This comes up all the time, the selfish so and so who no longer wants to be married, they are sooo selfish, and therefore sooooo bad. But somehow the selfish desire of the spouse who wants the other person to stay and meet their needs is ok? Come on, if selfish is bad, than lets apply the standard evenly. But if we do, then we quickly realize everyone is selfish, so why is selfish bad at all? It is a ridiculous argument against divorce, and a transparent attempt at emotional coercion of the unhappy marital partner. Marriages cannot be decided on selfish or selflessness, both quickly fail as reasons (conflicting outcomes are easily shown), instead the only real standard for a marriage is whether it meets the psychological health of both participants, and that is all. And that must be decided by the participants, once again we are back to a harley principle, marriage is the ultimate poja, it must be the honest (the ratioal side), enthusiastic (the feeling side) choice of BOTH, or it ends, not really all that complicated. Of course trying to figure out what we each want in life is the complicated part.

Hi Snl,<P>Take you as the WS and all Wss and all the Bss out of your question and see if your logic works as well in other scenarios. If it does, you may have a point. If it doesn't will you be open to reconsidering? I'll let you mull over this question before presenting my thoughts. <P>L.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sad_n_lonely:<BR><B>This comes up all the time, the selfish so and so who no longer wants to be married, they are sooo selfish, and therefore sooooo bad. But somehow the selfish desire of the spouse who wants the other person to stay and meet their needs is ok? Come on, if selfish is bad, than lets apply the standard evenly. .</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>First off, it wouldn't matter if everyone in the world was selfish. Two wrongs don't make a right. You are still selfish and selfish is still wrong no matter who or how many people are selfish. Even so, your moral equivalence argument, as usual, doesn't work. <P>Let's look at the definition of the word selfish:<P> 1 : concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others<P>Is the BS acting without regard for others, or concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself? The BS only wants her spouse to act in accordance to his promises to her and that includes fidelity and integrity. She is not asking for MORE than should be rightfully expected in a marriage with a committed, decent person. Her needs are NOT excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Nor are they exclusive. It is not selfish to expect your spouse to love and honor you, it is an expectation and a need. And it is a HEALTHY expectation that positively effects others.<P>The WS, on the other hand, is only concerned with his own pleasure AT THE EXPENSE of many others by pursuing his "soulmate." A destructive pursuit that hurts many others. His pursuits are done without regard for the spouse and family, that he destroys, and only benefit him. <P>Your moral equivalence arguments are getting exceedingly tiring, snl, and frankly, make my a** hurt. You are working way too hard to justify yourself. Why not just be a man and admit that you are exceedingly selfish without trying to drag everyone down in the gutter with you? Wouldn't that be so much simpler than producing these tortured moral equivalence arguments that make no sense? Don't be a Clinton. <P>

snl,<P>Put another way, when you buy a car and it turns out to be a lemon, are you therefore "selfish" when you demand an operable car? <P>Or are you selfish when you go and STEAL the car in the dead of night?<P>According to your definition there would be no difference. [But it would make the THIEF "feel" much better to have his act equated to a rightful act!]<P><p>[This message has been edited by Dana114 (edited September 22, 2001).]

I have thought about this before too. I often think that by trying to save my M I am being selfish for myself and selfless for my spouse. If I really believed that he would be truely happier with his OW, I would have left him alone a long time ago. I know through educating myself that his relationship with her is very unlikely to bring him any happiness in the end, even if I dropped off the face of the earth. I believe that my WS has not been in his right mind and am therefore trying to act accordingly.

Let's face it we are all selfish creatures. When we feel that our needs and desires aren't being met by the person closest to us, we can either do something about it or just suck it up. And the longer we suck it up the longer that we feel that we aren't appreciated and that selfish seed inside us grows until it bursts out in some way or another.<BR>And many times that is how an A can find a little chink in our amour and get into our heads. Then we find someone who wants to meet our needs and we want them too. So once again that selfish monster inside us comes out and we justify our behavior by telling ourselves that "we deserve to be happy." And then our spouse who thought we were happy discovers what is going on and their selfish monster rears its head and they do what they need to for self-perservation. <BR>Is it selfish to want to stay married to the person you love? No. When you enter into marriage you base your life on that love and on the other person loving you in return.<BR>When that changes, we tend to go into a self-persevation mode and become selfish.<BR>So no matter which was you slice it, we all have selfish tendency to us.<P>------------------<BR>"I find the great thing in the world is not so much where we stand, as in what direction we are moving. To reach the port of heaven, we must sail sometimes with the wind and sometimes against it ---- but we must sail, not drift nor lie at anchor." Oliver Wendall Holmes

This is really silly. I shouldn't respond but can't help myself.<P>If every married person kept their options open during the marriage, no marriage would last. No matter how great your spouse was when you married, there are 5 billion people in the world and there's always someone better at whatever it is you like. We can all do better than our current spouses. So following this logic, we would have a 100% divorce rate.<P>Second point, NO relationship is stagnant. They all have up and down times. If everyone gave up and left during the down times, again, we'd have 100% divorce. In my view, affairs typically happen during the down time, and the "high" of the affair feels incredible compared to the marital down time, a double whammy not to come back.<P>I'm certainly not an advocate for staying married at all cost. But I do think, short of alcohol, drug or physical abuse, very significant effort should be invested by both parties before letting go of a marriage that includes children. Third party involvement virtually destroys chances for marital recovery, which I suspect you already know. The question is not which one can make you happier, the OW or your wife. Even if you pick the OW, you'll find someone better than her in time, if you keep the same attitudes. The real question is what kind of man are you?

