Leaving wife for mistress
| sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Mahogany 180 brunch hissy fit | 10/19/17 | | crimson massive station police squad | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | thriller flesh lettuce market | 10/19/17 | | black irradiated affirmative action | 11/17/17 | | light elite sanctuary | 07/19/19 | | Supple Round Eye International Law Enforcement Agency | 07/19/19 | | gay tanning salon | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | histrionic cream hominid temple | 10/18/17 | | Abusive slimy personal credit line | 10/18/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | Abusive slimy personal credit line | 10/18/17 | | Cracking bistre hall really tough guy | 10/18/17 | | Plum stage | 10/18/17 | | bespoke preventive strike | 10/18/17 | | yapping property | 10/19/17 | | Stubborn slap-happy yarmulke principal's office | 07/19/19 | | Buff comical rigor deer antler | 10/18/17 | | nudist school | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | judgmental windowlicker wrinkle | 10/18/17 | | Soul-stirring locale community account | 10/18/17 | | Cracking bistre hall really tough guy | 10/18/17 | | bespoke preventive strike | 10/18/17 | | light elite sanctuary | 10/18/17 | | Vivacious aqua chapel | 10/19/17 | | drunken home | 10/19/17 | | sick puce mad-dog skullcap | 10/19/17 | | Adulterous stock car | 10/19/17 | | Stubborn slap-happy yarmulke principal's office | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | dashing copper office | 10/19/17 | | abnormal site liquid oxygen | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | Brilliant self-absorbed codepig | 10/19/17 | | Disturbing place of business | 11/14/17 | | Lime medicated university macaca | 10/19/17 | | fiercely-loyal orchestra pit marketing idea | 10/19/17 | | stimulating parlor haunted graveyard | 10/19/17 | | thriller flesh lettuce market | 10/19/17 | | dead stead | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | Boyish step-uncle's house blood rage | 11/17/17 | | black irradiated affirmative action | 11/17/17 | | iridescent stage | 07/24/19 | | fear-inspiring exhilarant indirect expression | 10/18/17 | | Abusive slimy personal credit line | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | fear-inspiring exhilarant indirect expression | 10/18/17 | | judgmental windowlicker wrinkle | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | autistic razzmatazz church building | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Painfully honest charismatic french chef | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Mahogany 180 brunch hissy fit | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | gay tanning salon | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | Diverse clown rehab | 10/18/17 | | Curious abode goyim | 10/18/17 | | dashing copper office | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | Hyperventilating Pisswyrm Parlour | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | Buff comical rigor deer antler | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | Plum stage | 10/19/17 | | Carnelian Persian Cuckold | 10/23/17 | | deep cyan goal in life mediation | 10/26/17 | | Drab boiling water | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/19/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/18/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | shaky theater stage | 10/18/17 | | startled internet-worthy factory reset button depressive | 10/18/17 | | thriller flesh lettuce market | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | Floppy bright son of senegal | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Floppy bright son of senegal | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | Painfully honest charismatic french chef | 10/18/17 | | thriller flesh lettuce market | 10/19/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | Supple Round Eye International Law Enforcement Agency | 10/18/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Pearl spectacular sandwich alpha | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/19/17 | | Vivacious aqua chapel | 10/19/17 | | Mahogany 180 brunch hissy fit | 10/19/17 | | Talking electric furnace meetinghouse | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Buff comical rigor deer antler | 10/19/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | nudist school | 10/18/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | nudist school | 10/18/17 | | Mahogany 180 brunch hissy fit | 10/19/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | black irradiated affirmative action | 11/17/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | Diverse clown rehab | 10/18/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | wine rigpig gas station | 10/19/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | crimson massive station police squad | 10/19/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | wonderful range | 10/19/17 | | Mahogany 180 brunch hissy fit | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/19/17 | | chocolate pit | 10/18/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | up-to-no-good potus roast beef | 10/19/17 | | trip field background story | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | bonkers trust fund | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | nudist school | 10/18/17 | | trip field background story | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | sick puce mad-dog skullcap | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | Brilliant self-absorbed codepig | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | black irradiated affirmative action | 11/17/17 | | demanding toaster | 10/18/17 | | unhinged arousing location fat ankles | 10/18/17 | | Infuriating rose karate | 10/18/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/18/17 | | Vivacious aqua chapel | 10/19/17 | | bespoke preventive strike | 10/19/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/19/17 | | shaky theater stage | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | shaky theater stage | 10/18/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | Exciting Jet Dingle Berry | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Henna senate | 10/18/17 | | heady hot business firm puppy | 10/18/17 | | shaky theater stage | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | yellow domesticated cruise ship | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | Buff comical rigor deer antler | 10/19/17 | | heady hot business firm puppy | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | Plum stage | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Mind-boggling dysfunction | 10/18/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Bateful patrolman | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/19/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/19/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/19/17 | | Plum stage | 10/19/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | Drab boiling water | 10/18/17 | | Mind-boggling dysfunction | 10/18/17 | | demanding toaster | 10/18/17 | | Drab boiling water | 10/18/17 | | thirsty sickened half-breed | 10/18/17 | | Brilliant self-absorbed codepig | 10/19/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/18/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | bonkers trust fund | 10/18/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/18/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/18/17 | | Angry Quadroon Immigrant | 10/18/17 | | Diverse clown rehab | 10/19/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/19/17 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 10/19/17 | | seedy messiness spot | 10/19/17 | | Vivacious aqua chapel | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | Shivering giraffe | 10/19/17 | | aromatic overrated feces | 10/19/17 | | duck-like swollen masturbator | 11/17/17 | | Transparent mental disorder | 10/19/17 | | Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman | 10/19/17 | | Transparent mental disorder | 10/19/17 | | Brilliant self-absorbed codepig | 10/19/17 | | pale crackhouse | 10/19/17 | | Fragrant school cafeteria associate | 10/19/17 | | Insanely creepy flatulent friendly grandma | 10/19/17 | | swashbuckling kitchen scourge upon the earth | 10/19/17 | | Crusty Menage New Version | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | lake forum | 10/19/17 | | up-to-no-good potus roast beef | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | hairraiser gaped cuck candlestick maker | 10/19/17 | | poppy athletic conference | 10/19/17 | | Plum stage | 10/19/17 | | aromatic overrated feces | 10/19/17 | | up-to-no-good potus roast beef | 10/19/17 | | Aphrodisiac idiot | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | Aphrodisiac idiot | 10/19/17 | | Electric bawdyhouse famous landscape painting | 10/19/17 | | outnumbered roommate institution | 10/19/17 | | razzle garrison | 10/19/17 | | sick puce mad-dog skullcap | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | Shimmering beady-eyed hairy legs | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | hyperactive twisted house | 10/19/17 | | concupiscible casino tank | 10/19/17 | | Appetizing chad | 10/19/17 | | fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch | 10/19/17 | | Plum stage | 10/19/17 | | Odious Milky Nibblets | 07/19/19 | | thriller flesh lettuce market | 10/19/17 | | Electric bawdyhouse famous landscape painting | 10/19/17 | | heady hot business firm puppy | 10/19/17 | | Supple Round Eye International Law Enforcement Agency | 10/19/17 | | Glittery bisexual space | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | Vibrant cowardly theatre | 10/19/17 | | talented doobsian locus main people | 10/19/17 | | razzle-dazzle corn cake twinkling uncleanness | 10/19/17 | | big onyx dog poop | 10/19/17 | | Shimmering beady-eyed hairy legs | 10/19/17 | | Scarlet big-titted den | 11/17/17 | | Useless boltzmann | 07/19/19 | | slippery headpube | 07/19/19 | | duck-like swollen masturbator | 07/19/19 | | sapphire cerebral hell | 07/24/19 | | purple racy box office | 07/24/19 | | Free-loading cruel-hearted lodge | 07/25/19 | | slippery headpube | 07/25/19 | | Balding Ladyboy Library | 07/25/19 | | naked rebellious jap weed whacker | 07/25/19 | | startled internet-worthy factory reset button depressive | 07/25/19 | | contagious beta heaven | 07/25/19 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:01 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Tale as old as time. Mostly antagonistic relationship with wifey. Been seeing side piece for a while; she's obviously much younger then wifey but more importantly is actually kind and nice.
Two kids.
So, really, the question is: stay in unhappy situation for benefit of kids or look to improve my own situation in hopes that impact on kids may not be that large.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475656)
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:04 PM Author: yellow domesticated cruise ship
Kids will be fine, stuff like divorce doesn't matter to them.
Mistress will not change she'll in fact get nicer and more interested in you once she wins.
Wife will happily accept all of this, she won't make your life hell in the divorce and after.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475679) |
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:06 PM Author: autistic razzmatazz church building
I say leave your wife in pursuit of a happy life.
But you should be sure that your mistress is legit first. Once you divorce, you'll lose a lot of power over her. If she's a gold digger or otherwise has bad motives, you're in for a world of hurt. Have to really know her character before you make your move.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475694) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:10 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
She didn't know that at first of course.
Later I told her that I was separate and going through a divorce.
