Have you ever "stolen" someone else's man?

[Celestial]

I never "stolen" someone's man but I messed around with married men on several ocassions and I would never do it again. It is just not right even with the fun. I started to think what if it happens to me. I'm glad I left married men alone. I had one lady call me and tell me that her husband makes good money and he hasn't been coming home with any lately so he must been spending it on me. I had to explain myself to his wife and told her she need to keep investigating because he must be seeing other women because her husband wasn't taken care of me in that way. We were more like social friends who talk to each other or would meet up for lunch.

 

[jada1111]

Like I stated b4 long story... but I'll entertain...
The Accidently was said as a joke to insinuate that it wasn't planned. I was actually on birth control for 2 years and the pharmacy screwed up my refill and being that I am in a committed relationship I threw caution to the wind and here I'm am pregnant for the first time at 27. I'm sure there are plenty women who've gotten pregnant under worse circumstances.

I declined the engagement because I simply wasn't ready to be married period and wanted to accomplish things as a single person before I made that type of commitment and now 2 years and a lot of accomplishments later I feel as if I'm ready.

And yes I surly did date him. People, generally women, want to believe that when a man leaves a woman he's leaving some poor saint that is home waiting by the window with his dinner and slipper which isn't always the case. Prior to me deciding to date him he explained a situation and told me he was leaving I made a choice to believe him and he indeed left. And the events that followed only reinforced the situation he explained as well as my decision to believe him. Like I said b4 knowing what I know now I would have waited to avoid a lot of the drama but I don't regret a day of being with him, his child, or being pregnant with mine. Sorry if that goes against peoples selective moral code.

And regarding your comment that I got pregnant to seal the deal. If you knew anything that about me or my relationship you'd truly understand how comical that statement is. But people tend to make judgments on things they know nothing about.

Regardless of whether or not you sexed him he KNEW you'd be waiting for him that's why he left.

Like I've said many times in this thread, when a man INITIATES the break up there's a chick waiting for him.

She could cut him, throw burning water on him and even if he caught her sexing another dude in his bed he will NOT leave, unless there's another woman willing to take him.

I, personally, wouldn't want a man from the type of situation you went through. It will most definitely be YOUR turn one of these days. Nothing beautiful can be born out of drama. Women don't just bug the hell out on their men for no reason.

Remember that.

 

[itismehmmkay]

You down w/ O.P.P. ?

 

[JFemme]

ITA. And, I find the paradox on this board really interesting. How many threads and discussions have gone on about why women should demand exclusivity in a relationship before sex? It's been pretty much a given around here that if you are giving of yourself sexually to a man who has not committed himself to your relationship exclusively (but is also sexing others), that you are endangering your own health and comprimising your integrity.

However, in this thread, there should be a distinction between the marriage commitment and the relationship commitment? Women in exclusive relationships should not expect true monogamy? If that is the case, then what is the deal with all the outrage and rabid fear over cheating? We are obsessed with cheating on this board even when the dude isn't married!

Furthermore, WHY, if we really believe that it's honorable on some higher level, to fall in love with someone's spouse or SO, why then, do we at the same time, have an issue with someone like Steve McNair? He was living out his highest truth. Mechelle McNair was free to release him with love and good wishes...that was on her. What about all the Alicia Keyes bashing? Swizz and his wife were DONE as a couple (though not on paper) before they got together...but she's being called a homewrecker.

There are communities for people who prefer to express love in a more free manner without the constraints of ego and binding....Polyamorous communities and Swinging communities come to mind. I love those because people of like minds agree together. That seems more honorable to me. IDK.

I'd like to hear more thoughts on the questions your raised in this post...

Any takers...

(GREAT post, by the way, SS...)

 

[aribell]

I think there are a multitude of perspectives being represented in this thread that don't fit into a "this side v. that side" equation. There wasn't any consensus at all advocating for non-monogamous relationships, only a couple of anecdotes. And also, "falling in love" with someone and starting an affair with them are very different things. It was mentioned a while back that the op wasn't talking about cheating at all, even though that's how many comments took it.

And insofar as people consider it to be inherently unfaithful to develop feelings for someone that a person is not in a relationship with, I think that's a much easier thing to condemn in theory than in practice. It's how people respond to those initial feelings that makes the difference, and what the appropriate action is is going to depend on the nature of the relationship that they are already involved in and the nature of the commitment that was made, if one was actually made at all.

