On one hand, I'm impressed that WFLOWER and her husband have made a pact not to interact with members of this board OFF of the board. (This is on the "WFLOWER EMAIL ME" thread) On the other hand, I question why it's a problem to email a FEMALE member of the board.

WFLOWER mentioned that she would be upset if her husband had contacted a member of the board, but what if it was a MALE board member? I guess I'm going on the assumption that contacting people off board is risky behaviour if it's a member of the opposite sex.

I guess my question is---how many of you have made such a pact and does it extend to ALL board members or just members of the opposite sex?

Can't speak for others, but I see no problem with contacting others off the board. That is just my perspective. My wife has no problem either. I have contacted both male and female members, but only to discuss issues that were not related directly to the MB principles.

If someone sets a boundry, I have much respect for them when they will not cross that boundry.

I guess boundaries are relative....I know people that would flip if they knew their spouse was even posting on a board like this---whether it was to try and help the marriage or not....

Crossing that line when your feeling vulnerable is pretty risky, agreement or not. ANything you need to say should be able to be said in this fairly anonymous public forum... Why go off board with a member of the opposite sex??

SheWill....

I'm definitely not disagreeing with you! I see no need to go off board at all, although I've spoken to a couple of the ladies here on occasion.

WFLOWER in particular has made a pact not to speak to anyone---not even a female....I was just curious how interacting with a female might become a problem in a relationship.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:
<strong> SheWill....

I'm definitely not disagreeing with you! I see no need to go off board at all, although I've spoken to a couple of the ladies here on occasion.

WFLOWER in particular has made a pact not to speak to anyone---not even a female....I was just curious how interacting with a female might become a problem in a relationship. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'd like to respond here, first post - may as well be a good one.

I am amazed that this is another personal affront to Aeri. Is it anyone's business but WFLOWER's? Having been at this site in the background for several months, I see that as long as she is in control, everything's fine through her rosey glasses. If anyone has a genuine question, no matter how well it's asked of her, it's a personal attack. What gives? and who cares?

As for the topic of this thread -
Going off-line to speak with anyone privately is something that I would think twice about, and would expect that my spouse wouldn't find it very honorable either.

Aeri - how would one really know that you're not a man???

Whoa....for a first post, that's rather antagonistic, don't you think?

She posted this on the MB site---am I supposed to assume that it's personal and private information that I can't comment on? This question relates DIRECTLY to Marriage Builders! It's more on topic than 50% of the posts here!

Give me a break....just another example of why I've cut my time on this board....

Edited to say:

If I was really a man, what difference would it make? After all, I DON'T talk to anyone off board, with the exception of Starfish and that's once in a blue moon.

I don't even understand what relevance this has to the original question!

EARTH TO MB MEMBERS! HELLLOOOOO?

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 09:11 AM: Message edited by: *^aeri^* ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:
Whoa....for a first post, that's rather antagonistic, don't you think?

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">you reap what you sow.

What did I sow, Caitie?

Can you be a bit more specific? Surely you didn't think you'd get off that easily with such an intelligent comment.....

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:
<strong> Whoa....for a first post, that's rather antagonistic, don't you think?


Give me a break....just another example of why I've cut my time on this board....

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I remember that saga too, and opened the champagne that you were leaving. Glad it wasn't Dom Perignon...

If my husband wanted me to keep conversations on the board....I would certainly adhere to that. As it is....before I started mentoring couples, there were a few male board members that I communicated with off board. My H knew about it, and correspondence was open for him to see....as well as kept to issues to do with marriage building. I have always communicated with women....but as far as men go....I needed to be convinced first that their commitment to marriage was consistent over time before taking that kind of risk. Someone mentioned that there shouldn't be anything that cannot be talked about here....but a perfect example is folks in Plan B. They shouldn't be posting....and losing that support is very hard when they are hurting. There are also times when legal issues or custody issues are better kept private. Those are the kinds of things that turn up off board that can't be exposed here occasionally. I DO think that people who are vulnerable, or have marriages that are vulnerable need to be very very careful about opposite sex communication.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 09:26 AM: Message edited by: star*fish ]</small>

hi Aeri,

personally, for what i think ar obvious reasons,i think it is always a good idea to be a little cautious about internet contact.
however....
i have not discussed off board chatting w/ my H, but i tend to go w/ my heart and gut about how he would feel about it.