It's a little unclear to me whether she believes everything or accepts what she wants to hear on her end.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475723) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:12 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
This is my number one fear and only reason I'm even considering the item.
No kids = immediate divorce.
So yes, my major considerations and custody and then child support. Marriage was short so alimony would be limited.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475750) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 10:18 AM Author: fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch
Every other weekend = 4 overnight visitation periods every 28 days. That's standard visitation in many jurisdictions.
Contemplate that. You wake up, your kids are there, you make them breakfast and send them off to school. Then you don't have any meaningful time with them for 12 days. You lay there, alone, wondering if they're having nightmares, wondering if your bitch of an ex-wife is taking care of them (or if she has just, yet again, plopped them in front of the TV so she can internet shop), you wonder what they ate for dinner. Even worse, you're laying next to your mistress, looking at her, and deep down you understand that you traded your time with your kids for this woman.
If you're lucky, you'r the kind of person who can shut off the part of your mind that can self identify mistakes and take a real view of the consequences of your decisions. If you're lucky, you're the kind of person that can rationalize your choices as being someone else's fault (i.e. oh, my ex-wife was such a bitch, she created this situation). If you can't do this, my advice is to find a liquor that you like that you can drink without a mixer - you're going to need it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478253) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 11:57 AM Author: Buff comical rigor deer antler
There's no such thing as a "standard visitation" schedule.
If the kids are not infants, and he's an available, fit parent who is willing to show some backbone during the litigation there is no reason it shouldn't be 50/50 or close to it. At worst it should be every other weekend Fri - Mon morning with an additional mid-week overnight. That brings it to 10 overnights for every 28 day period. Not great but better than what you described.
A smart person might consider creating a trail now before the shit hits the fan and everyone's antennae are up. Take pictures, send texts/emails if for no reason other than to document involvement or attendance at events etc.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478969) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:21 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
I make way more so yeah I'm probably screwed on child support.
I'm encouraged by custody rulings of late in my state so happy to hear a second opinion in my favor on that front.
Do you think mediation is feasible? If I could get wifey to come to the table.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475848) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:27 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Well she doesn't know that of course.
So the divorce would be for each of us to try to find a better future for ourselves.
I know she's not happy either.
Haven't hid much money, I was thinking it wouldn't really be an effective way to shelter assets.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475910) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 11:54 AM Author: talented doobsian locus main people
I was pigeonholing cash away before divorce was on the table. It was more of a rainy day fund. I think I had 20K set aside for a european vacation or if something catastrophic happened. Was kind of a nice F U to her after divorce when I spent it on hookers and blow.
I'm just warning you that she will not be the rational woman you once knew and you WILL be a basket case for a while. The woman you are leaving her for will not be the angel you think she is, nor will any other woman the rest of your life. Relationships are hard. Once you get beyond the initial wanderlust and fascination of new poon, it always turns sour.
Has your wife gained significant weight? Is she uglier? Have you put in any effort into your marriage?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478948) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:24 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Relationship with wifey was always tumultuous, but she was (and honestly still is) very attractive. So I was a bit enamored.
I generally agree with the concept of many compatible mates, but if I'm not with such a compatible mate now why not try to choose from among one of the other more compatible ones?
Not sure if you're flaming with the couple decades thing but we've been doing counseling on and off for two years.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475875) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:34 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Yeah, the stepdad thing sucks. I would lose the full ability to influence my own kids which really sucks.
Definitely don't care about what she does with her own self. I'd guess she'll just re-marry old and rich.
I would be fine without more but you're right that if I end up with a new girl she'll be younger and want more kids. I'm not against it but the finances would be a little tight. Still, not a dealbreaker.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475969) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:49 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Sorry I don't share your moralistic world view.
Your poast sounds like dogma. I take it you are religious?
The motivation isn't to get a younger wife. The motivation is to take a chance at finding happiness in a relationship. Without kids this would be an easy choice. So the question is more one of assessing the impact on the kids, understanding likely legal outcomes, and weighing that against the value of increased self-happiness adjusted for risk of the next relationship failing short.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476093) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:07 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Yes, of course some significant part of this is my fault; failed relationships almost always take two.
You are right to criticize my lack of honesty towards the mistress, I don't seek to defend that. I do care about her well-being, but honestly I think my relationship with her is secondary in this situation.
I'm not looking for validation, but I am openly questioning some of the prevailing wisdom on the effects and impacts of divorce on young kids, and whether they're worse off with divorced parents or parents that can't communicate and get along.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476251) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:25 PM Author: seedy messiness spot
Well, let's add some additional material:
-Has your mistress actually met your kids? Is she going to welcome suddenly having stepchildren in her relationship? Will she behave the same way? How likely is it that your children will accept their "new" mom?