Like it was already mentioned, a lot of people have the mentality that a person isn't bound to the person they're dating until there's a ring. The point being that only the two people in the relationship can say what it means to honor their relationship based on whatever commitment they made to one another. Also, the thing about actual "cheaters" is just that--they're cheating. They're trying to actively have something that they know isn't compatible with what the person they're in the relationship with would want. They're telling the person one thing, acting like they agree with the commitment, but are doing something completely different and dishonoring that so that they can get the benefit of acting commited plus the benefit of not really being commited. That's different than breaking up with someone to pursue someone else.

Yes, women are very much obsessed with whether men are faithful to them. But we can't assume that all of that energy is coming from a good or sane place. I don't think that it is. Please don't get me wrong, it is perfectly right to expect faithfulness--you couldn't build a relationship without it. But unless you took lifetime vows and clearly said to one another "Nothing will ever change between us," why would we define faithfulness to mean that nothing would ever change between two people? That can't be assumed.

And if we can accept that things might change in a relationship, what difference does it make that things end because there was a better, more fulfilling, deeper, whatever, relationship to be had with someone else? That's the question that I would like answered.

 

[aribell]

...........................................

 

[MrsBurns82]

Regardless of whether or not you sexed him he KNEW you'd be waiting for him that's why he left.

Like I've said many times in this thread, when a man INITIATES the break up there's a chick waiting for him.

She could cut him, throw burning water on him and even if he caught her sexing another dude in his bed he will NOT leave, unless there's another woman willing to take him.

I, personally, wouldn't want a man from the type of situation you went through. It will most definitely be YOUR turn one of these days. Nothing beautiful can be born out of drama. Women don't just bug the hell out on their men for no reason.

Remember that.

If you deem it more honorable for a man to stay and be cut, burned or cheated on as appose to be with someone else that's your opinion.

While he wasn't subjected to any of these things he was a man you was raised to believe that not living with your child makes you a bad father and he was with a woman who had no problem encouraging him to feel this way as well as leading his child to believe the same. And after seeing the things this woman did to him as well as the games she played with their child and the things she said to her child and the many, many, many court appearances later. I'm comfortable with my decision because knowing the type of man he is and the type of father he is I don't believe for a min that she wasn't fully aware that he was leaving or wanted to leave prior to that. Her concern was her comfort because for his son he did and still will do anything and that included keeping her very comfortable. He has his child 4 days a week and even 3 years later I see his face when his child goes back with his mother and it hasn't gotten any easier for him. So when you say I'll get mine it doesn't worry or concern me because he and I love and respect our relationship as well as his family and mine who are both fully aware of the entire situation because we all went through it together and we will all rejoice on the beauty that is set to be born Feb 9.

Everyone knows this isn't always the case and I'm sure that many woman have heard the same story and in the end it didn't pan out the same. This one just happens to be mine and these where my decisions and they didn't come from a malicious or bad place. I chose not to sleep with him not to make the situation better but more so because I wanted to keep a part of me safe just in case I was being naive ...but for me it worked out, my choice, my life, my decision I'm not going to apologize for it. Just like anything else in life if you don't agree do make that decision for you life.

 

[chokolate miss]

I think there are a multitude of perspectives being represented in this thread that don't fit into a "this side v. that side" equation. There wasn't any consensus at all advocating for non-monogamous relationships, only a couple of anecdotes. And also, "falling in love" with someone and starting an affair with them are very different things. It was mentioned a while back that the op wasn't talking about cheating at all, even though that's how many comments took it.

And insofar as people consider it to be inherently unfaithful to develop feelings for someone that a person is not in a relationship with, I think that's a much easier thing to condemn in theory than in practice. It's how people respond to those initial feelings that makes the difference, and what the appropriate action is is going to depend on the nature of the relationship that they are already involved in and the nature of the commitment that was made, if one was actually made at all.

Like it was already mentioned, a lot of people have the mentality that a person isn't bound to the person they're dating until there's a ring. The point being that only the two people in the relationship can say what it means to honor their relationship based on whatever commitment they made to one another. Also, the thing about actual "cheaters" is just that--they're cheating. They're trying to actively have something that they know isn't compatible with what the person they're in the relationship with would want. They're telling the person one thing, acting like they agree with the commitment, but are doing something completely different and dishonoring that so that they can get the benefit of acting commited plus the benefit of not really being commited. That's different than breaking up with someone to pursue someone else.

