pursuing married women

[sodbuster]

well, my pistol is in one drawer and my camera[for evidence at the divorce is in another]. I can honestly say I don't know which one I'd grab. Play it however you want to. Now if you want my ex wife, I might even give you her phone #. BUT i'm not putting up with her **** trying to make the marriage work in exchange for the implied exclusive access.

Where I live, a guy caught 2 rustlers and klled them both-the county sheriff ruled murder suicide by the rustlers.

I THINK texas still has a law on the books that will let a husband off in that situation for temporary insanity.

 

[acw]

ehh....yeah...there are lots of hot married women out there...and a lot of them fluckround on the side....but when you consider the position that you are putting yourself in...it hardly seems worth it.

Make sure she has a much to loose as you do. But remember, these things always backfire.

Its bad enough dating someone who has a bad relationship with her x....

As a general rule, pursuing married women is a bad idea.

 

[ketostix]

I think there's a difference between pursuing married women and being pursued by married women. In other words if you stumble acrossed a married woman and she sends you signals that's different from intentionally seeking out married women and trying to seduce them.

 

[STR8UP]

I think there's a difference between pursuing married women and being pursued by married women. In other words if you stumble acrossed a married woman and she sends you signals that's different from intentionally seeking out married women and trying to seduce them.

I would venture to guess that at least 9 out of 10 affairs are instigated the married woman herself, NOT by other man, as our "women are always the victim" society would like us to believe.

The last one I fukked was certainly the instigator. She goes on vacation 1000 miles from home, and it was her mission to get fukked. I just happened to be the "available" guy who met her minimum standards. I didn't seduce her with my wit and charm. I went home. Then I get the phone call from the mutual friend "You should come over.....Stacy wants to make out with you!".

No...sorry....that wouldn't be right!

psshhh...

Now I have a married ex g/f contacting me on facebook. Does she want to cheat? Can't really tell, but I'll say one thing- I'm not doing anything whatsoever to facilitate that happening, but she keeps asking if she can call me, wants to meet for lunch, etc. At minimum it is totally inappropriate for her to be contacting ex b/f's.

Going to meet up with an old fling when I head out of town in a couple of weeks. Apparently she has a serious b/f. Does she want to fukk? Who knows, but if she certainly isn't acting as if she has a b/f, and I'm not putting any effort into seducing her.

If you feel like doing it- go for it. If you don't, someone will.

 

[jophil28]

Its bad enough dating someone who has a bad relationship with her x....

As a general rule, pursuing married women is a bad idea.

Two very good points..

I have done both in the past. Both ended in hostility.

Dating a woman who "has a bad relationship with her x" is almost a guarantee that she will puke her unfinished anger all over you. At the least you will hear her endless victim stories of how bad he acted and how innocent she was. At the worst, you will become her dartboard.

Pursuing a married woman is AFC in the extreme. It reeks of desperation and demonstrates a total lack of self respect and an absence of other choices.

 

[Ballie]

Married women are easy to fvck. They will approach you and seduce you. I am talking with experience here. Then they will use you as a FB. Cool s*x without strings attached, you think initially.

Well if she is BPD as mine was, then there are problems - she will make sure that hubby finds out, pick fights with him and come over, even if you don't want her to.

Done it once - never again. Not worth the hassles believe me.

 

[acw]

Another thing to consider is the Legality of this should it blow up in your face and you become the defendant in a Trial.

Think for a moment of how a jury will look at you....hmmmm?

JURY CONFAB: "That's the snake who was bangin that guys wife. I'd be pissed as hell...even if she and i SHE AND I were through....that's not right...i think we should give him the maximum sentence."

;-)

 

[speed dawg]

And perhaps I have a little itch to be the 'other' guy and not the 'nice' guy anymore.

You have insecurity issues. You enjoy pleasure at the expense of someone else's pain? Awesome. This can be good or bad. If you're cheating with a scandalous woman who married some AFC and was going to cheat anyway, then I'm all for it. You can degrade the b1tch at the same time teach the AFC a lesson. But if you're going out and specifically targeting married women just because you like the challenge of being "better" than the man she's married to, then you are scum of the Earth.

Find another challenge you ridiculous sack of sh1t.

 

[Deep Dish]

acw: Another thing to consider is the Legality of this should it blow up in your face and you become the defendant in a Trial.

This comment made me curious. A defendant in what trial? This question lead me to "alienation of affections," which is when a spouse sues the lover of his cheating spouse for the failure of their marriage. The law was popular in the 19th century but has since been abolished by all but eight states--Hawaii, Illinois, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah. Hawaii and New Hampshire are geographically small, New Mexico and South Dakota have low population density, and few people are Mormons. So, chances are, very few men would need to worry about a civil lawsuit.

