bonny8 at May 19, 2008 1:03 PM

Warped, mate. There are sock puppets and jock puppets. I think you are manipulating the latter.
Cheers Marquis.

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 19, 2008 12:36 PM

Thank you Marcus for adding some philosphy to all the psychology - a skeleton to hang the arguments on.

Discussing this topic has escalated into a very big argument, with several of our main contributors progressively building enough ego-involvement to get them up on tall soap-boxes, the better to preach their messages to all our readers.

Which is appropriate - this is an enormously-important topic for society, and especially for our readers, seeing that most of us are hoping for some kind of new physical relationship in the near future.

Including our admittedly married readers looking for "only friendship," defined as a bit on the side as well, if they can get to wangle it, and the ones who pretend they're not still legally married, because they define their wife/husband as the bit on the side that they won't tell their new lovers about, until they've hooked them.
...............................................................

I loved the quote from "Reach for the sky" where tin-legs Bader's Squadron Leader carpeted him for some aerial hooning which had wasted his plane and the bottom end of both his legs.

"Rules" he said "are mde for the blind obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men."

He was talking about a priori rules, ranging from the 10 commandments to local speed limits, and not wearing thongs into a licensed club.
................................................................

I believe that the rules were usually made in the hope that they would benefit the populace as a whole, who are seen as including fools who need strong external control, because they don't have strong inbuilt altruistic value systems that they obey all the time.

In a free country, that is. Not talking about rules made to tyrannise a captive population, like no contraception allowed for members of some religions. So they'll well-feed the clergy, and outbreed the enemy.

So I believe that the instructions for living given in the bible, the koran and the laws of the state of Queensland were all written in the pious hope that following them would keep everyone as safe and happy as possible.
................................................................

And I believe that wise people, and especially opinion-leaders, have a duty to support the law audibly when it's relevant - and a duty to call for it to be changed, whenever circumstances change and it becomes less desireable than some alternative. Eg. I believe the whole world deserves a Green pope. Now, before it's too late for South America.
...............................................................

This topic is about disloyalty to a pre-existing contract. In old testament terms, "Thou shalt keep thy naughty bits (including thy dirty mind) focussed on thy spouse alone."

In New Testament terms, "If you'd like your spouse to cheat on you, let her know, and if she's cool with that, have a look around for yourself in the meantime. Otherwise don't."

Don't know exactly what all the other major religions have to say. And don't know which temporal governments round the world have made adultery a crime punishable by death by stoning (preferably by men who are free of sin, because they only fancy young boys - watch "The Kite Runner" - it will change your life.)

I'm a Consequentialist. If you are a wise person and not a fool, and you want to do something where no-one will get hurt, go do it.

But if it's cheating, don't presume to decide for your spouse that it won't hurt her - especially if she doesn't find out.

Ask her for her actual opinion, not just what would salve your conscience. Bring it up as just one topic included in a calm mutual detailed review together of your whole relationship. A board-meeting of the directors of your relationship, to review its recent performance, and plan its next moves.

Which is something that every relationship deserves, every couple of months in the first year, and at least annually after that. To keep it on the rails, so it keeps serving you both well enough eg. to minimise the attraction of the idea of straying.

Or don't get hitched, because you're too selfish and duty-phobic.

Must go chase the $$. Seeyez.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 19, 2008 12:25 PM

Iaminperth: Is your post at 10:25 am directed at me? If so, you do not know anything about my academic qualifications or me, so could you please explain your comments?

I see that you are are an admin/secretary with a Diploma..If that is what you say you are, I believe you. So it begs the question..why would you query my qualifications? Seems strange to me.

Could you also explain what you mean by "learning psychology by default"? You seem very angry at the fact that I am studying to be a clinical psychologist..why is this?

Maybe you have some personal issues of your own that you need to address. My comments were in answer to some points that Amberlight raised, not you, so your response seems inappropriate.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 19, 2008 12:08 PM

Thanks OG, I have a real lemon tree in my real garden and real bees but they don't have any real honey, also have the real panadols, so will pick up some real good honey when I am out at the real shops today, might pick up a bottle of real good rum also, only Bundie of course as came from real Queensland. Thanks a lot guys, and yes Virgil we will catch up in Perth and have a real cup of coffee, it'll be a laugh a real one at that!!!..

