Originally posted by jOhO:
thanx for your response, not that it's in point!

in essence, i just wanted to point out to you that sometimes it's not so easy to just say "u cheat one me, ok fine, we're done"...
so let's address what you've said. i fully understand how a woman (like yourself) wouldn't rely on her man fully becos of all these "lessons" learnt. be it fear, practicality or culture, it's a very commonsense way to safeguard urself.
however i'm quite idealistic and it's my view that while u are NOT totally reliant on ur man, you would still do so becos u love him. then again, in this day and age, as u mentioned, there are hardly any women out there that will die without their man. we are all educated, male or female and have pretty much the same opportunities. (within reason, there are still traditional companies that don't usually promote women to top levels becos they believe a woman cannot fully concentrate on her work becos of kids and family - that's another topic let's address that elsewhere)
it is a leap of faith. having already established the fact that women won't need to rely on her man for her financial and physical needs, perhaps it's the emotional reliance that is the essence of love, which you didn't mention, so i won't assume that u believe that even emotionally, women should be self-sufficient.
i bring to ur attention the risk u mentioned of being like the woman in the article (hence the need be able to not to rely on your man fully). and sorry for being concise and perhaps blunt, if you can't take this risk, then dun get married. period. are u anyway?
just being idealistic me.
ok, back to that woman in the article. since you are educated and able to work and support yourself and 4 children, would u still choose to leave the man if you were her?
ahha i dun give up do i? dun mean to corner you, since u seem vocal and definitely can express urself in good english, i thot i might request a response.
feel free to "challenge" me if u wish. lovely discussion so far.
i wonder in what respect was my response "not in point"? perhaps i did not comprehend the full essense of what you're asking?
i acknowledge the fact that it's not easy for her and also that i fully understand why she had to accept what he did and forgive him despite her misgivings. perhaps you did not read my reply fully before saying what you said?
Originally posted by neuros:
"much as i do not endorse her reluctant acceptance of the situation, i fully understand why she can do it.
so yes, if i were to be in her shoe, i might be doing the same thing as she is. or i might not. what i'm saying is that i'm not judging her and her actions as i do not have that right or priviledge to. i do not profess to be self-righteous in this respect.
what i AM saying is that as women we should do our best to prevent ourselves from landing in HER shoes. her shoes being totally helpless when the man commits a fault. her shoes being left with little choice but to stay on, albeit with reluctance and perhaps, bitterness. i'm not saying her shoes as being betrayed, and being in possession of an unfaithful basket of a husband - that, afterall is within little of her control.
I'm idealistic too. But love and reliance are not equivocal. if i do not die without my man, it does not mean that i do not love him. in a relationship, we're both part of a partnership, as well as individuals unto ourselves.
I never denied the emotional aspect of love either. perhaps, again, you didn't read my post properly.
Originally posted by neuros:
if we can't protect ourselves from the emotional hurt, at least take care of ourselves on the physical, monetary front.
precisely because we are unable to safeguard our emotions in a relationship, having taken the "leap of faith" that you mentioned, all the more necessary it is for us to safeguard ourselves physicalyl and emotionally, no?
it is all very well to say when you love someone, you trust him or her. but again, who marries someone without trusting him or her? if we don't trust him/her, why marry? but again and again, we see that trust betrayed.
NOTE: i'm NOT saying don't trust your partner. i'm just saying be careful and leave something for yourself to fall back on.
we all think we're invincible. but we're not.
we can trust the other person and be relatively self-sufficient at the same point too, you know. i don't believe they're mutually exclusive. unless you're saying once i married and love the person i've to take all my money from him, spend every cent or return him every cent that i didn't spend such that i do not keep anything for myself. else that's not love? ridiculous notion, huh?
i'm willing to take the risk of emotional suffering if i really really love the person. if i love him, i probably can't help myself, committing to him spiritually and emotionally, entirely. but what i can help is being left high and dry in the event of any adversity happening. it's already painful enough coping with the feeling and hurt of betrayal - why make it more difficult for yourself by having no choice but to swallow it?
i'm also not saying to definitely not forgive the straying man (though i personally would find it extremely hard), but to forgive him because you love him and treasure the family/relationship is very different from forgiving him because you need the money to feed yourself and your kids. again, i'm not saying that the woman in the article is purely the latter but you cannot deny that there is that element. if given a choice (i.e. she can fully support herself and her kids) AND she still goes back to him, then i'd think their relationship might then be more worth saving and stands a better chance of starting afresh. otherwise, there might always be the resentment and sense of helplessness/bitterness even if she's physically by his side.
and no worries, i'm dun feel cornered. nor am i challenging you. just an exchange of viewpoints.
