Would You Tolerate SO Continued Dialogue With Past Lover?

[fastfredracing]

When my ex sent my a FB friend request, I asked my SO , if I accept, will it cause any problems. SHe was o.k with it, but just for good measure, I gave her my FB password, and if there is any ever doubt , I tell her to just go have a look for herself.

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

you'd be a fool to invest in a woman who would allow some other man to "steal" her from you.

Originally Posted by tweezers74

This. I don't mind it if the guy I am dating is talking to an old girlfriend. There is a reason why they aren't with them. I don't concern myself on ways to keep my man from straying. I concern myself on ways to make him happy so that he doesn't even think of straying because he knows what he has is the best out there.

I was trying to come up with a nice way of saying that you are naive, cockerpunk. Obviously you are also stubborn. Oh well....learn the hard way. And Tweezers, why would your man buy when he can rent?

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by rusnak

I was trying to come up with a nice way of saying that you are naive, cockerpunk. Obviously you are also stubborn. Oh well....learn the hard way. And Tweezers, why would your man buy when he can rent?

if the woman i am with would cheat on me with an ex, then i shouldn't be with her in the first place. similarly, if she is so afraid and untrusting as to dislike/disprove/get mad about me meeting with an ex, then that shows that our relationship is a sham, and i should be out of there anyway.

its not naive, its being moral and truthful in your relationship.

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

if the woman i am with would cheat on me with an ex, then i shouldn't be with her in the first place. similarly, if she is so afraid and untrusting as to dislike/disprove/get mad about me meeting with an ex, then that shows that our relationship is a sham, and i should be out of there anyway.

its not naive, its being moral and truthful in your relationship.

^ Naive.

You will find out that the world is not a perfect place that fits into your theories of how it should be.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by rusnak

^ Naive.

You will find out that the world is not a perfect place that fits into your theories of how it should be.

so you are proposing that you are ok with forming a lifelong moral, ethical and legal relationship, with possible children, with someone you don't trust enough to sit down and have a cup of coffee with someone, without ****ing them?

really?

have some standards my god.

[McLovin]

Well, first the initial post seems to contemplate a continuing dialog, not a one time cup of coffee.

But second, it just strikes me as an odd thing. I guess maybe it depends on how long it's been. My wife and I have been married almost 25 years.

It just seems odd that some former sexual partner, after all this time, would attempt to re-initiate contact with my wife.

That just doesn't seem normal to me. I know I'd never do that to any of my formers. It's creepy.

And if someone did that to me, like called me up and asked to meet for lunch or coffee, I'd say to them "Umm, yeah, nice hearing from you but I'll be passing on your lunch date proposal, but hey, you take care now! Click."

I just can't fathom, even for a second, why I - as a happily married man - would ever want to take up a former on that out-of-the-blue contact. I can't fathom why anyone would do that.

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

so you are proposing that you are ok with forming a lifelong moral, ethical and legal relationship, with possible children, with someone you don't trust enough to sit down and have a cup of coffee with someone, without ****ing them?

really?

have some standards my god.

Are you proposing that you can modify or control another person's behavior by modifying your own? You can "will" them to be honest with you because you expect that of them eh?

What I am saying is that your "standards" should be made clear that you are not ok with your SO hanging out with guy friends. I think to the experienced person, that is so obvious you don't even need to point that out. But you're so dense I guess I should point it out.

So here goes: Cockerpunk, don't let your lady hang out with guy friends or you might find out that some other guy is boinking her.

As far as "standards", you are the one with the double speak. On the one hand, go ahead and have a relationship outside, but don't "cheat".

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by McLovin

Well, first the initial post seems to contemplate a continuing dialog, not a one time cup of coffee.

But second, it just strikes me as an odd thing. I guess maybe it depends on how long it's been. My wife and I have been married almost 25 years.

It just seems odd that some former sexual partner, after all this time, would attempt to re-initiate contact with my wife.

That just doesn't seem normal to me. I know I'd never do that to any of my formers. It's creepy.

And if someone did that to me, like called me up and asked to meet for lunch or coffee, I'd say to them "Umm, yeah, nice hearing from you but I'll be passing on your lunch date proposal, but hey, you take care now! Click."

I just can't fathom, even for a second, why I - as a happily married man - would ever want to take up a former on that out-of-the-blue contact. I can't fathom why anyone would do that.

a continuous dialog is even more innocuous, as the only titillating part of of talking to an ex again, is that first 15 minutes, seeing if they have fixed what was wrong with them and why you broke up in the first place. after they show they have not (cause they never do), then there shouldn't be any sexual tension at all, that is unless you have been lying to yourself for all those years.

sometimes i like to chat with old exs. one of them is married to a friend of mine, the other i spent 7 years of formative years with, its always interesting to sit down and chat with them. mostly to see how different our lives have turned out. they havn't changed one bit, and speaking to them only reinforces the reason we aren't together. on both sides i assume.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by rusnak

Are you proposing that you can modify or control another person's behavior by modifying your own? You can "will" them to be honest with you because you expect that of them eh?

where did you get this idea? no where have i said anything like this.