Posted by: iaminperth at May 19, 2008 11:53 AM

Perth

I believe you, and whenever I return to WA I will contact you.

Posted by: virgil at May 19, 2008 11:26 AM

Perth,
when out on your walk get some lemons and good honey (not heat treated) then tonight mix a desert spoon of honey with the juice of a lemon 2 panadols and boiling water, drink as hot as, as much bedding as you can stand and sweat it out, in the morning it won't be cured but it will be broken, The Grannies cure.
Of course all the ingredients have to be real if you are real, don't know how it goes for an imaginary being lol
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at May 19, 2008 11:13 AM

Now the real me has a real cold, so I am going to stay in my real bed for a little while with my real cat and have a real cup of coffee then think about wandering around my real garden. Later I will take my real dog to the real beach at Cottesloe for a little real walk, instead of a big real walk and then come home, oops real home, and take a couple of real panadol and probably crash back into my real bed and I will go now because I know I am being a real bore and I have a real sneeze coming on.....lol

Posted by: iaminperth at May 19, 2008 10:30 AM

Wow, What an ego. Learning psychology by default...major interest is writing but takes all afternoon to type a page. Shame, some people try to create a personna of who they wish they were, not who they really are.

Posted by: iaminperth at May 19, 2008 10:25 AM

Amberlight, your comments @ 1407 hrs on May 18 suggest to me that if you needed a cerebral tumour removed, you would prefer to be operated on by a surgeon who has had the same surgery himself. It is his/her study,expertise and authority that are crucial and this goes for any profession. For instance I delivered many babies before I ever gave birth to my own children, and I can now say my obstetric information and knowledge & care of a woman during pregnancy and childbirth is no different , because it is based on scientific fact and the latest medical research.

When you say that you have a fair idea of how you would react to a cheating partner..the role of the psychologist is to help you discover why you react in that way..and to question whether you have developed your *self* enough to be able to create a rewarding relationship.

While you might not be aware of it at any conscious level, your emotional self is greatly influenced by your family of origin,as well as by generations of your family that have gone before you.

You appear to be getting the skill of being able to empathise confused with professional expertise and qualifications.

Posted by: femalepersuasion at May 19, 2008 9:31 AM

Kaz..what a hoot!!! Lynath, she's as real as they get and that's for sure and certain.. "G"

Posted by: amdoingit at May 19, 2008 12:08 AM

Amberlite and Lynathdreary.
Further to the discussion on 'cheating' and my interest in where a sense of morality might come from.
Moral philosophers are the professionals when it comes to thinking about right and wrong. They agree that 'moral precepts, while not necessarily constructed by reason, should be defensible by reason'.
Broadly they divide into 2 groups,
'Consequentialists' who pragmatically hold that the morality of an action should be judged by it's consequences, and 'Deontologists' (from the Greek for 'that which is binding') or Moral Absolutists who literally believe in the science of duty with no reference to the consequences.
Normally Moral Absolutism is defensible only on religious grounds, usually by reference to a holy book. Interestingly you both are prepared to defend your position on the unequivocal wrong of cheating soley on a moral precept.
If we apply the moral philosopher's test that 'your positions should be defensible by reason', what happens? You both say that there is no justification for infidelity in a relationship. Period.
Various contributors, myself included, have suggested and demonstrated real world situations where the consequences of infidelity have been positive and where the consequences of monogamy have been negative. I am not going to cite the examples bloggers have offered. These positives give the lie to your Absolutist position being defendable by reason. It is not, there are too many examples of such rigid adherence to a moral rule being unreasonable and damaging. Your position therefore substantially fails the test. An absolute position is not a moral one.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 19, 2008 12:01 AM

Hi all. Just back from tennis, which was excellent. Made up for not being cooked a dinner first. Can't win 'em all. Well, not immediately.

Virgil at 8.58pm: Mate, you're an accountant. I'll bet you don't miss a trick if money tries to sneak in or out of your clients' accounts when you're not looking. And your main hobby is following football. Another numbers thing.

On the other hand, the Captain and I share a very different hobby - studying people. In some considerable depth, yet.