SNL, <BR>If you need a clue about your wife's emotional needs try reading this link.<BR> <A HREF="http://www.marriagebuilders.com/forum/Forum8/HTML/006119.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.marriagebuilders.com/forum/Forum8/HTML/006119.html</A> <P><BR>SNL,<P>RE: “But somehow the selfish desire of the spouse who wants the other person to stay and meet their needs is ok?”<P>Boy do you turn things around. The BS wants the WS to stay because they are committed to the marriage and because they love the WS. If it were only to have their needs met then any warm body would do. SNL, this may come as a surprise to you but thinker wants you to stay because she loves you.<P>RE: “the only real standard for a marriage is whether it meets the psychological health of both participants”<P>That’s right SNL. And a marriage will only meet both spouses psychological health if both parties work at it. (Perhaps follow the MB principles)<P>RE: “we are back to a harley principle, marriage is the ultimate poja, it must be the honest (the ratioal side), enthusiastic (the feeling side) choice of BOTH, or it ends, not really all that complicated.”<P>That’s right SNL, if your marriage is not meetings BOTH of your needs and you are BOTH not willing to put 100% into the marriage then you should get a divorce. MB is not about torturing one’s spouse.<P>You are totally right here. The problem that I see is that you do not know what you want so you continue in a marriage that does not met either your or your wife’s needs and no real work happens to improve the marriage.<P>Z<P><BR>Z<BR><p>[This message has been edited by zorweb (edited September 23, 2001).]

z.....: (snl)“But somehow the selfish desire of the spouse who wants the other person to stay and meet their needs is ok?”..........Boy do you turn things around. The BS wants the WS to stay because they are committed to the marriage and because they love the WS. If it were only to have their needs met then any warm body would do. SNL, this may come as a surprise to you but thinker wants you to stay because she loves you.<P>snl....Ok, so now we are ammending things, some selfishness is ok, but others is not? Who decides? Where is the list of approved selfishness? Why isn't what you just said rationalization? Why does a motivation of love justify selfishness? And if it does, why do ws who love op and go with them out of love get trashed for being selfish? I am NOT turning anything around, selfish is selfish, either selfish is wrong as a motivation or it is not, You cannot say some selfishness is just fine, but others is not. Not unless you can provide the unvarying principle that explains how one is supposed to apply selfishness.<P>RE: “the only real standard for a marriage is whether it meets the psychological health of both participants”<P>z...That’s right SNL. And a marriage will only meet both spouses psychological health if both parties work at it. (Perhaps follow the MB principles)<P>snl...Frankly I don't think MB prinicples are so much a methodology as they are a description of how fitted people live in marriages. Clearly people (not many though) have had (truly) successful marriages long before MB appeared. The word work is used (and abused) a lot I think. It is too general a rule to mean anything...life is work, every second of every day. But there is work you want to do, that you are motivated to do, that you should do....and there is work that is not a good focus, is not the best choice, I think everyone works at a marriage, whether it is staying or leaveing...the work should be about determining what you really want, whether you really freely enthusuastically choose this person as a mate, and if not, then the work is either learning to accomodate a roomate marriage, or the work is disconnecting the 2 people as painlessly as possible, going through the grief inherent in the end of any human relationship, and recoverying your life.<P>RE: “we are back to a harley principle, marriage is the ultimate poja, it must be the honest (the ratioal side), enthusiastic (the feeling side) choice of BOTH, or it ends, not really all that complicated.”<P>z...That’s right SNL, if your marriage is not meetings BOTH of your needs and you are BOTH not willing to put 100% into the marriage then you should get a divorce. MB is not about torturing one’s spouse.<P>snl...Torture? The point simply was no one should choose or accept to maintain a sacrificial marriage. But many do, some here are. The point of radical honesty is you cannot hide your feelings. There are many people in marriages who claim to be happy, will never divorce, but are clearly not passionately in-love with their spouse. They have chosen a different path, they have settled for less than is possible in human relationships. It is this settleing I do not understand. Why be married to someone you are less than passionate over, who is not your other half? How is that any different that being friends with them instead? Why be married to them? What does the marriage do?<P>z...You are totally right here. The problem that I see is that you do not know what you want so you continue in a marriage that does not met either your or your wife’s needs and no real work happens to improve the marriage.<P>snl...Describe the work that is not happening. It is a huge struggle just to be here, was to give up ow, is work to meet her needs (when it is not something I would do otherwise), to be emotionally honest with her (knowing she will use it against me), to continue to work and pay the bills (even though I just want to stay in bed 24 hours, or jump off a bridge)...how can you say doing nothing real!!!!!!!!!!!!....maybe I should just quit. I feel like it, nothing changes, nothing I do is good enough. My w hammered me last night, and again this morning because I have not performed to her specifications, ok, I get the message, I will never be good enough, I don't count, I am just here to meet everyone elses needs. Excuse me if I don't feel real enthusiastic.<P>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sad_n_lonely:<BR><B>snl....Ok, so now we are ammending things, some selfishness is ok, but others is not? Who decides? Where is the list of approved selfishness? Why isn't what you just said rationalization? Why does a motivation of love justify selfishness? And if it does, why do ws who love op and go with them out of love get trashed for being selfish? I am NOT turning anything around, selfish is selfish, either selfish is wrong as a motivation or it is not, You cannot say some selfishness is just fine, but others is not. Not unless you can provide the unvarying principle that explains how one is supposed to apply selfishness.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Instead of looking for ways to justify your selfishness, why not just look up the word in the dictionary. It gives the underlying principle of the concept, which I posted above. Here, I will post it again since you seem to be ignoring it:<P>Dana114: First off, it wouldn't matter if everyone in the world was selfish. Two wrongs don't make a right. You are still selfish and selfish is still wrong no matter who or how many people are selfish. Even so, your moral equivalence argument, as usual, doesn't work. <P>Let's look at the definition of the word selfish:<P>1 : concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others<P>Is the BS acting without regard for others, or concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself? The BS only wants her spouse to act in accordance to his promises to her and that includes fidelity and integrity. She is not asking for MORE than should be rightfully expected in a marriage with a committed, decent person. Her needs are NOT excessive by any stretch of the imagination. Nor are they exclusive. It is not selfish to expect your spouse to love and honor you, it is an expectation and a need. And it is a HEALTHY expectation that positively effects others.<P>The WS, on the other hand, is only concerned with his own pleasure AT THE EXPENSE of many others by pursuing his "soulmate." A destructive pursuit that hurts many others. His pursuits are done without regard for the spouse and family, that he destroys, and only benefit him. <P>Your moral equivalence arguments are getting exceedingly tiring, snl, and frankly, make my a** hurt. You are working way too hard to justify yourself. Why not just be a man and admit that you are exceedingly selfish without trying to drag everyone down in the gutter with you? Wouldn't that be so much simpler than producing these tortured moral equivalence arguments that make no sense? Don't be a Clinton. <P><BR>