 

[standard toaster]

You have insecurity issues. You enjoy pleasure at the expense of someone else's pain? Awesome. This can be good or bad. If you're cheating with a scandalous woman who married some AFC and was going to cheat anyway, then I'm all for it. You can degrade the b1tch at the same time teach the AFC a lesson. But if you're going out and specifically targeting married women just because you like the challenge of being "better" than the man she's married to, then you are scum of the Earth.

Find another challenge you ridiculous sack of sh1t.

lol, ummk. so it's ok if I can 'degrade and teach a lesson' at the same time but I am a sack of **** if I only pursue the woman?

 

[acw]

Forget the Civil suit....what about Criminal?

Who knows how a scandalous relationship would be viewed by a Jury convening on a murder trial in which the defendant was bangin the murder victims wife...

Get it....?

This comment made me curious. A defendant in what trial? This question lead me to "alienation of affections," which is when a spouse sues the lover of his cheating spouse for the failure of their marriage. The law was popular in the 19th century but has since been abolished by all but eight states--Hawaii, Illinois, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Mississippi, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Utah. Hawaii and New Hampshire are geographically small, New Mexico and South Dakota have low population density, and few people are Mormons. So, chances are, very few men would need to worry about a civil lawsuit.

 

[Deep Dish]

Forget the Civil suit....what about Criminal?

Who knows how a scandalous relationship would be viewed by a Jury convening on a murder trial in which the defendant was bangin the murder victims wife...

Get it....?

Don't be absurd. Homicide rates, even at their heighest -- Detroit has 45 homicides per 100,000 residents -- are extremely remote and almost never happen; the only reason people think homicides are not rare is by watching the local news, but the systemic problem with journalism is its perpetual focus on events which essentially never happen. On the other hand, at least 40% of spouses cheat -- or about 40,000 per 100,000. If you compare the number of cheating spouses against the number of murders, there is no reasonable justification to argue homicide is a significant enough possibility to warrant contemplative consideration. In fact, if you rule out the many murders which stem from drug deals and brawls between spouses, the number of trials of a wife's lover standing accused of murdering the husband is essentially non-existent. And yet, you say to "forget" focusing on civil lawsuits... which are extremely more likely!

 

[acw]

Absurd...???

Is that a rhetorical statement?....LOL.

Bud...i'm a Big Guy and i don't back down from fights...i also have a little more experience than you.

...When you start to get around,...things happen (when you start gettin some heavy action you will meet the X or current BF. Obviously you haven't been tapping any Hot P...else you wouldn't have made that statment). When you are bangin the Hotties...you will be competiting with the other DOMINANT males for the Primo Puss...

And when you reach that level (if you ever do), You will meet the X or BF through happen stance or just moving through life in your area of the world (unless you sit home and play nintendo all night).

As the say..."shat happens all by itself"...no need to hasten it by being stupid.

But hey...maybe your James Bond and can dodge bullets or maybe you're Chris Angel and can make people disappear?

I've tagged a few X's in my day...and believe me...next would come the pistol if it went any further. I don't like AH and don't take **** from anyone (unless i have to)....But that's me.

Now you on the other hand...maybe you are smarter than everyone. Hell you got the odds book right in front of you....maybe you like the dare...or the thrill of banging someone's wife...i've been there and i know what that's about...

...Now if you're an "Average Chump"..then yeah...you will fall into the mean average and not have any scurmishes...lol.

But...hey...have at it young man...!


"Don't be absurd. Homicide rates, even at their heighest -- Detroit has 45 homicides per 100,000 residents -- are extremely remote and almost never happen; the only reason people think homicides are not rare is by watching the local news, but the systemic problem with journalism is its perpetual focus on events which essentially never happen. On the other hand, at least 40% of spouses cheat -- or about 40,000 per 100,000. If you compare the number of cheating spouses against the number of murders, there is no reasonable justification to argue homicide is a significant enough possibility to warrant contemplative consideration. In fact, if you rule out the many murders which stem from drug deals and brawls between spouses, the number of trials of a wife's lover standing accused of murdering the husband is essentially non-existent. And yet, you say to "forget" focusing on civil lawsuits... which are extremely more likely!"

 

[Deep Dish]

I certainly do not question the anger, territoriality, and violence which accompanies men who know or believe a particular individual man has dipped into his honey jar. In fact, I have twice experienced the rage of men who thought I was doing some hanky panky when in fact I was an innocent bystander, and thankfully physical violence did not transpire. However, where I disagree and find preposterous—indeed, perennially absurd—is the very specific theoretical argument of murder, specifically. I can most definitely envision outcomes of battery and I grant aggravated battery, although rarer, seems still within reasonable plausibility—but not murder. Viewing the issue from aggregate sociological statistics is far more reliably representative—not theoretically perfect but more reliable—of the realistic frequency of particular outcomes than some tough guy posturing he'd actually murder some dude. Once again, murders are extremely rare compared to competing outcomes and, for all intents and purposes, essentially never happen. Even by your own admission, no situation ever transpired which went further to a pistol.