The study of psychology is one of my main interests. When my Ex was doing her honours degree with a psych. major stream, she told me progressively anything she'd learnt that I didn't know already, and got me to read and critique all her assignments.

Since then, two friends have in turn involved me in critiquing their psych. assignments. So I've picked up a fair bit of knowledge for a layman.

Writing is also a major hobby for me. Something I've always found easy. And do a lot of. Including here. But it was Joan (my Ex.) who introduced me to the detailed study of writing styles.

While we were engaged for a year and a day, she was teaching up the bush, and doing English at Uni by correspondence. She showed me one assignment - "Rewrite the following long paragraph in the exact styles of each of the following 6 famous authors."

Forty years later I was tutoring Creative Writing for the University of the Third Age, and gave my class a similar exercise, to get them looking past the information included in each piece they read, to focus on how the author had chosen to word the piece, to get across the emotional content as well as facts.

Virgil: horses for courses. If Perth's posts caused you to suspect her authenticity, Mr S would be ashamed of himself. On the other hand, that I didn't suspect her for months is something he can be very proud of. Bleep good work, sir.

Virgil, I've just thanked Perth sincerely for a lot of helpful info on percheron horses. Suggest you go along with her too. Was it in Peter Pan where all the kiddies had to declare they believed in fairies, or poor Peter would die on stage in front of them? Help us keep Perth alive, Virgil, but delay visiting the West again, in case you're tempted to want to meet her in person.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 18, 2008 11:47 PM

Oh well... The mainstream speaks up on this comment line ;-) While I have to admit two things - the admin had started this very cleverly and sure enough lots of people poured their hearts out with examples of what their "exs" did to them. True - there are many insecure and deceiving people out there. But is there really noone able to distinguish between the emotional attachment and purely physical relationship? Does not anyone believe in "no strings attached" - well, here's another good theme to start ;-)

Posted by: just4funover40 at May 18, 2008 11:24 PM

Virg.
Why not let Perth make up her mind as to whether I am a TW clone, better still you are or have been in contact with him off site ask him, he will not lie to you. Then again I might be manipulating Aunty K by thought transferrence, just to nark Marcus, so if she starts with the scientobabble it could be him doing it. No B not tonight, I have signed the pledge till the next time I cook Italian,
Marcus I know you don't believe but I got G to scratch her ear in an interesting way, explain how I did that!
Cheers OG

Posted by: oldergent at May 18, 2008 11:17 PM

NGG you too are value adding to what I have said. Can you tell me where I have stated I am a counsellor? Stating factual evidence based information about betrayal and infideltiy on a blog about infidelity is not moralising. Having an opinion is valid. "Judgemental" is a silly convenient word used by people who can't argue a valid point so choose to label instead in order to lessen the opinion they don't like.

Not hanging on to anger and disappointment is not the same as telling the cheaters what they did is quite okay and justified. That is exactly what they want to be told in order to relieve them of the guilt they feel. so that they can face the world.
Doesn't work like that.

Now Bob, you have told us how deliriously happy the pair of cheaters are but what about those they left in their wake? Are they happy too?
No matter what you say Bob those who have been betrayed are scarred for life. That does not mean they are permanently wallowing in grief but a part of their psyche is damaged.
If your friend was willing to cheat then he must wear the consequences of little respect for his lack of integrity whether from people who know him or strangers who don't.
He has a relationship built on very wobbly foundations of dishonesty and deception, and the ability to inflict pain. Neither can ever truly trust the other. Not much of a relationship really. They rarely survive long but occasionally they can if there is something which holds them together for some reason. Not the kind I would be looking for. It doesn't take much to knock it down. They are damaged permanently too.

There is no sense in your comment that cheaters might not cheat again so therefore
it is logical that they were not to blame.
Over and over I have said there is always a reason for cheating, but never a valid justification...no matter what they tell you.

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 18, 2008 11:15 PM

Ha Jewels, l was being a bit lighthearted maybe too much so........ things at times get a bit paranoid here.