What I am saying is that your "standards" should be made clear that you are not ok with your SO hanging out with guy friends. I think to the experienced person, that is so obvious you don't even need to point that out. But you're so dense I guess I should point it out.

why is that? you still have not justified this

So here goes: Cockerpunk, don't let your lady hang out with guy friends or you might find out that some other guy is boinking her.

i do all the time. why not? i hang out with friends of mine that are girls too.

As far as "standards", you are the one with the double speak. On the one hand, go ahead and have a relationship outside, but don't "cheat".

don't you have relationships outside of your SO?

^^^^

[tweezers74]

Originally Posted by McLovin

And there's a (related) reason why he's only dating not marrying you!

Yeah, because I tell him I never want to get married again. I actually have the opposite problem. Every man I have dated seriously wants to marry me.

[tweezers74]

Originally Posted by rusnak

And Tweezers, why would your man buy when he can rent?

First, I would never let a man "rent" or "buy" me. Secondly, why do men assume all women do is wait around for a man to "buy" them, aka get married?

I'm good, thanks.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by tweezers74

First, I would never let a man "rent" or "buy" me. Secondly, why do men assume all women do is wait around for a man to "buy" them, aka get married?

I'm good, thanks.

gotta love the subtle sexism present in these posts. women are property, can't be trusted to there own devices, all of them just want to get married, if they have sex before marriage they are giving away the only thing a man wants .....

[rusnak]

Originally Posted by tweezers74

First, I would never let a man "rent" or "buy" me. Secondly, why do men assume all women do is wait around for a man to "buy" them, aka get married?

I'm good, thanks.

That's great. You do know that "buy" and "rent" are a figure of speech right, which means when you play the field, don't expect your SO to be loyal.....and if your SO is allowed to mess around, or be gratified by the company of an EX, then why would he ever respect his relationship with you..... etc etc..

What you are saying is that you don't have an SO. You play the field or mess around. That's a great plan.

[tweezers74]

Originally Posted by rusnak

That's great. You do know that "buy" and "rent" are a figure of speech right, which means when you play the field, don't expect your SO to be loyal.....and if your SO is allowed to mess around, or be gratified by the company of an EX, then why would he ever respect his relationship with you..... etc etc..

What you are saying is that you don't have an SO. You play the field or mess around. That's a great plan.

I do know it is a figure of speech, not a very good one in my opinion. And no, I don't play the field. You assume. And I have told the men I have been with in the past that cheating is one one of the reasons I would leave them flat out. No questions, no drama, or second chances. in fact I agree with you. You can't control other people so I don't try to. I trust and enjoy the person I am with, and well, if they cheat on me, I guess I shouldn't be with them right? No, I don't allow the men I am with to "mess around".

And you are right, I don't have a SO. I don't want to get married again as I said in my prior post. Reading this thread has been very insightful and interesting. How men assume if I am not with someone that either I am sleeping around, nobody wants to marry me, or I am a lonely spinster wishing somebody would respond to a profile on match.com. Maybe it's none of the above. Maybe I am alone and OK with that and actually having quite a bit of fun.

Actually, thanks for reminding me that yes, I am definitely OK without a man.

[Jferr006]

I heart you, Tweeze!
I want to be just like you when I grow up.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by rusnak

That's great. You do know that "buy" and "rent" are a figure of speech right, which means when you play the field, don't expect your SO to be loyal.....and if your SO is allowed to mess around, or be gratified by the company of an EX, then why would he ever respect his relationship with you..... etc etc..

What you are saying is that you don't have an SO. You play the field or mess around. That's a great plan.

since when does speaking with folks of the opposite gender, while in a relationship mean you are cheating, or "playing the field?"

thats called "daily life" for me.

[tweezers74]

Originally Posted by Jferr006

I heart you, Tweeze!
I want to be just like you when I grow up.

Awwwww, J, thanks for the love.

[sc_rufctr]

Originally Posted by LubeMaster77

Would you tolerate your significant others dialogue with a past lover?

Depends on the dialogue.

If it was stuff about "their" children, then you have to tolerate that.

But if it's social or romantic???... No way but that would have to be rare. (maybe not so rare?)

--------------------------------------------------

FWIW... People are people and we all do stupid things. Often the memories of a past lover are erotic and lasting/vivid. IMO we are hard wired that way.
... So how do you stop thinking about those "nice" times?

[M.D. Holloway]

Very interesting outlooks. Very interesting indeed. I wonder how much of the speak is actual and how much is wishful thinking.

I would like to think I would be cool with my SO having dialogue with an old lover. I want to think I was mature, grown-up, secure. In many ways I would try to convince the world I was 'that guy', cool and confident. The truth is I'm not. I would not like it or tolerate it. I am insecure and frightened. The upside is, I haven't had to experience this on any significant level yet.