Yes, women are very much obsessed with whether men are faithful to them. But we can't assume that all of that energy is coming from a good or sane place. I don't think that it is. Please don't get me wrong, it is perfectly right to expect faithfulness--you couldn't build a relationship without it. But unless you took lifetime vows and clearly said to one another "Nothing will ever change between us," why would we define faithfulness to mean that nothing would ever change between two people? That can't be assumed.

And if we can accept that things might change in a relationship, what difference does it make that things end because there was a better, more fulfilling, deeper, whatever, relationship to be had with someone else? That's the question that I would like answered.

@ the bolded, you are right, I wasn't. However, it is interesting to see where this thread has gone. I love how some of the ladies are so open and willing to share their life experiences. I appreaciate it.

I thought it would have faded away to forum heaven, but I see that it hasn't. I'm glad that the tone has come down. People can be sooo judgemental...but I guess I understand

 

[babyb900]

People say I did.....I honestly don't believe I did.

My current boyfriend just turned fiance (yay me!!! ) used to be really good friends. We liked each other, but were scared to get in a relationship out of fear it would ruin our friendship if we were to break up. So we ignored our feelings and got involved with other people.

Stupid stupid move. Our feelings were undeniable and it was obvious neither of us were happy in the relationship we were in. My boyfriend at the time was slowly becoming abusive and his girlfriend was just crazy. She even pretended she was pregnant to try to keep him around.

Eventually we both agreed to end our relationships and be together. We have been together since.

But, since most people only saw outside the situation (he had a girlfriend, I had a boyfriend), and the fact that his girlfriend was very hurt over their breakup, I am told that I "stole" him from her. In my eyes, he was never hers in the first place.

 

[MissYocairis]

I think there are a multitude of perspectives being represented in this thread that don't fit into a "this side v. that side" equation. There wasn't any consensus at all advocating for non-monogamous relationships, only a couple of anecdotes. And also, "falling in love" with someone and starting an affair with them are very different things. It was mentioned a while back that the op wasn't talking about cheating at all, even though that's how many comments took it.

And insofar as people consider it to be inherently unfaithful to develop feelings for someone that a person is not in a relationship with, I think that's a much easier thing to condemn in theory than in practice. It's how people respond to those initial feelings that makes the difference, and what the appropriate action is is going to depend on the nature of the relationship that they are already involved in and the nature of the commitment that was made, if one was actually made at all.

Like it was already mentioned, a lot of people have the mentality that a person isn't bound to the person they're dating until there's a ring. The point being that only the two people in the relationship can say what it means to honor their relationship based on whatever commitment they made to one another. Also, the thing about actual "cheaters" is just that--they're cheating. They're trying to actively have something that they know isn't compatible with what the person they're in the relationship with would want. They're telling the person one thing, acting like they agree with the commitment, but are doing something completely different and dishonoring that so that they can get the benefit of acting commited plus the benefit of not really being commited. That's different than breaking up with someone to pursue someone else.

Yes, women are very much obsessed with whether men are faithful to them. But we can't assume that all of that energy is coming from a good or sane place. I don't think that it is. Please don't get me wrong, it is perfectly right to expect faithfulness--you couldn't build a relationship without it. But unless you took lifetime vows and clearly said to one another "Nothing will ever change between us," why would we define faithfulness to mean that nothing would ever change between two people? That can't be assumed.

And if we can accept that things might change in a relationship, what difference does it make that things end because there was a better, more fulfilling, deeper, whatever, relationship to be had with someone else? That's the question that I would like answered.

So, are you saying that the OP premise was that "stealing someone's man" means that you and the man strike up an interest in each other and, before he cheats on her with you, he leaves her for you? Is that the original premise? If that's the case, then I can see your point. It's different.

But, honestly, how many men readily jump directly to "oh, this new person is 'it'" without first cheating with her? Do they leave what they have specifically to build with someone new without having tried the new lady out? And, how many women who "steal" (OP's word, not mine) actually wait to give of herself, her time and attention until he has clearly left the other relationship? If they are indeed waiting, then that's not actually stealing now, is it? He's handling his status independently BEFORE they start taking up with each other.

It's so subjective. Let's look at the A. Keyes sitch....he left home before he took up with her right? Then, by the logic in this thread, should it matter that the papers weren't filed and case closed on the divorce? Did she STEAL Swizz or did she WAIT til he left home - hence, not steal him at all?