Maybe l should change my exit from ......K ,which it has been since day 1 to ooooaaahhhh......... what you think ??.......K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 18, 2008 11:12 PM

Does that mean my puppy is not a real puppy? Oh dear, now that is something to really worry about....I think not! lol

Posted by: iaminperth at May 18, 2008 11:06 PM

hey kaz. what is going on this evening on the blogs and how did you cop it!!! ....lucky that a lot of us (including me on a Melbourne trip, my next one is Darwin in July...any Darwin bloggers out there??) have met you and know that you are real and not some kind of sock puppet.....but you gotta laugh or is that screech oooooooaaahhhhh...have a lovely evening....jewels

Posted by: junebaby57 at May 18, 2008 10:56 PM

Hi Virgil, What a laugh...How strange...I cannot imagine why he would think that. I do believe he is very obsessive and controlling. Would be much better in my opinion if he controlled himself and took stock of his own life rather than try to control others. Sure, we can catch up if you come back to Perth, Cott is still good for coffee, although very cold at the moment.

Posted by: iaminperth at May 18, 2008 10:45 PM

malsie at May 18, 2008 9:05 AM

Marcus - "precisely" - "because you cannot understand how something works, it doesn't stop it working."

Malsie, with evolution or a silicon chip there is obviously something to understand so it is worth investigating.
With what you are talking about, like fairies and hobgoblins, or that "the moon is a giant orange suspended just above the tree line", there is no evidence of anything to even look at much less understand.
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 18, 2008 10:42 PM

oohh Lynath l really am an Aunty....... to 6 neices and nephews.
That was just a pisstake on the rumour mill is all......

There is no way l could have that many "people" in my head, l get confoosed and befuddled being me..........K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 18, 2008 10:36 PM

kaz you know you have no brothers or sisters...the "aunty" was a great disguise

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 18, 2008 10:24 PM

Amberlight thanks for the support. Seems like I have caused a bit of a fuss while not even here!

ISTJ is refusing to acknowledge what I have actually said and continues to twist my posts and meanings in order to make herself feel better.Either that or she has a serious learning difficulty with comprehension skills. All that tuff she has made up about support groups for instance in order to belittle me. ISTJ states that I dare to reply when someone disagrees with me, but surely that is the purpose a debate or discussion?
IstJ is obviously upset because in two of her posts she has virtually said that she can't understand why it is not all about her. Post one "I have felt hearbreak not related to betrayal"and now post two "but it might have been"
If you look back throughout the blogs I have never been snappy to anyone unless I have need to defend myself. You will see that if I have something to say to someone I say it to them rather than use the istj manipulative method of making seemingly innocent remarks with a not so hidden meaning and target. ...

Posted by: thelynathdiary at May 18, 2008 10:22 PM

Okay guys...the game is up.....

They really are all me......
I have been lurking around for a while, popping up now and then as auntykaz, doing my Jeannie Little impression, you know the where she screeches....oohlalala, or is that oooooaaaaaah...
Whilst neuroticising about the fish l am catching for dinner, now a red herring, or what, l say to myself....... what is my favorite fillum......... l think it may just be Alien resurrection......1,2,3 and 4 and very possibly any further morphs into predator 1,2,3 and 4 also......

What l am justsaying, is that what a bloody game this all is....for some.......no wonder we are all suspicious of others.....posted by the on and only auntykaz, in her original and only guise.....................K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 18, 2008 9:54 PM

Whatever is he talking about? I've never tried to bluff anyone, just make a few comments now and then. I don't think he is a well man

Posted by: iaminperth at May 18, 2008 1:01 PM

Perth

What TW is saying is that you are not a real person.

Personally, I find that hard to believe. I feel your posts are consistent with your profile and with themselves.

If I return to Perth either to live, or for a holiday, I would very much enjoy having a coffee with you.

TW has made the point that, due to the amount of time I have been on here, I should be of the same opinion as he is.

That is not the case, as I find you to be one of the real characters here.

In fact I think you feel TW and OG are the same person.

I know the Adelaide bloggers are real, as I have met them in person, and spoken to some of the Melbourne bloggers on the phone.

Posted by: virgil at May 18, 2008 8:58 PM

Good one Bill..."G"

Posted by: amdoingit at May 18, 2008 7:03 PM

oohlla at 5.07pm: I see you're cooking red herring for dinner tonight. What's your recipe?