aside from taking time away from him,
i don't think he would mind me chatting w/ anybody about our relationship....he does know i have done this a few times in the past..and never asked me not to.......

so,as long as i remained respectful to him and i THINK i have a pretty good idea what would/would not bother him, i see no harm.
(i think i will have to ask him flat out now that i realize i have made some assumptions there. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> )

i usually go w/ the idea that....if i am going to say anything that i wouldn't say to him or want him to read........i will not do it.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: nelly ]</small>

Nelly---you're absolutely right.....

Anything that you feel you have to hide from your spouse shouldn't be done in the first place. I guess that's the simplest way to sum it all up.

greengrass,

aeri was struck by the comments on WF's thread and asks this question:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I guess my question is---how many of you have made such a pact and does it extend to ALL board members or just members of the opposite sex?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think it's a legitimate question and not an attack....so I'm not sure where you are coming from? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> It's also a very IMPORTANT topic for this board since EAs have occurred here and boundaries are important to enforce if this is going to be a safe board for folks who are vulnerable. I sincerely think it is a topic that needs to be discussed....examined...and for each of us to decide where our own marriages fall in this scenario.

Yes, of course it is WF's choice to make this decision for HER marriage. But I see no reason why it shouldn't raise questions for others as it has aeri. And what's with the question about being a "man"??? Where on earth did that come from? I am equally stumped by Caitie's "reap what you sow" comment.

Communication in and of itself is not evil or wrong....even with the opposite sex. There are boundaries that must be enforced and the POJA to be met. Motivation means everything. Integrity and morality along with good boundaries is what I use to guide my way and help me keep my own marriage safe when talking to ANYONE off board. I respect everyone's choices....and I champion WF for following the POJA that she has made with her husband....it is what these principles are built on.

hi Aeri,

I am one of the people here in the BayArea that actively communicating w/ each other and even meet offline.

Yes, if you are M, it should be open and honest w/ your H and the moment there is a reservation you have to cut it out. You M is more important than "helping".

Between Orchid & I, she refers male MBer to me and I refers female MBer to her on most cases.

We meet regulary now ... we are in our 6th months (6 times) ... as a social event. To show that there is a possibilities of recovery after A ... KS41 & Orchid. There is a life after Dv ... me ... and some plan B'er that could exchange idea and help out each other to get busy. When they are ready to move on ... they will get busy w/ their own life <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> . Some of us stay to payback what we gained from this life experience. Either way, we have fun meeting new/old friends offline ...

I agree with star*fish "I DO think that people who are vulnerable, or have marriages that are vulnerable need to be very very careful about opposite sex communication". You know who you are (hopefully) so you could put your guard up.

-rh-

PS: I don't ususally post here too since this board is a bit too hot for me.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: redhat ]</small>

I have contacted both male and female members, but only to discuss issues that were not related directly to the MB principles.
Uh, that seems kind of backwards. If one were to have any contact off these boards with the opposite sex, then it should be STRICTLY about MB principles.
But as this thread is about, even that is a no-no.

sorry I should not have posted taht. what I meant was simply that when WFLOWER psoted a perfectly legit question about "loss of trust", you jumped on her, so why be surprised now whn it happens to you?

personally i think questions should be perfectly accptable to post, and I apologize for being a smartalex.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Chris -CA123:
<strong> I have contacted both male and female members, but only to discuss issues that were not related directly to the MB principles.
Uh, that seems kind of backwards. If one were to have any contact off these boards with the opposite sex, then it should be STRICTLY about MB principles.
But as this thread is about, even that is a no-no. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Chris - there are several on here who have information about specific business interests, and we've utilized our contacts here for those purposes, to gain advice or information. Much of it doesn't relate to MB business.

