The problem for me is that we have no reason to let any person denigrate members of our community in the fashion that she has been doing so. Even if they're hurting, that doesn't give someone a pass to treat people the way that she has been doing so. Originally Posted by jbravo_123And I have no problem with members here pushing back on that part. It is the number of people who assume the breakup was her fault, that she wasn't sexually available for her husband and that is why he did it, etc.
I don't have any idea if she was or was not--but for some to say:
"Yeah, you never refused but you never made yourself available. Oh, there was always something in life that seemed more important at the time than sex. Finishing the laundry, putting the whining kids to bed and reading to them until they fell asleep. Walking the dog that one last time before you go to bed, dishes put away. Once everything else was done, then and only then, could you relax and be a lover. Except you've squandered away enough of the evening that now he's too tired, has to get up at 5:30 and really needs some rest. But what's worse to him is that he now lays awake wondering why you don't want to have sex with him. Why you find every excuse in the world not to fuck him."
Again, my point is wee have no idea what happened, but there are plenty here who presume to know--and all have pronounced her guilty because--it seems--they want her to be guilty. Or some of the guys are easing their own conscious I don't really know.
I know guys who sound just like boardman. I've heard almost the same exact comments. But when I commented that they could increase their chances by helping put the kids to bed, or doing the dishes while she is walking the dog, etc., it becomes, "that's her job, not mine. I have to watch football."
I wonder if some of them truly believe a 3 year old should put himself to bed. Or the dog should shit in the living room. Or what.
I am certainly not condemning all guys by any means--but it comes back to a hanging judge holding trial with no witnesses or evidence.
PS: Just wondering why WU is not castigating the husband and supporting the wife in this case? Seems it would fit his belief system.
Me, I don't know which side is at fault, and since I don't, I prefer neither to condemn nor sanctify the OP.
Speaking of WU: it is actually rather simple--not all truths serve a good purpose by being made public. And gratuitously attacking someone just because you can makes for a pretty hostile environment--especially when they are not likely to absorb what you said. But I know there ARE some people who do get satisfaction from gang tackling the wounded so I am not surprised by the behavior, just saddened by those who see the need.