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 18, 2008 5:54 PM

Timewarp. My understanding garnered from Captain Thunderbox is that he has not been indulging in 'serious literary criticism' with you 'over months' as he has been seriously incommoded, having been unwittingly caught up in a lieu of ill design that has resulted in essential services having to cut him loose after enduring 72 hours of frozen agony in this bitterly cold weather, but did opine that he considered one loose canon roaming freely through the blogs a psychological casualty of his own mental undoing, whether he being lurking, sliming, just saying, random naming, morphing into a tailfinn, whatever takes his perverted fantasies.

Posted by: oohlala1 at May 18, 2008 5:07 PM

amber those two posts you chose to highlight were from men and were their perceptions of what Lynath was posting endlessly about her situation, and those in her group therapy sessions...that can't be working because they are still going after ten years...time for a new therapist methinks.
I said I had not been cheated on that I know of...doesn't mean it hasn't happened...I haven't had an easy life but I am not hanging it all out on the blogs to garner sympathy...Lynath was snappy and quite rude to me but I see you excuse that. Lynath has been posting for some time...as have I ...and this is her modus operandi...just because you are flavour of the month does not mean it will always be so...you may also disagree with her one day or choose to look at a topic objectively...so be ready for the sting!

Posted by: istj54 at May 18, 2008 4:14 PM

Amberlight,

Everyone deals with being cheated upon in different ways....that is their right and privilege; but moralising to others that dont hold your point of view is wrong and judgemental. Howver, this from someone who purports to be some kind of counsellor; a vocation I would believe is to help people cope with their issues, not to hang onto their anger and disappointsments, is unbelievable. She is allowing her personal experiences and belief systems to cloud her thinking ....just look at her comment about my mate and his wife and tell me that is not bitterness....and malicious towards them; and not clouded by her own preconceived ideas about ALL people who have cheated in the past.

The truth is that most people find redemption in some form, and people that have cheated are not guaranteed to continue that behaviour throughout their lives....therefore, logically speaking, the problem isn't wholly the cheater's; they have cheated for a reason (whether they know why or even understand it at the time)...and perhaps we, as the partners cheated upon, were a part of the problem (though maybe we dont realise it or understand it at the time either).

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 18, 2008 3:19 PM

lynath, you ae so damaged and bitter it is sad. Your belief that you can pass judgement upon others based upon your distorted perceptions is a further confirmation of the deep bitterness you carry within yourself. Your hurt overlays everything you post. Your striking out at those with an opinion other than yours lessons you and the message you ae attempting to convey.
And yeah, get over yourself you sanctimoneous pain in the ass.......ha ha

Troy
Posted by: troyohboy at May 8, 2008 10:11 PM

Lynathsishairy May 8, 2008 6:16 PM
Good to see you can still skip down the concrete path, behind the picket fence, with another load of too-long-left in the basket sour washing and hang it on the Hill's hoist for us to see the mouldy bits..
Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 9, 2008 1:37 AM

Sorry ISTJ, but these are just 2 comments that people have made about Lynath.
Can't see too much "twisting of blogger's posts" there, can you?

Maybe Lynath may have taken your comments out of context, but after such comments as those above, is it any wonder that Lynath may have been feeling a little "prickly"?

ISTJ, you attempt to sound so reasonable and all-seeing (as from both sides of the equation) in your comments about infidelity, but did I read in one of your posts that you have never been cheated on yourself?
You may feel a little diferently if it ever happens, as guilty pleasure posted on May 7,
"The one thing it isn't is definitive. What would crush one person with infidelity, would be understood and condoned by others. Don't pre-judge anyone. And don't ever think it won't happen to you,or that you would respond honourably when it does. Until that tipping point arrives, you just don't know."

Same as FP who says they are approaching the issue from a ?"psychological perspective" as in a psychology student?
No matter how much training you have, you still can't truly see where another person is coming from until you have been there yourself.
That doesn't mean that professionals don't have their place, of course they do.
But I have heard professionals such as doctors, saying how they never understood a patient's perspective until they had faced a major crisis, either as parent of a child who was a patient, or as a seriously ill patient themselves!

