[eavesdropper]

[quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=bearishgurl] The study of NPD is indeed fascinating.[/quote]

It is, indeed, when done from an academic point of view. Not so much when conducted from the vantage point of spouse.

Fortunately, I am no longer in that position. But I’ve conducted fieldwork worthy of that required for a doctorate!

[eavesdropper]

[quote=deadzone]Enough already with the morality debate and discussion on love and marriage. The first poster had it right. The only real mistake Arnold made was not having a vasecomy. Period.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s anyone’s damn business (including my own). However, if my fellow Piggs want to engage in speculation on the subject, I reserve the right to speculate on the reasoning (or lack thereof, as may sometimes be the case) behind their speculations.

As for yours, perhaps the only real mistake was in the failure of Arnold’s father to have a vasectomy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=deadzone]Enough already with the morality debate and discussion on love and marriage. The first poster had it right. The only real mistake Arnold made was not having a vasecomy. Period.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s anyone’s damn business (including my own). However, if my fellow Piggs want to engage in speculation on the subject, I reserve the right to speculate on the reasoning (or lack thereof, as may sometimes be the case) behind their speculations.

As for yours, perhaps the only real mistake was in the failure of Arnold’s father to have a vasectomy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=deadzone]Enough already with the morality debate and discussion on love and marriage. The first poster had it right. The only real mistake Arnold made was not having a vasecomy. Period.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s anyone’s damn business (including my own). However, if my fellow Piggs want to engage in speculation on the subject, I reserve the right to speculate on the reasoning (or lack thereof, as may sometimes be the case) behind their speculations.

As for yours, perhaps the only real mistake was in the failure of Arnold’s father to have a vasectomy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=deadzone]Enough already with the morality debate and discussion on love and marriage. The first poster had it right. The only real mistake Arnold made was not having a vasecomy. Period.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s anyone’s damn business (including my own). However, if my fellow Piggs want to engage in speculation on the subject, I reserve the right to speculate on the reasoning (or lack thereof, as may sometimes be the case) behind their speculations.

As for yours, perhaps the only real mistake was in the failure of Arnold’s father to have a vasectomy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=deadzone]Enough already with the morality debate and discussion on love and marriage. The first poster had it right. The only real mistake Arnold made was not having a vasecomy. Period.[/quote]

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s anyone’s damn business (including my own). However, if my fellow Piggs want to engage in speculation on the subject, I reserve the right to speculate on the reasoning (or lack thereof, as may sometimes be the case) behind their speculations.

As for yours, perhaps the only real mistake was in the failure of Arnold’s father to have a vasectomy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=frenchlambda] Yes I feel emotionally attached to the property but the reason I want to keep it is really the practical aspect. I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move. After all, that’s her house too. If I move, I will end up renting an 2-bdr apartment in the same area that would cost me probably around $1,500 month, more than what the mortgage would cost me. The place is close to my work, it has good schools around and everything about it is convenient for me. [/quote]

I’m going to refrain from responding to the remainder of your email, but feel compelled to address the issue you raise above.

I do see your point about your daughter, but unpleasant relations with your in-laws and ex-wife over money will prove to be MUCH more disruptive to your daughter than any move could be. There is a lot going on in this situation, and I’m sure that everyone’s emotions are running high. It sounds as though you have many reasons to be upset and angry, but I’m strongly advising you to work on letting it go. Otherwise, it WILL affect your daughter in a negative way. Newly-divorced parents think that they can keep their feelings to themselves, and that their children will not notice, but they are wrong.

If you can find a manageable way to refinance the property and pay off your in-laws, do so. BEFORE you withdraw the money from your 401K, be sure to (1) thoroughly check out tax/penalty information with IRS, and (2) work out a plan for repayment. If you cannot make payments on your CURRENT salary, do not borrow the money. Leaving a house voluntarily is a lot less traumatic than being forced out by foreclosure.

It will be much better for your daughter if you disengage yourself from all monetary obligations to your ex-in-laws. Bonne chance, et meilleurs vœux pour votre nouvelle vie.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=frenchlambda] Yes I feel emotionally attached to the property but the reason I want to keep it is really the practical aspect. I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move. After all, that’s her house too. If I move, I will end up renting an 2-bdr apartment in the same area that would cost me probably around $1,500 month, more than what the mortgage would cost me. The place is close to my work, it has good schools around and everything about it is convenient for me. [/quote]

I’m going to refrain from responding to the remainder of your email, but feel compelled to address the issue you raise above.