I don't see a problem with developing a network of 'friends' from a source such as MB - between people who have good boundaries. I've actually gotten business contracts from people here. It's been a good thing - definitely not something I would have a problem with my spouse doing at all (if I were married).

Jan

Not a problem if it's for business, but the wording seemed awkard.

I highly recommend the utmost caution when going off-board to any member, and especially when contacting a member of the opposite sex. For instance, anyone who sends me an email should be aware that it may or may not be read by my husband, as per the Policy of Radical Honesty. There need to be assurances and safeguards in place.

However, I have had several cases where contact off board has been necessary for the comfort of either spouse especially when it comes into the realm of past Sexual Abuse, even if that abuse didn't occur within the marriage.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: *Takola* ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Chris -CA123:
<strong> I have contacted both male and female members, but only to discuss issues that were not related directly to the MB principles.
Uh, that seems kind of backwards. If one were to have any contact off these boards with the opposite sex, then it should be STRICTLY about MB principles.
But as this thread is about, even that is a no-no. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm the one that originally posted the message about non MB related issues being discussed off line. I do not consider it appropriate to be discussing taking soil samples and determining the ph balance for the planting of a particular type of grain. If someone, male or female wants to ask a question, I will gladly answer, but if it is not related to marriage building, then it should be off line.

This site is for the building and rebuilding of marriages and not a general communications board.

Your gender in an email does not make any difference to me. I will not discuss personal matters offline, regardless of your gender.

As for WFLOWER maintaining her boundries, I applaud her. Are her boundries different than mine? Certainly, but rest assured that I maintain mine as well.

Aeri was asking about the contacting of the same gender off line and if she has a question, then she should be free to ask for clarification without being attacked by people that thinks she somehow "deserves to reap what she sows".

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:
<strong> I guess I'm going on the assumption that contacting people off board is risky behaviour if it's a member of the opposite sex. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">As a couple of other posters have commented, I think it is risky if you are prone to EA. The same way alcoholics are better off staying out of bars, my H (who is susceptible to internet affairs) would not be comfortable posting privately to another woman, but he has done so to a few men who had problems similar to his.

I post here, and email both men and women when asked to do do. H gets the link to everything I post, and he gets copies of any emails I get or send. Many times, I'll ask his advice or thoughts before responding.

For us, it's a matter of keeping all communication non-private.

These are my absolutes:

- Anyone is vulnerable to an EA with the potential PA (we do have to protect ourselves from that reality)

- POJA between couples supercedes (anything)

- the net can be a dangerous place (so can the grocery store!!)

- I am a boundary lover so I do respect other's boundaries whether I like them or not.

But SHEEESSSSH ..... when you have posted on a public forum for at least a solid year on a daily basis and another same sex poster that has PROVEN credibility asks you would please e-mail her, couldn't you just set up a hotmail or yahoo account & e-mail her with a cc to your husband and then go accordingly?

I mean I am sorry but I see this as a little silly. You speak to these people on a daily basis, some of them for a year or more, and you STILL don't trust them? To me that is the bottom line.
If it were another male, yep .. absolutely! I have had to refuse a couple invites from male posters on here myself, but women???? I don't get it? What is the risk?

What in the world would you be afraid they would say off board that they haven't proven themselves to say here? And if they prove to be goofs .. poof you delete their butts off your e-mail and block them... gone!!

Which brings me to the next question. Do people really think we are "real" here? Do people honestly form any type of emotional attachment at all? Are we really just a series of electronically generated responses? I dunno .. this disturbs me.

Again, tho please see my previous absolutes.