 

[acw]

I'll tell you what's absurd...your argument.

--and even then...you dilute your own position by agreeing with me.

Its a foregone conclusion that violence between males, other males and females will escalate when the dam is breached.

Litterally 10' of thousands of females have been murdered by their Xs during a breakup or divorce. In fact there have been so Many women who have been murdered by their X that that Laws were passed around the nation to help prevent this tragedy----but once again---you seem to know better (sigh).

That's why, my friend, it is so easy for a women to get a restraining order against a male with one simple phone call (the accusation doesn't even have to be true).

Those in Law enforcement will concur with my position.

--on such an important subject--i would suggest you ask your nearest Cop friend what he thinks--maybe he can talk some sense into you.

I certainly do not question the anger, territoriality, and violence which accompanies men who know or believe a particular individual man has dipped into his honey jar. In fact, I have twice experienced the rage of men who thought I was doing some hanky panky when in fact I was an innocent bystander, and thankfully physical violence did not transpire. However, where I disagree and find preposterous—indeed, perennially absurd—is the very specific theoretical argument of murder, specifically. I can most definitely envision outcomes of battery and I grant aggravated battery, although rarer, seems still within reasonable plausibility—but not murder. Viewing the issue from aggregate sociological statistics is far more reliably representative—not theoretically perfect but more reliable—of the realistic frequency of particular outcomes than some tough guy posturing he'd actually murder some dude. Once again, murders are extremely rare compared to competing outcomes and, for all intents and purposes, essentially never happen. Even by your own admission, no situation ever transpired which went further to a pistol.

 

[Deep Dish]

You dilute your own position by agreeing with me.

My position remains standing and unadulterated because I did not concede agreement. Framing the issue is not concession and within the framed issue was no concession.

Literally 10' of thousands of females have been murdered by their Xs during a breakup or divorce. In fact there have been so Many women who have been murdered by their X that that Laws were passed around the nation to help prevent this tragedy----but once again---you seem to know better (sigh).

We are not debating domestic violence between spouses. We are debating husbands versus outside third parties. Ergo, henceforth, your rebuttal is moot. Furthermore, are those tens of thousands women murdered annually or an accumulated body count? Even if, hypothetically speaking, the figure of tens of thousands referred to the lovers of cheating wifes (or as you had originally argued, the murdered husbands), it would pale in comparison to the 60 million married couples, of 30 million wives of whom at least 12 million will engage in extramarital affairs sometime during their marriage(s). The only question would be how many spouses cheat annually. But once again it's all irrelevant because your argument is moot. You may be a formidable force who never backs down from a fist fight, but you are abysmal at intellectual debate.

 

[john siegal]

...Merely for the sake of argument, you spout off using 50 cent words and freudian arguments that are loosing everyone's attention.

The point he's trying to make is...."don't fuke with married women!"...and fuking with married women may get you in a lot of trouble....maybe even Legal trouble....Why is that so hard to get?

I therefore concur..."just avoid dating married women. Plenty of single chicks out there to Bang...."

 

[john siegal]

...Merely for the sake of argument, you spout off using 50 cent words and freudian arguments that are loosing everyone's attention.

The point he's trying to make is...."don't fuke with married women!"...and fuking with married women may get you in a lot of trouble....maybe even Legal trouble....Why is that so hard to get?

I therefore concur..."just avoid dating married women. Plenty of single chicks out there to Bang...."

My position remains standing and unadulterated because I did not concede agreement. Framing the issue is not concession and within the framed issue was no concession.We are not debating domestic violence between spouses. We are debating husbands versus outside third parties. Ergo, henceforth, your rebuttal is moot. Furthermore, are those tens of thousands women murdered annually or an accumulated body count? Even if, hypothetically speaking, the figure of tens of thousands referred to the lovers of cheating wifes (or as you had originally argued, the murdered husbands), it would pale in comparison to the 60 million married couples, of 30 million wives of whom at least 12 million will engage in extramarital affairs sometime during their marriage(s). The only question would be how many spouses cheat annually. But once again it's all irrelevant because your argument is moot. You may be a formidable force who never backs down from a fist fight, but you are abysmal at intellectual debate.

 

[Colossus]

Deep Dish is patently correct here---I think you are just arguing for the sake of argument.

The likelihood of a third party getting murdered by an enraged husband in a extramarital affair is so low statistically speaking that this in itself is a poor argument for not pursuing married women.

A better line of reasoning would be that given the stakes inherent in an extramarital affair and the potential for you to get caught in a very uncomfortable situation, your time would be much better spent pursuing the abundance of single women without this kind of baggage.

 

[Deep Dish]

john siegal:
You spout off... 50 cent words.

I had a ten dollar budget.

...and freudian arguments that are loosing everyone's attention.

This spurious statement is fittingly full of flaky fluff. I believe I am done with this discussion.