-Your wife will probably try to remarry. What kind of man will she attract, being a divorced woman with two kids? Will that man treat your kids well, given his total lack of biological connection? Recall that stepdad-on-stepchild is an insanely common kind of child abuse.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476366) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:34 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Yes, the mistress has met the kids and loves them. She is overwhelmingly kind which is kind of part of the problem for me; I'm very fortunate to have met her and wish I could have met her earlier.
She's great and realistically deserves better than me but I've been trying to remove the focus from my relationship with her as I think that's kind of secondary.
The kids are small and--frankly--take very well to new people after a day or two. Wifey was out of town for almost two weeks a while ago and they did fine.
My wife is very attractive so I think she'll fare well in the dating market. I tend to think she'll remarry a significantly older, wealthy guy, but maybe that's just me being hopeful.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476418) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 11:59 AM Author: concupiscible casino tank
Wait...wait...
Your kids MET the mistress and they didn't rat you out?
What little kid could hesitate to tell mommy about meeting, "Daddy's friend from work! She was pretty and nice to us!"
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478981) |
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:37 PM Author: bonkers trust fund
Divorce isn't always the best option, but sometimes it's the only option. Sucks for the kids, but they'd still have you as a father. They just might have another one in due time - are you prepared for that?
I've found that kids who are teens get hit the hardest when their parents divorce. Just my observation. So if they're younger than that, which they probably are, it might be better to do it now.
With that said, I'm leery of someone who would enter into a relationship with a married man. How do you know she wouldn't do that again? How does she know you wouldn't do that again?
Maybe the best thing to do would be to break it off with this paramour of yours, so you can think more clearly about the whole situation. Then, when you're ready, make a decision about whether you can repair your marriage. Only then should you pursue another relationship, if your decision is to end the marriage.
It's inauspicious to start a new relationship before you've ended the last one. It's called adultery, and it's a proven fact that people go to hell for that shit.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34475988) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:42 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
No, not prepared to be displaced. Honestly I am more concerned that a new stepdad would be a dick or abusive.
The kids are young so yes, I was thinking that I should pull the plug now or just suffer on until they're out of the house. I would like to do it now before they can remember much of it if I'm going to do it at all.
The situation with the paramour is really hard to explain and too unique so I can't go into it; suffice it to say that (a) I don't have much fear of her mistreating me or the kids but (b) she probably is clouding my judgment to some extent.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476031) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:45 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
This is reductive and kind of silly.
Say that the parents are constantly fighting and screaming at each other -- is that environment by definition best for the kids?
Your position assumes without consideration that in all instances a divorce would not be in their best interests. I also think you are overstating the effect of the divorce on the kids but I'm happy to be proven wrong or shown otherwise. That's why I'm poasting.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476056) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 12:02 PM Author: Vibrant cowardly theatre
"don't scream at your wife you dumb bitch. problem solved."
This. You can 100% see his blindspot, you say to put the kids first, and he says "yeah well what if we're yelling" as if putting the kids first wouldn't also imply you've stopped engaging in fights
being a henpecked husband and just letting your wife boss you around is a far more moral, child-supportive decision than to bail because you can't stop fucking defending yourself when your wife complains that you tracked mud into the house
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478992) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:53 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Complete inability to communicate. Has always been the case but exacerbated by having kids (and thus having to communicate about more tense/stressful things).
Immediate defensiveness on the part of wifey.
Wifey's lack of interest in contributing financially coupled with conceptions of feminism and wanting to share the load 50/50 at home.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476131) |
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:52 PM Author: Plum stage
Lol assuming you will get 50/50 custody.
First, you NEVER admit to having a side piece. Ever. Even if she remarries, you NEVER bring the new gf to child exchanges, court hearings or anything.
In SoCal you by default will get alternate weekends, and a midweek visit from 5-8 pm. That's what you will get if she doesn't DVTRO pwn you which is pretty much guaranteed if she's already hostile.
Alternate weekends is 20% custody. If you get DVTRO pwnd you won't see your kids for weeks, maybe months before you get supervised visitation or 5% custody.
To get 50% you have to show you are a 50% parent. My money says you aren't.
You have to be MOVED OUT before you serve her papers and then only communicate via text or email and never be alone with her again. Exchange the kids in a public place like McDonalds.
That's all the advice I'm giving this JM flame.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476123) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 10:58 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Surprised to see the assumption of alternate weekends.
I'm kind of banking on 50/50. I think if I could only get alternate weekends then the cost is too high and I'll probably suck it up and just live with an unhappy relationship as others have suggested.