As I have said previously, I'm not sure if my ex ever cheated, but I have a good idea on how I may have reacted if I had ever found out!
I would never have cheated on him, not because I am any "saint" but because I believe firmly that such behaviour is unfair and cruel. And totally disrespectful to the other person.
No matter how bad things have become, you must have loved and honoured that person in the early days of your relationship. The very least you owe them at the end is honesty, concern and respect.

Posted by: amberlight58 at May 18, 2008 2:07 PM

Whatever is he talking about? I've never tried to bluff anyone, just make a few comments now and then. I don't think he is a well man

Posted by: iaminperth at May 18, 2008 1:01 PM

Marcus - 2 things:

Evolution: I wasn't thinking about the brain, from the amygdala onwards, which seems to be your only real focus above the waist. (Which I can say, because I'm a tit man ...)

I was thinking about gills and then the reptilian tail. Please tell us more than I know about those particular way-stations of the human embroyo.

Puppets: Yes mate, and I deserved it. I had just pushed too many of his buttons too hard. You could have called my posts a serious personal attack, and in a fair society you don't get away with that. And I didn't. So that was fair.

Since then, I've stopped meddling in other people's personal affairs. Not an old dog yet, so still evolving.

The secret info I mentioned is simply the result of the Captain and me taking the trouble over the months to do some serious literary criticism, and then compare notes.

And I have to admit that Perth was the one who had me completely bluffed for months. Really professional work, Mr S, and I congratulate you again.

Must get back to my 3D life - Long lazy Dabblers picnic lunch in the park under the Story Bridge, probably all walk to Southbank for afternoon coffee then back, late-afternoon snooze for an hour or so in my car on a west-facing hill till the sun's warmth leaves us, early dinner at a friend's and then night tennis, now that yesterday's warmth and heavy rainstorm has been replaced by a very cold south-westerly wind from Melbourne or thereabouts. Might play in trakkies tonight, instead of shorts. The others do in winter. Seeyez.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 18, 2008 11:24 AM

No one has said that Lynath is bitter and twisted, or wallowing in pain and misery except for you and maybe Lynath where she has twisted bloggers posts to suit herself.
No one has belittled her terrible experience either...the problem lies in the way Lynath speaks to other posters if they do not agree with her stand on a topic, or her dogmatic views...JMO...for what it is worth.

Posted by: istj54 at May 18, 2008 9:46 AM

Marcus - "precisely" - "because you cannot understand how something works, it doesn't stop it working."

And my consciousness isn't at all "depressed", thanks, or any other part of me :)

Posted by: malsie at May 18, 2008 9:05 AM

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 16, 2008 11:02 PM

Hi Bob,
I guess it doesn't matter sometimes how well we think we know someone, we never really do.
I can understand just a little, how you must have felt.
I can remember being rocked to the core when my marriage was falling apart as the one major thing I had always believed about my ex (and the major reason I had stayed with him years longer than I really should have) was actually not true at all.
I was completely shattered.
I just couldn't believe how blind I had been and how much I had so wanted to really believe this about him, that I had actually made it my reality.

I am so glad for you that you were able to see and even understand your ex-wife's reasons for her infidelity.
It must have taken you a lot of soul-searching, many people can never get to that place.
It sounds like from what you have written, that your ex-wife may have also taken some responsibility for her infidelity and not simply blamed you for all her actions.
Which would have made it a lot easier for you to forgive her.

However, I entirely disagree that just because Lynath has written at length about the pain she felt at her husband's infidelity, that this means she must be somehow "bitter and twisted" and "wallowing" in her pain and misery.
I don't see Lynath's reflection on her past experience as anything other than an expression of the pain that infidelity causes to the people who still love and care for the person who cheats on them.
People who cheat usually avoid thinking about their current partner's hurt and pain.
Lynath has only pointed out the reality for her of that experience.
Not made any easier by her partner's refusal to take any responsibility for his complete lack of honesty, his unwillingness to make her aware of and work on any issues he may have had about the relationship, and his denial of the pain his betrayal caused both to Lynath and their children.