Or, is it different with a marriage? Where anything taking place before those papers are filed is considered "stealing" regardless?

Many of the examples listed in this thread deal with men who did not leave instantly before striking up with the new woman. Just the language "stealing" implies an action on the part of the new woman. She let him in before he was gone from the other situation. Of course, he let her in before he had let go of the old situation too.

My questions about monogamy in a non-married relationship are not meant to imply that people don't have free will nor do they imply that free will is to be altered because of this "agreement". On the contrary, the decision to be monogamous is the exercise of that same free will.

I still would rather see men and women honor each other by shutting down an undesirable relationship first and independently before starting up the next one. I don't care how attracted you are to the new one. I don't care how much of a connection there is. Get your **** resolved first and then come check for me. If it is meant to be, it will be. Seems to be that you would increase the likelihood of success for the new relationship if you have done the work to tie up loose ends.

 

[aribell]

I still would rather see men and women honor each other by shutting down an undesirable relationship first and independently before starting up the next one. I don't care how attracted you are to the new one. I don't care how much of a connection there is. Get your **** resolved first and then come check for me. If it is meant to be, it will be. Seems to be that you would increase the likelihood of success for the new relationship if you have done the work to tie up loose ends.

I do agree with this. I also agree that most people do very sketchy things when it comes to honoring their own relationships or those of others. So, that exceptional situation where no one actually cheats (emotionally or physically) before leaving, is probably just that, an exception.

 

[Truth]

I put other but now that I read the actually post... then answer is NO.. I thought it was one of those situations like did u steal someone elses man like purposly.... In that case it's an other type situation, I was single and of course he didn't let me in on the secret that he had a woman...if that was the case..I woulda crushed that idea all in the beginning.. but if I KNEW he was married or with someone and still tried to take him...that's a or If I was with someone and met a new person..That's a NO .. I had that situation happen to me more then once... and both times..I just said If it was meant to be then it will...

 

[v2.0]

Sharing a kiss with someone's husband?

Don't actions like this go against all of the "positive energy" that we are supposed to be putting forth? What about the potential negativity caused by these great "vibrations"? That's why I always side-eye people who claim to be so deep into positive vibrations, energies, and other flower child goings-on. That's usually code for I'm liberated and free aka I'm a selfish sl*t.

Vibrate. Vibrate higher.

</Andre 3000>

Wow. LHCF is getting soft.

 

[winterinatl]

I'm not going to read the last two pages.

This whole thread, the discussion of "love" and "being in love" and "connections", is just a bit much.

I don't prescribe to "the one" or "soul mates" because of some of the very arguments I've seen in this thread, especially the one about having a connection with someone.

Love is a verb. It is not a feeling. That is sexual feelings, infatuation, and endophins. Love is committing to someone and deciding to keep that committment in tact.

To answer the question, I've never sought out an attached man like that, but had a somewhat attached man dump his current to get back together with me.

 

[Princess4real]

Sharing a kiss with someone's husband?

Don't actions like this go against all of the "positive energy" that we are supposed to be putting forth? What about the potential negativity caused by these great "vibrations"? That's why I always side-eye people who claim to be so deep into positive vibrations, energies, and other flower child goings-on. That's usually code for I'm liberated and free aka I'm a selfish sl*t.

Vibrate. Vibrate higher.

</Andre 3000>

Wow. LHCF is getting soft.

 

[sstevenson]

I have to agree. If he is not yours, and you are sharing, you will always be that women on the side. If he was going to leave his wife, etc., he would, especailly if he is really as miserable or whatever lie he is telling you to keep your attention, if he really wants to. Nothing makes him stay with you except his selfishness, not your needs. And when he has gotten all he wants, or the wife threatens to leave him for good, you will be right there, still on the side and alone. You better listen to Jamie Fox, Just like me. He would not want her if he can't have the two.........

 

[Princess4real]

I have to agree. If he is not yours, and you are sharing, you will always be that women on the side. If he was going to leave his wife, etc., he would, especailly if he is really as miserable or whatever lie he is telling you to keep your attention, if he really wants to. Nothing makes him stay with you except his selfishness, not your needs. And when he has gotten all he wants, or the wife threatens to leave him for good, you will be right there, still on the side and alone. You better listen to Jamie Fox, Just like me. He would not want her if he can't have the two.........