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

Dzzz (Woman Poster A) (maybe .. maybe I am a man!!! yeah that's it!!! I have been posting as a woman now for a year .. just like Aeri!!! ) LOL

DZZZ

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

I think it is risky if you are prone to EA
What does this mean? Who is "prone" to an EA?

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>

double post again..
stupid computer.....ok, i'll take this oppiurtunity to ask you all to keep your fingers crossed that my H finds a new job soon.....he had an interview today.
thanks.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 04:06 PM: Message edited by: nelly ]</small>

Ofcourse i think you are real, DZZZ <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

and, yes....i will admit it, i have formed an emotional attachment to you. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

typical ENFP.... fishin' for compliments again. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">and, yes....i will admit it, i have formed an emotional attachment to you. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">and me to you Nelly <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

DZZZ

nelly -- Dzzz

Stop it! Sheesh --- <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

Jan

Prone to an EA?

I would take that to mean that you or your spouse has had an EA in the past. If you're having problems in your relationship, you might have another if the circumstances are right.

I tend to agree with Diamonzz, it's probably harmless to contact a woman poster through email, BUT if we're talking strictly POJA here, you have to follow it. If WFLOWER POJA'd this, she's bound to follow it---I agree with that.

sorry, jan. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Embarrassed]" src="images/icons/blush.gif" />

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">BUT if we're talking strictly POJA here, you have to follow it. If WFLOWER POJA'd this, she's bound to follow it---I agree with that. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes, again, see my "list of absolutes".

I am sorry Aeri if I sidetracked the thread a little .. I think it is a personal slant I tend to put on this subject sometimes.

Don't you agree there are two main issues here? One is about maintaining POJA, and keeping ones' self in a state of accountabilty, but the other issue is the fact that sometimes people on the net really do not think of others as "real", "valued", etc, etc, etc. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

You know the ol' "good enough to talk to on here but OMG you don't think I really think you are REAL do ya?"

I'll shush up now ....

How ARE YOU by the way????????? (seeing as though this is your thread I am allowed to ask that .. hehe)

DZZZ

I am not sorry Jan. I am running willy nilly all over threads and hijacking ...... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

I am not real anyway .. I can do whatever I want!

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

DZZZ

*^aeri^*,

I think it's a legitimate question--


--Prone to an EA?

TR--I would tend to think that prone to an EA would mean more--if your spouse is NOT meeting your most important emotional need's your prone to an EA--especially if the person your communicating w/ off the forum is a member of the opposite sex--

if you talk off the board about many different topics that are of interest to both people but not the spouse--a friendship is bound to form between the two people--and an EA could occur--

And if you are both sharing intimate details of your marriage--that also forms an emotional bond--

So there really should be boundaries set in place even in these situations--to help avoid that--

There have been a few people here that has happened too--I know of at least one couple who even got married--

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> There have been a few people here that has happened too--I know of at least one couple who even got married-- </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">WHO????????!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

DZZZ

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Diamonzzz:
<strong>"STOP-DROP-'N ROLL"</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'd rather roll, pinch, and twist, then inhale deeply & hold it a few secs ... but I haven't done that in ages. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

As to the original question by Aeri, there's really no pact of any sort between me & Mrs. O about off-board contact between me & other MBers. There are a couple with whom I exchange the occasional e-mail. Sometimes it's about life-stuff, sometimes it's just the silliness that we all get in our in-boxes.

Either way, I don't hide it. If she wants to peruse my in-box, she can.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Diamonzzz:
<strong> These are my absolutes:

- POJA between couples supercedes (anything)

- I am a boundary lover so I do respect other's boundaries whether I like them or not.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I completely agree. Boundries are hard enough to create and maintain without fellow MBers encouraging us to violate them.