It sounds to me as if Lynath has moved on, very well.
She is a wiser person, but if Lynath was already a kind, caring person (which is how I read her from reading these blogs), I would ask all of you who think you have some kind of moral authority on this issue, please tell me how can such an experience make you a "better" person, than you were before?

If Lynath's experience makes some people feel upset, uncomfortable or awkward, then perhaps they need to reflect on WHY Lynath's experience makes them feel/react in this way?

BTW, I also agree with Grego's (and Kaz's) comments about not letting those who have hurt you defeat you.
I have met so many people who have been seriously emotionally damaged by trying all their lives, to get unconditional love and approval from demanding, critical parents as well.
I have read that this can be the source of many eating disorders and depression.

I wonder if this is far more prevalent, longer lasting and damaging, than hanging onto a previous partner's infidelity?
Maybe even the cause?

ISTJ, re your comment about the reason's people marry and who they marry. I think you are probably very accurate, especially for first marriages!

Posted by: amberlight58 at May 17, 2008 11:02 PM

Padre.
I notice in Timewarps response to your "put up or shut up" request re iaminperth he is unable to do either. With usual Kim Beazely-would-blush verbosity and obfuscatorial slipperiness declined any sort of answer and instead claimed secret knowledge.

I will not accuse him of becoming the blog mystic; more likely just very circumspect because he has been bitten on the arse by a transvestite 'sock puppet' more than once (and very recently).
Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 17, 2008 9:44 PM

Hello Everyone....Very very new Around here me.....so ill just get on with it shall i....?
My oppinion...

When do you cross the line from being faithful to being a cheater?
its when the cheater decides to be dishonest not only with their partner..but with themselves about their feelings not matter what the feelings may be

Is flirting considerate cheating?
once again if your dishonest about your feelings or your partners feelings with the way you flirt ...it is yes...

Is going out for drinks with someone you just met cheating?
I see no problem with it, if i was in a realtionship i would phone my significant other and ask them to join us

What is cheating?

Dishonesty with your partner and Yourself..!
Simple but once again my thoughts

I have no affiliation or objection to any religion but will use a quote here
Do Unto Others ..as You Would have Done unto You..!

Posted by: intimatemind at May 17, 2008 8:23 PM

Warped.

No foetal resorbtion of a reptilian brain Warped. You and I and everyone have a genuine one. It is the oldest of our 3 and controls most basic functions; heart rate breathing, balance body temperature and many others and is pretty much the same as the 250 million year old one current reptiles sport.

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 17, 2008 7:15 PM

istj54

Quite simple really.

I know that 28.3% of Australians are Catholic........so that would make you the major religion ?

Would you not automatically assume that i am Lutheran considering 82.5% of suomalais are Evangelical Lutherans ?

Posted by: amodnar at May 17, 2008 6:34 PM

May 17, 2008 9:40 AM Malsie wrote;

Marcus @ 10.40 am "Because you cannot understand how something works- think about a silicon chip in your PC perhaps- doesn't stop it working."

Precisely, Marcus - because we may not be able to fully explain and comprehend the workings of a "higher consciousness" or "God", it doesn't stop it working or us having the ability to feel that flow throughout our whole lives. I have no need whatsoever to understand that connection through "logical" means. To me it just "is", and I am happy with that. You can call it blind faith, if you will, but I would disagree. It is more a sense of knowing from deep within.

Precisely what Malsie?

My comment to Virgil was in regard to evolution and DNA. He may not understand but it is deeply, fundamentally understood by others. The same for the silicon chip. It was designed and made by scientists and engineers so naturally it is also deeply understood.

What you are expressing has nothing to do with 'raised consciousness'. That implies a high level of knowledge and sophisticated understanding. Your comments indicate the exact opposite; a deep reduction to a depressed consciousness with, as you say, workings you cannot explain or comprehend (let alone understand in the sense most people have of the word).

That is primitive, tribal level superstition. Perhaps there are alternative reasons for why you feel and know rather than being inhabited and directed by the supernatural? You substitute 'feeling that flow throughout our whole lives' and 'knowing from deep within' for rationality, logic and scientific evidence or even honest philosophical enquiry.

