Dear Pru: What is it with women and married men? If he’s married, he’s not available. Now if a married man says, "We are divorcing, but the final documents haven’t been signed," that’s different. However, do your homework ladies. Go to the courthouse and make sure. Bottom line: Leave married men alone. This way, we married women won’t have to worry about our cheating husbands because they will have no one to cheat with. Somebody’s Wife

Here are two replies:

You assign blame for cheating upon the "other" woman.  Taking sides doesn't work, it reveals your ignorance about responsibility and that you have an incomplete relationship from the past. I have never come across a woman, who, after the anger subsided, could not/would not, with a bit of coaching, acknowledged her cause of the cheating, of how she caused (unconsciously intended) her husband to cheat on her. She is able to see that however unconscious she may have been at the start she did in fact mastermind the whole enchilada, partly to discover what’s so about responsibility. Cause is most always hidden from someone addicted to blame, to making others wrong, like an unacknowledged alcoholic, they simply have no choice.

Now reread the above paragraph and replace the word man for woman. "I have never come across a man . . ." What's also true is that in situations in which either partner is stuck playing victim (complaining about their partner cheating on them), again, with coaching, each are able to acknowledged that they drove their partner into another's arms. Victims are usually unaware of doing it until afterwards. Once a former "victim" accepts responsibility for having caused an incident they transform themselves from victim to cause, to being whole and complete. Thereafter, for life, they have no need for another cheating incident.

Your communication reveals that you are ripe for your husband to cheat on you so that you can have the realization that it was you who drove him into the arms of another. How you communicate determines whether or not your husband is open and honest with you. If he knows, from previous conversations, that you get angry when he mentions how pretty another woman is, then you have trained him to not share such thoughts. Thoughts suppressed sometimes grow. They sometimes become fantasies. Depending upon your intention (albeit, unconscious) sometimes they are manifested in reality. It’s always your script. The way to discover what your intentions are/have been, is to look at the results. Just because you are unaware of your intentions, or lie about them, doesn’t make them any-the-less yours.

A person, consciously or unconsciously, sets it up to be approached (seduced). Conversely, a person on-purpose with life and his/her primary relationship, communicates just that. It's simply unthinkable to approach a person of integrity who is in a committed relationship, such is the sanctity, the purposefulness of their commitment.

A woman whose karma is such that she has no need for deceptions, or lies, or withholds, doesn't attract partners who do. Only cons who are unaware of their cons attract cons.

In our support groups we have an agreement, to ask, up front, "Is there anyone who would be upset if they knew you were thinking of dating me?" The question is so right-on that an asker, whose integrity is in, one who keeps agreements and tells the truth, can experience a lie (in gambling jargon it's called a "tell"). Someone addicted to lying cannot always tell when another is lying. They simply can't hear it.  Put another way, in a relationship in which there is open, honest, and spontaneous communication, zero withholds, any withhold becomes so obvious that it’s as a "mote in thine eye." It begs clearing, else, communication breaks down, and the withhold manifests itself as an argument with inappropriate anger (abuse) that is not acknowledged cleaned up before bedtime. Millions and millions of romantic newlyweds make an agreement with each other, to never go to sleep upset, or with a withhold or an unacknowledged perpetration in the space. Yet all, yes all, divorced couples broke that agreement, after which the relationship never recovered.

Reply #2

You write, "If he’s married, he’s not available. " This is true in some realities. However it's not true for a couple in which there is/has been extramarital sex, in which case both partners are behaving consistent with the stated and implied agreements of their specific marriage.  (read Creating a Marriage Vow that Precludes Cheating,)

Let me be specific. If cheating has taken place there is an unacknowledged implied agreement that cheating is acceptable. We know so by the results, by the way they have communicated with each other. By omission (in their vows) they consciously/unconsciously allowed for the possibility. It could be said that cheating is a consequence of their sneakiness and of their arrogance. To think that you won't eventually drive your spouse away is arrogant. To think that you have the wisdom to choose an honest agreement-keeping spouse is arrogant. To think that you're smarter, more capable, committed or skilled, than the millions upon millions of others who have divorced is arrogant. To think that your relationship is somehow more unique and better than all those who have divorced, is arrogant. To think that a prenuptial agreement won't serve you both is arrogant. Arrogance begs to be humbled.

An example of an implied agreement between married couples is the agreement to return home each time you leave the house. It's never stated, it's simply understood. Don't show up until the next morning and you've got some serious explaining to do.