Diamonzzz, you go on to completely negate everything you posted above with the following:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> <strong>But SHEEESSSSH ..... when you have posted on a public forum for at least a solid year on a daily basis and another same sex poster that has PROVEN credibility asks you would please e-mail her, couldn't you just set up a hotmail or yahoo account & e-mail her with a cc to your husband and then go accordingly?</strong> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Absolutely NOT! These are exactly the type of fellow MBers that one might believe that they could actually count on to respect their boundries.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"><strong>I mean I am sorry but I see this as a little silly. You speak to these people on a daily basis, some of them for a year or more, and you STILL don't trust them? To me that is the bottom line.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Why do fellow MBers think that they should be an exception to the rule. If someone sets a personal boundry not to accept emails (period) then that is their choice. It matters not what *we* would choose.

ba109

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:39 PM: Message edited by: ba109 ]</small>

Diamonzzz,


WHO????????!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

What are you an owl??? No, that is up to them to disclose that information---

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: nelly ]</small>

BA .. I totally agree with you .. I saw the irony of it myself...


*puts hands up* guilty as charged..... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

please see my new thread....

I think I was on the verge of a new discussion.

DZZZ

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

ba109:

I totally respect WFLOWER in her decision. She POJA'd the issue and she's sticking with it. That's great.

I think you misunderstood Diamonzz...I can see her side of the story as well.

You may have missed the point--I was only curious to know who has this same arrangement. Personally, I would trust my spouse contacting ANYONE on the board if he HADN'T had an EA and wasn't prone to one.

I think trust is a big part of a relationship. I think I could trust my spouse enough to allow him to talk to anyone on this board. After all, we're all here to help our marriages...what would be the point in trying to establish an EA with someone?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Diamonzzz,


WHO????????!!

What are you an owl??? No, that is up to them to disclose that information--- </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Alright!! I want WHOever it is to come forward this instant!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

It's Dan-O and Slappy! I knew it!!!!!
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
DZZZ

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by star*fish:
[QB] greengrass,

aeri was struck by the comments on WF's thread and asks this question:

[QUOTE] I guess my question is---how many of you have made such a pact and does it extend to ALL board members or just members of the opposite sex?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think it's a legitimate question and not an attack....so I'm not sure where you are coming from?

Greengrass: You don't have to replay too many of Aeri's posts slewn WFLOWER's way recently to see where it's coming from. She has a certain "charm" about her style of disagreeing, or all too often, taking things personally.

Starfish:
Yes, of course it is WF's choice to make this decision for HER marriage. But I see no reason why it shouldn't raise questions for others as it has aeri. And what's with the question about being a "man"???

Greengrass reply: The whole point here is who is truly behind a screen name here on the Web? If someone chooses not to go "off-line" with a stranger, it's their perogative. So Aeri has a great little thread started here, and I agree it's a good topic.

One question though: What if this thread's title was:
"Socializing with MB Members....(insert your name here everyone on MB reading this) Isn't the title just a bit disrespectful, or is it just me?


Edited to add: It's nice to see WFLOWER is classy enough to not stoop to "victim status" by engaging back.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: greengrass ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by *^aeri^*:


I totally respect WFLOWER in her decision. She POJA'd the issue and she's sticking with it. That's great. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I know you do, although using WFLOWER as an example is what I think set some people off, thinking it was a personal attack. I know it was not.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think you misunderstood Diamonzz...I can see her side of the story as well. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I don't think I did. One can't say that they respect my boundies in one sentence and then assume to be an exception in the next.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You may have missed the point--I was only curious to know who has this same arrangement. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Your point is very clear.

ba109

Personally, I would trust my spouse contacting ANYONE on the board if he HADN'T had an EA and wasn't prone to one.
There is that word again, "prone".

what would be the point in trying to establish an EA with someone?
So he previously set out to intentionally have an Emotional Affair?

Most affairs start don't start out with, "I'm going to have an affair" or "my spouse doesn't love me, who can I turn to for comfort?".
Harley says don't get into situations where affairs start and you won't get into affairs.