Cheers Marcus

Posted by: laughsandtalks at May 17, 2008 5:53 PM

Virgil at 9.29am: I hate to see you putting it so bluntly. That's like saying "OK. Disprove Santa Claus. Here and now. With proof. Or else leave the kiddies forever with lifelong substantial illusions that Marcus would consider to be totally unscientific and thus, completely repehensible."

1) I want you to know that the PURPOSE of sock puppets (which I call glove puppets, in certain cases like this, where the puppeteer is a particularly skilful scriptwriter) is to achieve simultaneously:

* the complete trust of the audience (or at least the less-observant 99% of it) in the suggestion that the puppet is real, and that the words and actions of the puppet are NOT those of the hidden puppeteer.

* the ability to take on a persona which is completely different from the puppeteer's, and thus,

* to have several puppets in action at once, usually communicating with the audience - but also with one another, eg. agreeing with what the other puppet just said, or even having a go at the other one, like the traditional Punch and Judy, which always involved spousal abuse with a club, visible on screen.

2) One puppeteer is so good at it that I've named him Mr Svengali, which is quite a compliment. Mr S for short.

3) Pastor, the Captain and I both know who Mr S. is, and which city he lives in. And the names of most of his puppets, past and present.

But there is no way I am going to tell his name and city to anyone. Ever. That would be so churlish. Spoilsport territory. And RSVP is based on not telling people your surname.

4) Puppeteers are entertainers. They entertain the populace, and a third group called theatre critics also watch the show, and rate it, just like how many stars for each movie.

I'd been away from the blogs for a few days, and when I returned I commented on the highlights in what I'd just read - including some bouquets and brickbats for Mr S's cast of puppets and their performances.

5) Pastor, that's all you get, because that's all you deserve. You spend a lot of time on the blogs.

If you were a more attentive reader, you'd also be asking yourself as you read:

* "What would a person be feeling, to make them say that?"*

* "What kind of person would say that in this context?"

* "Is this person speaking authentically at this moment?"

and similar questions.

And you'd pick the phoneys quicker - the real people as well as the puppets. On blogs and in real life.

That's why I organise my RSVP prospecting the way I do. I want to talk with each person face to face for at least 2 hours at a first date. To listen to them and find out about them.

And if someone doesn't want to commit themselves to that much time, in case it might lead to a happy future for them, they're not motivated enough to be worth my time at all. I'm looking for my match.

Posted by: timewarp1 at May 17, 2008 4:52 PM

Ha istj, maybe it is the weather....or the lateness of the hour....maybe l just felt like saying it....maybe it's intuition....
Freezin here in Melbourne after a loverly day yesterday....got the fire happening and the coffee machine on the go.....may slip something nice into it to warm the cockles of my heart.
I'm sure l have one here somewhere.
Can see where you are coming from with the comment about marrying who you are with at the time.........

Stoic, right back at ya. A man of many talents :-).......................K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 17, 2008 11:34 AM

I think Grego makes a good point in his post of 1.37pm today...all of it. No matter how much something hurts you...you cant let it defeat you and make you bitter and twisted...the only person that this harms is yourself.

Bob

Posted by: notgodsgift at May 16, 2008 11:02 PM

Absolutely......others may harm you but in the end the healing comes from within..................K

Posted by: auntykaz at May 17, 2008 9:58 AM

Marcus @ 10.40 am "Because you cannot understand how something works- think about a silicon chip in your PC perhaps- doesn't stop it working."

Precisely, Marcus - because we may not be able to fully explain and comprehend the workings of a "higher consciousness" or "God", it doesn't stop it working or us having the ability to feel that flow throughout our whole lives. I have no need whatsoever to understand that connection through "logical" means. To me it just "is", and I am happy with that. You can call it blind faith, if you will, but I would disagree. It is more a sense of knowing from deep within.

ynotalice, I'm sure your situation caused you some hurt and frustration, and it's great you want to continue your friendship - not always easy after things have come to a head like that. I think Lynath covered exactly what I would think re where your friend may be at with things. She may want to get back into the swing of things regards "dating", but sometimes the body and soul takes its own sweet time, and it just can't be rushed.

amodnar - yes, people often do believe the most "incredible" of things, especially if they are trusting and honest, judge others by their own values and wouldn't dream for a minute that anyone co