Another example of an implied agreement is that it's ok for you to cheat, "I'll be upset but most likely I will forgive you and you'll be able to remain married to me." We know most married couples have this  agreement based upon the results. A partner who won't allow cheating communicates so clearly up front.

A test of a well crafted (and responsibly communicated) agreement, in this case a marriage vow (not what most people call a marriage vow), is the results. If "cheating" is taking place both are mirroring the omission of a "fidelity" phrase (agreement) in their vows. In all such cases the omission is an unconscious "forgetting" so as to allow the possibility, so as to have the option to cheat. Wedding vows have not had fidelity statements for centuries. It's omitted/forgotten using the concept of "trust" as the reason. Note: In the enlightenment game one discovers that it is unethical to trust another, to do so is a setup, to make another wrong. What's so is people can be trusted to keep agreements as long as it works for them to do so.

Many clergy members do an injustice when counseling engaged couples. Here's an example of responsible counseling:

Clergy member: I know that there is trust in your relationship and that you both sincerely believe that you will not cheat on each other, however, I've seen far too many marriages dissolve due to cheating, all of whom sat before me with the same beliefs as you have now. I recommend that you include a fidelity phrase in your vows. In truth the phrase is a, "no cheating and it's consequences" clause; in this way you are acknowledging the possibility of ignorance and self-righteousness. You will in fact be allowing millions who have divorced to make a contribution to your marriage, most of whom "knew/believed" cheating would not be a problem. The clause goes something like this; "I agree to be faithful or else this marriage will be automatically annulled and I will relinquish all claims to possessions, alimony, and to custody of the children." Such a clause can preclude cheating as one of your problems. It could save you both considerable legal fees. The annulment would not be a divorce because you've clearly defined that your definition of marriage includes fidelity. I also recommend a prenuptial agreement. I don't want to hear about you two battling in courts over possessions. I'll only mediate a married couple's dispute if the couple have signed a prenuptial agreement, or an agreement in which both partners agree to split everything equally to mutual satisfaction.

Conversely, proof of a poorly crafted wedding vow is a marriage wrought with unwanted problems, to include cheating, arguing, and in-law problems. Most unwanted problems are consequences of earlier (mostly childhood) unacknowledged perpetrations (lies/deceits).  Couples who vow "till death do us part" and later divorce, reap the consequence of that unconscious lie each and every day of their marriage. A truthful vow would be, "I'll stay married as long as it's working for me." A lie believed to be the truth does not make it the truth.

For example: A parent who tells their child I'll pick you up at 3:00 pm and doesn't, lied. The lie needs to be acknowledge, to oneself, and the child. "I get that I lied."

Unbeknownst to a cheater or a "victim" both are living appropriate to the agreements (both expressed and implied). In other words, without a fidelity phrase in the marriage vow, the implied agreement is that it's OK to cheat, and if you do there is a possibility that you will be "forgiven" and allowed to stay married to me.

Because all couples know about the phenomenon of cheating and yet few insist upon a fidelity phrase, all unconsciously allow for (the correct word is intend—create space for—based upon the results) the possibility. Take for example the agreement to not kill others. It's written as a law and the consequences are clear. If you kill someone while married to me, I will still love you but you must go to jail, which gives me the option of divorcing you. In other words, killing is a game neither of us will tolerate. Cheating on the other hand is a game with which we simply aren't willing to lay down the law because we unconsciously want the option and we're willing to take the risks. We believe that we can do so and then con our partner into forgiving us with no serious consequence. We also envision (albeit again unconsciously) the awesome lifetime power of magnanimously forgiving our partner for cheating.

So,,, my answer is: If your partner has been seeing another or others you did not make it clear, up front, that you will not tolerate cheating; you did not have them agree to the consequences. Consequently, your partner is living consistent with your nonverbal communication—that though you won't like it there is a very real possibility that you will forgive them. You were in fact afraid to lay down the law up front, for fear of upsetting/losing them. This fear bred disrespect. It could be said that you are reaping the consequences of your own sneakiness. Creating space for such a perpetration (it's called setting it up for them to cheat) so that you can hold it (being better than, more trustworthy than, more loving than) over them for life is unethical.

One would think twice about cheating if they knew that it would instantly automatically (incontestably) annul the marriage and that they'd forfeit all claims to possessions, to include finding another place to stay that night. Cheating would be a communication, "I no longer intend to be married to you. Do not give me a second chance no matter what I say or promise."

Note: A couple may agree to remarry but they must first completely divorce, complete 25 hours (individually and then as a couple 25-hours of therapy/counseling), and then create new clear agreements.