WFLOWER should stick to her POJA, unless she or her H are no longer enthusiastic about it. Then, they need to come to a new POJA. There is nothing wrong with this.

Now, I do know that I made suggestions to WFLOWER to see if that is something she was willing to do, or if they could POJA. If not, fine. No big deal.

Her marriage and POJA are the most important thing here. Period. More important than emails, aquaintances, participation in the boards, etc.

We are all prone to affairs, particularly so when our needs are not being met. There are more things than affairs that can adversely affect your relationships. That includes participating on the boards or talking on email if your spouse is not enthusiastic.

It is WFLOWER (in this example) and her H's opinions and boundaries that matter in this.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: *Takola* ]</small>

Wrong thread.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 06:57 PM: Message edited by: Imi_na'auao ]</small>

Uh---I think you're posting to the wrong thread.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by nelly:
<strong> Dan-O,
"If she wants to pursue my in-box, she can" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

did you set me up, for that one?

i was never a big roll, pinch twist and inhaler....( infact, i was more of a just hand it to me or blow it into my mouth kinda gal infact, i was more of a just hand it to me or blow it into my mouth kinda gal )......but,the image sure brings back some memmories.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">such appropriate banter for a marriage building board nelly.

a man never would have gotten away with this.

--moon

Well, I sure don't have a problem with people emailing me. My address is in my signature line. I do have respect for anyone that sets a personal limit and sticks with it.

well, i'll tell you what moon.....you delete it and i'll delete mine.

i agree, it was inappropriate and i posted w/o thinking.
i apologize.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by nelly:
<strong> Dan-O,
"If she wants to pursue my in-box, she can" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

did you set me up, for that one?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I believe the word I used was peruse.
per-ooz: vt - to read attentively; to examine in detail.

To pursue an in-box, between husband & wife, is something else altogether. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by moonstruck:
<strong>such appropriate banter for a marriage building board </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Appropriate? Maybe, maybe not. If such talk offends, then I apologize. Obviously, we grew up in different neighborhoods.

Heck, a lot of the kids I grew up with, who are now 40-ish, are probably still twisting 'em up. I gave it up under a fair amount of pressure from Mrs. O and from the corporate random testing that became a fact of life in the late 80s & early 90s.

Some days, I still kinda miss it.

Moon,
i deleted it.

sometimes, i get a little too 'comfortable' on the board.
but, i don't understand the comment that a man would never have gotten away w/ it......can you explain what you meant by that?

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: nelly ]</small>

dan-o--

nah, same age, same neighborhood, different lifestyle choices.

--moon

Permit me to play "let's all get along n the sandbox" Nelly, Dan-O and Moon but I "think"
I see a real misunderstanding.

I "think" moon took your comment about smoking the dubie as "sexual" and I think Dan-O missed that and was commenting that speaking about smoking pot was not something socially unacceptable in his neck of the woods.

And Moon... I think you missed the fact that BOTH missed that one.....

Ok ..... so did that explain things a little better or did I totally miss it too???????????


<img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

DZZZ

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

I have mixed emotions on this one. I have worked on charity projects involving people over the net. There were some quality people and there were some in need of a sleeveless jacket and a padded apartment if you get my drift.

I am guarded when it comes to the net.

That being said the work place is far and away the number one breeding ground for affairs.

Nearly 2 out of 3 wayward spouses either worked with or met their affair partner in the work place according to Shirley Glass.

The internet is getting alot of press because of dating websites, porn sites and various adult chatrooms.

But the workplace still is the largest concern for couples wanting to affair proof their marriages.

So while I would urge caution on the net I would not place it higher up on my concerns than work related activities.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">BA .. I totally agree with you .. I saw the irony of it myself... </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">D,

I'm glad that you recognized the contradiction. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> I do like your "absolutes".

ba109

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I'm glad that you recognized the contradiction </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Thanks for acknowledging it Ba. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

In my lifetime I have had to eat crow so many times it almost tastes good now!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

DZZZ