Most of the recent decisions I've seen suggest more equitable custodial arrangements.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476167) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:02 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
How does her workload change the custody analysis?
I'd concede she's the primary caretaker. I would propose she has them on weeks and me on weekends. I was hoping for Friday night through Monday morning.
I never work weekends and always leave early on Fridays.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476208) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:28 PM Author: Mind-boggling dysfunction
It wouldn't be fair for you to get every weekend, moron. The kids will get older and be in school during the week, so she's going to deserve and get some weekends, too. I mean, really? Yeah, she gets to do all the actual weekday work with the school hustle while you get the fun and relaxing weekends.
Annnyway, unless a marriage is a disaster (abuse, excessive cheating, excessive dishonesty about money or anything crucial) then you're literally just bored and will be bored again in 5-8 years with the new woman.
Also stop saying "wifey" you fag.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476380) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 12:01 PM Author: Plum stage
You sound like every single one of my former delusional male clients. You want your cake and to eat it, too.
This is what is going to happen to you:
DVTRO pwnd.
Somewhere between 5% and 20% custody.
Kids will hate you because wife will poison them.
Wife will hire very aggressive lawyer and write stuff about you that makes Hitler look like Mother Teresa.
You will come across as angry and arrogant in court despite your best effort.
You will rant and rant about how unjust the family court system is and how it favors women.
You and mistress will not work out.
You will be alone, giving half paycheck to wife who has remarried and seeing your kids, who hate you and blame you for the divorce, once every two weeks.
Autoadmit will be your sole source of diversion and friendship.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478989) |
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:33 PM Author: bonkers trust fund
Have you considered that maybe your wife is doing the same thing behind your back?
Maybe you both want the same thing and don't want to harm the kids. If she's nasty to you, maybe it's because she's got a sidepiece of her own and doesn't care very much for you. Just a crazy theory.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476412) |
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:45 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
I've considered that, yes. If that were the case then I would double down on my view, which is that we're both unhappy and living a sham marriage, so let's try to find a way out that minimizes impact on the kids.
I'd need a smoking gun, though, as she'd never admit to it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476485)
|
Date: October 18th, 2017 11:53 PM Author: Angry Quadroon Immigrant
“After all,” said Clare. “they had a right to happiness.”
We were discussing something that once happened in our own neighborhood. Mr. A. had deserted Mrs. A. and got his divorce in order to marry Mrs. B., who had likewise got her divorce in order to marry Mr. A. And there was certainly no doubt that Mr. A. and Mrs. B. were very much in love with one another. If they continued to be in love, and if nothing went wrong with their health or their income, they might reasonably expect to be very happy.
It was equally clear that they were not happy with their old partners. Mrs. B. had adored her husband at the outset. But then he got smashed up in the war. It was thought he had lost his virility, and it was known that he had lost his job. Life with him was no longer what Mrs. B. had bargained for. Poor Mrs. A., too. She had lost her looks—and all her liveliness. It might be true, as some said, that she consumed herself by bearing his children and nursing him through the long illness that overshadowed their earlier married life.
You mustn’t, by the way, imagine that A. was the sort of man who nonchalantly threw a wife away like the peel of an orange he’d sucked dry. Her suicide was a terrible shock to him. We all knew this, for he told us so himself. “But what could I do?” he said. “A man has a right to happiness. I had to take my one chance when it came.”
I went away thinking about the concept of a “right to happiness.”
At first this sounds to me as odd as a right to good luck. For I believe—whatever one school of moralists may say—that we depend for a very great deal of our happiness or misery on circumstances outside all human control. A right to happiness doesn’t, for me, make much more sense than a right to be six feet tall, or have a millionaire for your father, or to get good weather whenever you want to have a picnic.
I can understand a right as a freedom guaranteed me by the laws of the society I live in. Thus, I have a right to travel along the public roads because society gives me that freedom; that’s what we mean by calling the roads “public.” I can also understand a right as a claim guaranteed me by the laws, and correlative to an obligation on someone else’s part. If I have a right to receive $100 from you, this is another way of saying that you have a duty to pay me $100. If the laws allow Mr. A. to desert his wife and seduce his neighbor’s wife, then, by definition, Mr. A. has a legal right to do so, and we need bring in no talk about happiness.
But of course that was not what Clare meant. She meant that he had not only a legal but a moral right to act as he did. In other words, Clare is—or would be if she thought it out—a classical moralist after the style of Thomas Aquinas, Grotius, Hooker and Locke. She believes that behind the laws of the state there is a Natural Law.
I agree with her. I hold this conception to be basic to all civilization. Without it, the actual laws of the state become an absolute, as in Hegel. They cannot be criticized because there is no norm against which they should be judged.