Well said Dana114.<P>SNL, go comfort your wife, she needs it RIGHT NOW.

Nothing happened! No asking how my dad is, how I am doing, just nothing.

ditto Nina too. SNL - why do you have to analyze everything to death? You expound on everything you expound on instead of admitting you screwed up. Either by getting married in the first place or by having the affair. Can't you take any responsibility for anything? Do you have any feelings? Talk about trying to justify the lies and more lies. You are proving that you are the king of da nile. Do you have Real feelings? Why not go hold thinker. She needs it now.

Think about this:<P>When my twins were born at 25 weeks, we allowed them to remain on life support until they could breathe on their own--that equated to about 2.5 months total. Call us selfish...<P>When a relative's baby was born at 25 weeks, they felt it was selfish to keep their baby on life support regardless, so they let the baby go (removed the ventilator and the baby died because the lungs were too immature to breathe without help).<P>It's personal. What I mean is selfishness is according to one's personal values. If you see your marriage as a blessing (as I see my twins who are alive and healthy today), then you will hang on no matter what. If you see your marriage as better off without intervention, then you will let it go.<P>We held onto our kids, they are alive and healthy, but they DO have problems as a result of their prematurity. However, we are WORKING with them to help them live productive and meaningful lives and they are doing well considering they weren't expected to survive.<P>The other little baby is in God's hands and the parents will never really know what could have, or would have been had they held on at all costs? All they do know for sure is that the baby is in good hands. Their consciences are clear because they did what they believed was the right thing to do for them.<P>Either way you guys decide, I think you'll all survive, but it's very personal what you are willing to endure to get from Point A to Point B. You are at the fork in the road now. So far, you have chosen to save your marriage so there IS hope!

<BR><<<RE: “But somehow the selfish desire of the spouse who wants the other person to stay and meet their needs is ok?”<P>Boy do you turn things around. The BS wants the WS to stay because they are committed to the marriage and because they love the WS. If it were only to have their needs met then any warm body would do. >>><P>Yep! I could have been keeping myself occupied with my exBF while still Plan Aing my H and probably could have gotten away with it. That would have been the selfish thing to do, it was certainly tempting. But it wasn't right (on many levels) and very well had the potential to really hurt someone else, so I didn't do it. There are givers and takers and people in between. The key is to strike a balance. Towards the end of my H's affair one of his many realizations about himself was (his words) "I've realized I am completely self absorbed and totally selfish and it disgusts me. I am a complete taker and you ar a giver." He has made such dramatic strides in those areas that it is amazing. Our marriage is much more equal now.