And for the record, I would've smashed the blasted computer.

And its about him caring about her feelings more than the car. If he can't demonstrate that going forwards then how is she supposed to heal?

I have decided not to force him to sell it....

Good! "Harsh" or not, my opinion remains that the real issue is your attitude toward your FWH. Addressing THAT without the misdirected attention to automobile ownership will be the more efficient route to recovery.

Glad to have been of assistance!

Not to force is not the same as being enthusiastic about him keeping it though.

Can you be enthusiastic about him keeping it somewhere? If the answer is no then you need to keep being honest about it until you can work out a mutually agreeable solution.

NG seems to be forgetting the little matter of POJA here.

Quote

He said he immediately realized he was being stupid, risking his marriage, his job (she was a subordinate), etc. and that�s where things ended. They took a short ride and nothing else ever happened.

So the furor is all over this? There's got to be more to the story than this. I don't quite understand where everyone is getting that the husband cheated? Risking his marriage or job by giving someone a ride in the car? Sounds to me like someone that recognized that this could be a risky behavior that couild be viewed as inappropriate or that violated his boundaries, and so caught himself. What happened beyond giving someone a ride in a car?

After reading this I'm intensely curious if this was the reason you sought counseling?

He hid it from her, that's the problem. He snuck his car into work to give little miss hotpants a ride, and hid it from his wife. It's not like her car broke down and he gave her a ride home, he PLANNED this little escapade and then kept it from his wife.

Where does it say that he "snuck" the car to work?

Why is the woman now little miss hotpants?

From what I read the woman saw a model of the car and so the guy brought it into work and gave her a ride. Nothing else happened.

What exactly did this guy have to hide?

The point is that he did hide it. Had it been a mutual friend of theirs and he had POJA'd giving this woman a ride then there would have been no problem. But this was IB, weak boundaries and then dishonesty.

Now his wife feels hurt by the secret and is showing him clearly what he can do to make her feel better (sell the car and POJA their new purchase).

Exactly. If it wasn't a big deal, why not mention it at the time it happened? If her husband didn't think it was worth mentioning it, then there's a bigger issue at play.

No matter how small of a deal any of us think ths is, it is a big deal to his wife, s he needs to do whatever it takes to help her resolve this. If she wants to car gone, he should sell the car. If he wants another one, he can POJA with his wife. Maybe she will be OK a long as it is a different color. Who knows. But he needs to work this out with her. She feels how she feels. Not our place to argue she shouldn't feel that way.

NG seems to be forgetting the little matter of POJA here.

No, NG is applying it. DECIDING TO SELL the car is the action that must be POJA'd.

No agreement -> no sale.

Why should she have to POJA selling the car? Isn't it like some people in SAA sell houses and such?

That is not how the POJA works. If it makes her unhappy it has to go because it is bad for the marriage. No sale is not the default position when it concerns something that makes one of the spouses unhappy. Doing nothing is the default position when proposing something NEW to do. Anything that makes one spouse unhappy should be replaced with something that makes BOTH happy.

here

If it makes her unhappy it has to go

Okay, now we're getting to the crux of the issue. Her "unhappiness" is the point of this entire issue. Her attitude toward the car IS a fitting subject for discussion and resolution, and he should approach the problem with her.....if she is fittingly able and willing to look at all alternatives available. Does that strike anyone reading this thread as the situation as originally presented here?

Approaching the issue from a position of "I'm unhappy; we have to sell your car!" is NOT, IMVHO, conducive to a mature, joint resolution of the problem, and should not be mandated as the optimal solution here, just because she is the one who initiated the thread.

And, BTW: This issue is more or less moot. Having been able to express her hurt and discomfort to her husband, and evidently getting a response suitable to both of them (not revealed to us here) she DID take the MB-friendly position that the car can remain, and certain other EP's and JC's will adequately assuage her hurt. Whether or not the ability to "vent" her initial pain here as well, to us "uninvolved third partries", contributed to her ultimate decision, we may never know.

Not only is it "mature," but it is the solution to the problem. Anything that makes one spouse unhappy in marriage is to be eliminated, not tolerated. It is to be eliminated in a way that makes them BOTH happy. For example, the solution given by Dr Harley here was for them to find a replacement car that made them BOTH happy. But this car has to go. If something in marriage makes one person unhappy, it has to go.

This is how POJA works. I did not suggest what words to use when expressing her complaint, and that is another issue entirely, but the principle of POJA mandates that the car GOES.

Keep in mind WHY the solution is to remove the CAR and not focus on changing her attitude. Do you know why?

I don't remember your story.

But your position would support a WS that banged their OP in the family home, in the marital bed, see's no point for the WS to be forced to sell the house, bed, or even the sheets that were on the bed that day. There should be no sale because the WS has no desire to move or removal of furniture because the WS finds it comfortable and can't buy new because they don't make it any more.

That car must be sold.

And I would not be bothered if the BW takes a match to the car and burns it to the ground because if the BW felt that the money recieved from that car would be blood money/30 pieces of silver.

But being in this case that the car is kept in the garage it should be pulled out side and a safe distance from any buildings or other vehicles first. Then strike the match.

Logged on to give an update and was surprised to see so much activity on this thread.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I decided I was not willing to force my husband to sell the car.

We met with our counselor on Thursday evening. My husband shared first and said that he still did not want to get rid of the car, but reiterated that he would if that's what I needed. I shared some of the input I had received during the week, including Dr. Harley's advice, told him about posting on this forum and read the email from our pastor. I then told him that I was unwilling to force him to sell the car and he could keep it if he wanted.

Then, our counselor looks at us both and says you HAVE to sell the car! He said we should replace it with something new that my husband will love.

We did some car shopping over the weekend and I thought maybe he was getting a little excited about something new, although he wasn't terribly enthusiastic about any particular model and was shocked at the prices. His car is almost 7 years old. On our walk last night he informed me he wants to sell his car and NOT replace it! He doesn't want to incur any debt to get something new and he's not willing to raid our savings. He wants to put the proceeds from the sale into savings. We will also free up over $100/month that it costs to insure and maintain the current car.

I'm not sure what to think. I kind of like the idea but I don't want him to resent me down the road. I guess if he changes his mind we can always get another car. I went by his office this morning and the model is gone. I sort of thought getting what I believed I wanted would feel better, but I'm a little sad.

I understand on some intellectual level that folks feel the need to get rid of things if they have the taint of an affair. But then they keep the WS.

I guess I don't understand that. Why is it that some find the WS good enough to keep, but something that had no part of the decision to cheat is discarded?

To me, and I know not all see it this way, it makes no sense to get rid of something like the car if you are keeping the WS.

I can see something like pictures or gifts given to the WS, as they have little value.

But if someone is unable to use their mind to control the emotional response an object evokes, how do they ever get to an emotional state where they feel romantic love for the WS?

To me, actions mean far more than some object. Cars and houses are just stuff. It's people and their actions that matter. Cars and houses cannot make the decision to cheat or the decision to end the affair. So why is so much emotion spent on such objects after an affair?