The ancestry of Clare’s maxim. “They have a right to happiness,” is august. In words that are cherished by all civilized men, but especially by Americans, it has been laid down that one of the rights of man is a right to “the pursuit of happiness.” And now we get to the real point.
What did the writers of that august declaration mean?
It is quite certain what they did not mean. They did not mean that man was entitled to pursue happiness by any and every means—including, say, murder, rape, robbery, treason and fraud. No society could be built on such a basis.
They meant “to pursue happiness by all lawful means”; that is, by all means which the Law of Nature eternally sanctions and which the laws of the nation shall sanction.
Admittedly this seems at first to reduce their maxim to the tautology that men (in pursuit of happiness) have a right to do whatever they have a right to do. But tautologies, seen against their proper historical context, are not always barren tautologies. The declaration is primarily a denial of the political principles which long governed Europe; a challenge flung down to the Austrian and Russian empires, to England before the Reform Bills, to Bourbon France. It demands that whatever means of pursuing happiness are lawful for any should be lawful for alll that “man,” not men of some particular cast, class, status or religion, should be free to use them. In a century when this is being unsaid by nation after nation and party after party, let us not call it a barren tautology.
But the question as to what means are “lawful”—what methods of pursuing happiness are either morally permissible by the Law of Nature or should be declared legally permissible by the legislature of a particular nation—remains exactly where it did. And on that question I disagree with Clare. I don’t think it is obvious that people have the unlimited “right to happiness” which she suggests.
For one thing, I believe that Clare, when she says “happiness,” means simply and solely “sexual happiness.” Partly because women like Clare never use the word “happiness” in any other sense. But also because I never heard Clare talk about the “right” to any other kind. She was rather leftist in her politics, and would have been scandalized if anyone had defended the actions of a ruthless man-eating tycoon on the ground that his happiness consisted in making money and he was pursuing his happiness. She was also a rabid teetotaler; I never heard her excuse an alcoholic because he was happy when he was drunk.
A good many of Clare’s friends, and especially her female friends, often felt—I’ve heard them say so—that their own happiness would be perceptibly increased by boxing her ears. I very much doubt if this would have brought her theory of a right to happiness into play.
Clare, in fact, is doing what the whole western world seems to me to have been doing for the last 40-odd years. When I was a youngster, all the progressive people were saying, “Why all this prudery? Let us treat sex just as we treat all our other impulses.” I was simple-minded enough to believe they meant what they said. I have since discovered that they meant exactly the opposite. They meant that sex was to be treated as no other impulse in our nature has ever been treated by civilized people. All the others, we admit, have to be bridled. Absolute obedience to your instinct for self-preservation is what we call cowardice; to your acquisitive impulse, avarice. Even sleep must be resisted if you’re a sentry. But every unkindness and breach of faith seems to be condoned provided that the object aimed at is “four bare legs in a bed.”
It is like having a morality in which stealing fruit is considered wrong—unless you steal nectarines.
And if you protest against this view you are usually met with chatter about the legitimacy and beauty and sanctity of “sex” and accused of harboring some Puritan prejudice against it as something disreputable or shameful. I deny the charge. Foam-born Venus … golden Aphrodite … Our Lady of Cyprus… I never breathed a word against you. If I object to boys who steal my nectarines, must I be supposed to disapprove of nectarines in general? Or even of boys in general? It might, you know, be stealing that I disapproved of.
The real situation is skillfully concealed by saying that the question of Mr. A’s “right” to desert his wife is one of “sexual morality.” Robbing an orchard is not an offense against some special morality called “fruit morality.” It is an offense against honesty. Mr. A’s action is an offense against good faith (to solemn promises), against gratitude (toward one to whom he was deeply indebted) and against common humanity.
Our sexual impulses are thus being put in a position of preposterous privilege. The sexual motive is taken to condone all sorts of behavior which, if it had any other end in view, would be condemned as merciless, treacherous and unjust.
Now though I see no good reason for giving sex this privilege, I think I see a strong cause. It is this.
It is part of the nature of a strong erotic passion—as distinct from a transient fit of appetite—that makes more towering promises than any other emotion. No doubt all our desires makes promises, but not so impressively. To be in love involves the almost irresistible conviction that one will go on being in love until one dies, and that possession of the beloved will confer, not merely frequent ecstasies, but settled, fruitful, deep-rooted, lifelong happiness. Hence all seems to be at stake. If we miss this chance we shall have lived in vain. At the very thought of such a doom we sink into fathomless depths of self-pity.
