Extra Marital Affair

[Way2GO]

3Boys:

Way2GO:

[quote=\"3Boys\"] C'mon ladies, you know your man, his happiness is really in your hands.

Bro, what a choice of words!
:rotflmao:
:rotflmao:

Ooops :oops:

Ya know the joke about M&Ms?[/quote]Nope.
Pray tell.

[buds]

Wah lao you two.. :faint:


Please lah, Way2Go.. i'm sure
there isn't a need for show and
tell. You expert liao. :politebleah:

[buds]

autumnbronze:

Schweppes:

[quote=\"Funz\"]reading through some of the posts here, I somehow draw the conclusion that both men and women alike seem to hint that women have to work at keeping the men faithful. From stroking their ego, to 'tehing' to dressing up and looking good for our men to putting the man first above all else.


For me, when you enter a marriage, staying faithful to your spouse is EXPECTED. Neither should have to work to keep the other faithful. Yes, I will put him first and yes, I will boost his ego but not so he will stay faithful to me but because he is my husband. And I dress well and look good for myself, not for anyone.
If he strays, he has failed me and not because I did not do certain things.

Well yes, 3boys did state he by no means think it is the womens fault but there should not have been a need for a woman to have to prevent it from happening if the vows mean anything to these men to start with.

haiyah, dunno how to explain lah.

:goodpost: Funz, you couldn't have explained it better.

Ha ha Schweppes, you beat me to it !!!

Yes Funz, :goodpost:

You have penned it down v aptly. I can esp relate to the statements highlighted in blue.

This is what I tell my DH whenever we have discussions abt this topic. As lately, two frds we both know have strayed and it seems that one common thread is that they have turned 40 or are going to .... :roll: :roll:[/quote]Yeah! :goodpost: Funz!

[corneyAmber]

3boys, I am trying to understand this dress up for yourself and dress up for your husband, is there a difference physically? I believe when a woman dresses up for herself, she is confident and looks good, it also means dress up for her man.


What Funz is trying to say is also true. People ONLY change because of themselves, hardly because of anyone else. Even if they claim so, those are only temporary changes, never last. Do a self-check, you will find the truth in this. However, the real change is driven by self-love. So Funz is right to point out that the motivation is to perk oneself up, however, all those feasting their eyes on a well-dressed person can all enjoy it together, and the one who enjoys the most could be the hubby. So why the need to split hair over this if outcome is the same? How can someone dressing attractive be only exclusive to one pair of eyes?

Actually if any change, it is the time-slice change, used to be in 2 parts, wife and husband and now slices into broadly 3 parts, wife, husband and children. Woman can continue to dress up, just have more responsibility for children because they are not independent yet, yet man can still find reasons to stray, even they have to time-slice for the children.......perhaps the father who is not so involved in parenting will find more excuses to stray. Hence if you ask me, it is not the dressing up what nots, it is sharing the load with the wife evenly, then she will have more breathing space maintain the similar time-slice share with hubby....is this a more practical way to solve the problem than just expect the woman to dress up etc...? I think both need to work hard at the children to make the marriage blissful.

That said, there is still a species of men who would stray regardless how happy a family he has due to an efficient wife....it stems from discontentment or prey to merely temptation(rich and attract women like bees to honey). This, is all attributed to the weakness of the mind and body. For that matter, such a category also exists in women today, just a smaller sample size only.

[Way2GO]

buds:

Wah lao you two.. :faint:


Please lah, Way2Go.. i'm sure
there isn't a need for show and
tell. You expert liao. :politebleah:

buds, u talking abt hands
or M&Ms joke?
I may hv heard it already but
M&Ms doesn't ring a bell now.
Or u want to tell?

[buds]

I noe both. So u dun pretend.

Men and their..... :roll:

[buds]

ks2me:

3boys, I am trying to understand this dress up for yourself and dress up for your husband, is there a difference physically? I believe when a woman dresses up for herself, she is confident and looks good, it also means dress up for her man.


What Funz is trying to say is also true. People ONLY change because of themselves, hardly because of anyone else. Even if they claim so, those are only temporary changes, never last. Do a self-check, you will find the truth in this. However, the real change is driven by self-love. So Funz is right to point out that the motivation is to perk oneself up, however, all those feasting their eyes on a well-dressed person can all enjoy it together, and the one who enjoys the most could be the hubby. So why the need to split hair over this if outcome is the same? How can someone dressing attractive be only exclusive to one pair of eyes?

Actually if any change, it is the time-slice change, used to be in 2 parts, wife and husband and now slices into broadly 3 parts, wife, husband and children. Woman can continue to dress up, just have more responsibility for children because they are not independent yet, yet man can still find reasons to stray, even they have to time-slice for the children.......perhaps the father who is not so involved in parenting will find more excuses to stray. Hence if you ask me, it is not the dressing up what nots, it is sharing the load with the wife evenly, then she will have more breathing space maintain the similar time-slice share with hubby....is this a more practical way to solve the problem than just expect the woman to dress up etc...? I think both need to work hard at the children to make the marriage blissful.

That said, there is still a species of men who would stray regardless how happy a family he has due to an efficient wife....it stems from discontentment or prey to merely temptation(rich and attract women like bees to honey). This, is all attributed to the weakness of the mind and body. For that matter, such a category also exists in women today, just a smaller sample size only.

Wow! Yet another good post!

:goodpost:

[autumnbronze]

ks2me:

3boys, I am trying to understand this dress up for yourself and dress up for your husband, is there a difference physically? I believe when a woman dresses up for herself, she is confident and looks good, it also means dress up for her man.


What Funz is trying to say is also true. People ONLY change because of themselves, hardly because of anyone else. Even if they claim so, those are only temporary changes, never last. Do a self-check, you will find the truth in this. However, the real change is driven by self-love. So Funz is right to point out that the motivation is to perk oneself up, however, all those feasting their eyes on a well-dressed person can all enjoy it together, and the one who enjoys the most could be the hubby. So why the need to split hair over this if outcome is the same? How can someone dressing attractive be only exclusive to one pair of eyes?

Actually if any change, it is the time-slice change, used to be in 2 parts, wife and husband and now slices into broadly 3 parts, wife, husband and children. Woman can continue to dress up, just have more responsibility for children because they are not independent yet, yet man can still find reasons to stray, even they have to time-slice for the children.......perhaps the father who is not so involved in parenting will find more excuses to stray. Hence if you ask me, it is not the dressing up what nots, it is sharing the load with the wife evenly, then she will have more breathing space maintain the similar time-slice share with hubby....is this a more practical way to solve the problem than just expect the woman to dress up etc...? I think both need to work hard at the children to make the marriage blissful.

That said, there is still a species of men who would stray regardless how happy a family he has due to an efficient wife....it stems from discontentment or prey to merely temptation(rich and attract women like bees to honey). This, is all attributed to the weakness of the mind and body. For that matter, such a category also exists in women today, just a smaller sample size only.

ks2me,

Well said ... :celebrate:

[3Boys]

Wah, I swim against the tide hor?


I actually don't think there is a difference, so in fact it is indeed splitting hairs. I was pointing out that if someone dressed up for herself and not her husband, it just seemed a little churlish to me. Like, if I took my wife out for dinner and told her, its actually because I like the restaurant but not because I wanted to give her a treat, I'd get 2 black eyes and deservedly so.

Actually, now that I think about it, if I do dress up, IT IS mainly for the wife, 'coz I don't care what other women think ....8)

[Funz]

3Boys:

C'mon ladies, you know your man, his happiness is really in your hands.

No, his happines is in his own hands. Just as mine is in my own hands.