I'm not like that never have been and never will, but some women don't have a problem with that, so they will accept that role and play their part until they catch feelings for the guy. Look at Kim from the Real Housewives of Atlanta. She thought she was better than the wife because he brought her things and made time for her, but now old girl wants to be married and she wants big Poppa to buy her an engagement ring. She is really expecting him to leave his wife because in her head if he didn't love her he wouldn't be investing his time and money into her. Men have always paid for tail and they always will. If a woman can't pull a single man and can only get offers from married men, their game is off and maybe they need to say to ask themselves why aren't single men checking for me??? I'm sure the married men see something in you (easy access vibes) that tells them you are down with anything and that they can tell you anything in order to get in them draws. I'm really being kind by using those words.

ETA: I will never understand why a woman would want to share a man or gets off because somebody husband or boyfriend is attracted to her? I really wonder if it's daddy issues that causes some to be so thirsty for a man?

 

[Jewell]

No, I have never "stolen" another woman's man. Nor have I ever knowingly dated a married, dating, or engaged man. All my exes were with me and no one else, that I knew of. I'm just not the type of lady who can be with someone else's man and sleep easy at night. There are more than enough single, eligible men in the world.

 

[MissYocairis]

I'm not going to read the last two pages.

This whole thread, the discussion of "love" and "being in love" and "connections", is just a bit much.

I don't prescribe to "the one" or "soul mates" because of some of the very arguments I've seen in this thread, especially the one about having a connection with someone.

Love is a verb. It is not a feeling. That is sexual feelings, infatuation, and endophins. Love is committing to someone and deciding to keep that committment in tact.

To answer the question, I've never sought out an attached man like that, but had a somewhat attached man dump his current to get back together with me.

Sooooooo true. Great post.

 

[Iansan]

Other, one time...

 

[JFemme]

the Man stealing threads are dizzying round here....

lawd...

 

[Almaz]

I'll say it once if I have not said it a thousand times you CANNOT STEAL someone's man He wants to be with you for whatever reason. And just like he can you HER for YOU He can leave YOU for someone else.

 

[Almaz]

Why don't we have threads posted on how to keep a good man? or something. Why somebody gotta be stealing someone else's. Karma is a ****** what goes around comes around and why would anyone want to be with that type of man that can be swayed to leave his former SO for you anyway sounds like a weakling player to me. Wouldn't you be nervous that one day he is going to jump ship and leave you. I would always be wondering about that if I was in that postition and secondly I would always be wondering if he had second thoughts.

 

[Taliah]

Yeah, crashed and burned beyond recognition. Both of us.

 

[Lovestyr]

I will be women enough to admit it I am a homewrecker. I intentionally have dated men in the past whom were either living with a significant other or married. I didnt care that they were. Have I changed?.....hmm really cant say that I have. Sorry ladies we all cant be angels and do things the right way.

 

[aribell]

I will be women enough to admit it I am a homewrecker. I intentionally have dated men in the past whom were either living with a significant other or married. I didnt care that they were. Have I changed?.....hmm really cant say that I have. Sorry ladies we all cant be angels and do things the right way.

You don't sound like you're entirely happy about it, though.

 

[lux10023]

question--do u really think your stealing these dudes away from their situation--or do they not even consider their relationships serious like that-?

are the men your dealing with cheaters period ?

I will be women enough to admit it I am a homewrecker. I intentionally have dated men in the past whom were either living with a significant other or married. I didnt care that they were. Have I changed?.....hmm really cant say that I have. Sorry ladies we all cant be angels and do things the right way.

 

[Renovating]

question--do u really think your stealing these dudes away from their situation--or do they not even consider their relationships serious like that-?

are the men your dealing with cheaters period ?

Any "stolen" man is a cheater PERIOD. IMO

 

[LisaLisa1908]

I will be women enough to admit it I am a homewrecker. I intentionally have dated men in the past whom were either living with a significant other or married. I didnt care that they were. Have I changed?.....hmm really cant say that I have. Sorry ladies we all cant be angels and do things the right way.

Yes, we can. You choose to be what you are.

 

[lux10023]

true i was more referencing the theory of stealing a man as in you cant steal a cheater away from a rlp-becuz off the bat its clear that he doesnt respect the idea of monogamy
So whether he is married or bf or fh--if thats who he is--that who he is--

Any "stolen" man is a cheater PERIOD. IMO