Unfortunately these promises are found often to be quite untrue. Every experienced adult knows this to be so as regards all erotic passions (except the one he himself is feeling at the moment). We discount the world-without-end pretensions of our friends’ amours easily enough. We know that such things sometimes last—and sometimes don’t. And when they do last, this is not because they promised at the outset to do so. When two people achieve lasting happiness, this is not solely because they are great lovers but because they are also—I must put it crudely—good people; controlled, loyal, fair-minded, mutually adaptable people.
If we establish a “right to (sexual) happiness” which supersedes all the ordinary rules of behavior, we do so not because of what our passion shows itself to be in experience but because of what it professes to be while we are in the grip of it. Hence, while the bad behavior is real and works miseries and degradations, the happiness which was the object of the behavior turns out again and again to be illusory. Everyone (except Mr. A. and Mrs. B.) knows that Mr. A. in a year or so may have the same reason for deserting his new wife as for deserting his old. He will feel again that all is at stake. He will see himself again as the great lover, and his pity for himself will exclude all pity for the woman.
Two further points remain.
One is this. A society in which conjugal infidelity is tolerated must always be in the long run a society adverse to women. Women, whatever a few male songs and satires may say to the contrary, are more naturally monogamous than men; it is a biological necessity. Where promiscuity prevails, they will therefore always be more often the victims than the culprits. Also, domestic happiness is more necessary to them than to us. And the quality by which they most easily hold a man, their beauty, decreases every year after they have come to maturity, but this does not happen to those qualities of personality —women don’t really care two cents about our looks—by which we hold women. Thus in the ruthless war of promiscuity women are at a double disadvantage. They play for higher stakes and are also more likely to lose. I have no sympathy with moralists who frown at the increasing crudity of female provocativeness. These signs of desperate competition fill me with pity.
Secondly, though the “right to happiness” is chiefly claimed for the sexual impulse, it seems to be impossible that the matter should stay there. The fatal principle, once allowed in that department, must sooner or later seep through our whole lives. We thus advance toward a state of society in which not only each man but every impulse in each man claims carte blanche. And then, though our technological skill may help us survive a little longer, our civilization will have died at heart, and will—one dare not even add “unfortunately”—be swept away.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476547)
|
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 12:14 AM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Seems like the illustrative story is a strawman. The characters are hopelessly one-dimensional (war hero that has lost his virility; mother that has sacrificed her beauty and value).
My facts are not the same as my wife/wifey/m'lady is in fact very attractive.
I also think this whole tale assumes out of hand that women need men to be happy, and forgets that often women are the unappy members seeking divorce (as is typically the case).
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476667) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 12:47 AM Author: Claret Provocative Public Bath Skinny Woman
The prognosis is not good for the second marriage:
- guy who is willing to cheat on his wife and mother of children and then leave them for younger girl;
marries
- girl who is willing to cheat with a married man and break up a family;
Not exactly a pair of people you can see being highly committed to fidelity in their marriage.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34476882) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 1:31 AM Author: Fragrant school cafeteria associate
in this clusterfuck of a thread: the Jenna Haze definitive biography chapter 1
also, shame on the OP for this. this fucker needs to atone like Cersei Lannister and strip down and have Rachmiel shadow him to remind him every second of his massive shame
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34477099) |
|
Date: October 19th, 2017 12:46 PM Author: Vibrant cowardly theatre
"I remember reading a detailed longitudinal study that showed that while divorce is bad for kids, staying in a high-conflict marriage is worse."
false dichotomy - the husband ALWAYS has the choice to sacrifice his own happiness and become henpecked in order to keep his kids unfucked
high conflict marriage implies man putting his desires above his kids
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34479315) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 7:27 AM Author: poppy athletic conference
Your kids will be permanently fucked up by the fact that you chose sex with a younger woman over keeping your family together.
Instead of spending time fucking your mistress maybe you should try counselling w your wife and family time w your children.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34477618) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 8:10 AM Author: hairraiser gaped cuck candlestick maker
Threads and analyses like this make me so sad.
Recall that right now you are not comparing two things, your wife and your mistress, in the appropriate light. Let's put the analogy in different terms: the car you own v. the car you rent. The car you own is a pain--the mileage is running up, the oil changes seem never ending, the tires keep wearing out and you dump money into new ones only to see one go flat again. And then you get in a rental, and it's a dream--it's fresh, it's clean, you never have to maintain it. And suddenly, you think, "Why am I such a sucker? I'll just buy this rental."
...of course, you never suddenly think that. Because you know that when you buy the rental, you'll suddenly have to take ownership of all of the things that come along with it, all of the hidden costs that were absorbed by the company that you never dealt with in your temporary relationship with that car.
Your wife may seem like a drag and a pain, but it is because you are a child (here I'll get a little insulting) who is incapable of doing the hard, gritty work necessary to make a tough relationship work. The day-to-day of life can make things tough, miserable, and seemingly unbearable. But you can't even start to compare it to your mistress. Your mistress doesn't have these issues because she isn't really a part of your life yet, and when she is a part of your life, the same issues will recur, albeit perhaps in different forms or intensity.
I'll just echo the selfishness points of others in this thread, but my tiny contribution here is to say you're doing the comparison all wrong, and I hope you can take a moment to reflect on that fact.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34477699) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 9:31 AM Author: fishy fantasy-prone mother crotch
I've got a marriage like the Vietnam war, so I've been in the shit, and here's my thoughts:
1) "Tale as old as time" is from Beauty and the Beast. Watch that movie, it didn't work out too well for the Beast: he went from having his own place, fucking shit up, being all alpha and awesome to having to clean up, wearing pants, and eventually almost getting killed by some beta orbiter. The worst thing that ever happened to the Beast was Belle, think about that.
2) I'll be curious how this works out. While you have to know that relationships that start out this way have a lower percentage of working out, it is not unheard of to find another woman, leave your wife, and for things to work out. Just because something bad could happen doesn't mean it will, and maybe this works out for you.
3) You have to come to peace with the fact that you're going to get fleeced in this divorce. Accept it, pay the alimony and sanctions, and be happy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34477967) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 10:41 AM Author: hyperactive twisted house
This sounds like it's in everyone's best interests:
Your kids get to be raised by their loving mom, and not by a soulless sociopath like you.
The mom will get a good deal financially in the divorce, so she and your kids will be set. She'll eventually remarry someone who either a)actually loves her or b) is better-looking/richer.
You'll get the "freedom" to "smash young cunnus" for a while, until you get sick of your mistress, too, and dump her, too.
Your mistress will get the joy of having you all to herself until you guys inevitably cheat on one another or otherwise split.
And best of all, you'll eventually gain the wisdom of knowing that divorce in these sorts of circumstances is almost never a good idea. Perhaps you'll post and share your experience with another future poster who will find himself in a similar situation someday.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478419) |
Date: October 19th, 2017 11:53 AM Author: Vibrant cowardly theatre
also op i can almost guarantee you the problem is at least half your fault and not all wife
you're probably doing some selfish shit you don't think she cares about as much as she actually does, like not washing dishes right after using them, little things that wives care 100x more about than husbands, but it's so easy to fix
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#34478942) |
|
Date: July 24th, 2019 11:13 PM Author: sapphire cerebral hell
Thanks for the human concern. It would be great if you had any actual concern, as opposed to mere snark, but here we are.
In any event: left the mistress. Stayed with the wife. She continues to take, take, take, and display no interest in partnership or building something together as a team. Kids are starting to notice something is amiss but are still young and naive.
I stayed because my kids are my primary joy in life and I couldn't bear to see them less, and because I couldn't ascertain the negative impact on them by and through a divorce.
My general view on things moving forward: who knows how long it will last. Likely we end up divorced anyway. How to deal with a partner that doesn't feel any sense of fairness? How to form a team with a partner that opts out? Many things to say but few on this site will understand. Frankly I think blowing it up at a young age for the kids and moving forward aggressively may have been better but we'll see if relationship repair (on the third attempt) works out.
My XOXO view: I'm surprised to learn that had I painted myself as more of a victim my message would have been more well received. I expect that in the general populace but not here on this nerdsite.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#38584174)
|
|
Date: July 25th, 2019 11:57 AM Author: naked rebellious jap weed whacker
That sounds terrible bro. I've been there on toxic relationships, but fortunately we had no kids so I could jump ship and did so.
Truly sorry for your situation. You may be on to something regarding divorcing now while the kids are young. Growing up in a household with poorly matched parents may be even worse for the kids.
Maybe try counseling? I dunno man. Good luck.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#38586477) |
|
Date: July 25th, 2019 12:08 PM Author: contagious beta heaven
1) have you and wife been to counseling? Is she seeing a therapist on her own? Are you? Are either of you currently on any mental health meds?
2) how old are kids now? The analysis of effect on kids seems hugely dependent on their own personalities and how well they deal with change/challenges, how much resilience they exhibit, etc. Has oldest (have both?) changed schools from pre-school to KG and if so how’d that go?
I hadn’t seen this thread before today and am interested in your situation for my own reasons:
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=4247129&mc=65&forum_id=2
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=4303838&mc=103&forum_id=2
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3768244&forum_id=2#38586523)
|
|
|