I do see your point about your daughter, but unpleasant relations with your in-laws and ex-wife over money will prove to be MUCH more disruptive to your daughter than any move could be. There is a lot going on in this situation, and I’m sure that everyone’s emotions are running high. It sounds as though you have many reasons to be upset and angry, but I’m strongly advising you to work on letting it go. Otherwise, it WILL affect your daughter in a negative way. Newly-divorced parents think that they can keep their feelings to themselves, and that their children will not notice, but they are wrong.

If you can find a manageable way to refinance the property and pay off your in-laws, do so. BEFORE you withdraw the money from your 401K, be sure to (1) thoroughly check out tax/penalty information with IRS, and (2) work out a plan for repayment. If you cannot make payments on your CURRENT salary, do not borrow the money. Leaving a house voluntarily is a lot less traumatic than being forced out by foreclosure.

It will be much better for your daughter if you disengage yourself from all monetary obligations to your ex-in-laws. Bonne chance, et meilleurs vœux pour votre nouvelle vie.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=frenchlambda] Yes I feel emotionally attached to the property but the reason I want to keep it is really the practical aspect. I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move. After all, that’s her house too. If I move, I will end up renting an 2-bdr apartment in the same area that would cost me probably around $1,500 month, more than what the mortgage would cost me. The place is close to my work, it has good schools around and everything about it is convenient for me. [/quote]

I’m going to refrain from responding to the remainder of your email, but feel compelled to address the issue you raise above.

I do see your point about your daughter, but unpleasant relations with your in-laws and ex-wife over money will prove to be MUCH more disruptive to your daughter than any move could be. There is a lot going on in this situation, and I’m sure that everyone’s emotions are running high. It sounds as though you have many reasons to be upset and angry, but I’m strongly advising you to work on letting it go. Otherwise, it WILL affect your daughter in a negative way. Newly-divorced parents think that they can keep their feelings to themselves, and that their children will not notice, but they are wrong.

If you can find a manageable way to refinance the property and pay off your in-laws, do so. BEFORE you withdraw the money from your 401K, be sure to (1) thoroughly check out tax/penalty information with IRS, and (2) work out a plan for repayment. If you cannot make payments on your CURRENT salary, do not borrow the money. Leaving a house voluntarily is a lot less traumatic than being forced out by foreclosure.

It will be much better for your daughter if you disengage yourself from all monetary obligations to your ex-in-laws. Bonne chance, et meilleurs vœux pour votre nouvelle vie.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=frenchlambda] Yes I feel emotionally attached to the property but the reason I want to keep it is really the practical aspect. I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move. After all, that’s her house too. If I move, I will end up renting an 2-bdr apartment in the same area that would cost me probably around $1,500 month, more than what the mortgage would cost me. The place is close to my work, it has good schools around and everything about it is convenient for me. [/quote]

I’m going to refrain from responding to the remainder of your email, but feel compelled to address the issue you raise above.

I do see your point about your daughter, but unpleasant relations with your in-laws and ex-wife over money will prove to be MUCH more disruptive to your daughter than any move could be. There is a lot going on in this situation, and I’m sure that everyone’s emotions are running high. It sounds as though you have many reasons to be upset and angry, but I’m strongly advising you to work on letting it go. Otherwise, it WILL affect your daughter in a negative way. Newly-divorced parents think that they can keep their feelings to themselves, and that their children will not notice, but they are wrong.

If you can find a manageable way to refinance the property and pay off your in-laws, do so. BEFORE you withdraw the money from your 401K, be sure to (1) thoroughly check out tax/penalty information with IRS, and (2) work out a plan for repayment. If you cannot make payments on your CURRENT salary, do not borrow the money. Leaving a house voluntarily is a lot less traumatic than being forced out by foreclosure.

It will be much better for your daughter if you disengage yourself from all monetary obligations to your ex-in-laws. Bonne chance, et meilleurs vœux pour votre nouvelle vie.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=frenchlambda] Yes I feel emotionally attached to the property but the reason I want to keep it is really the practical aspect. I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move. After all, that’s her house too. If I move, I will end up renting an 2-bdr apartment in the same area that would cost me probably around $1,500 month, more than what the mortgage would cost me. The place is close to my work, it has good schools around and everything about it is convenient for me. [/quote]

I’m going to refrain from responding to the remainder of your email, but feel compelled to address the issue you raise above.

I do see your point about your daughter, but unpleasant relations with your in-laws and ex-wife over money will prove to be MUCH more disruptive to your daughter than any move could be. There is a lot going on in this situation, and I’m sure that everyone’s emotions are running high. It sounds as though you have many reasons to be upset and angry, but I’m strongly advising you to work on letting it go. Otherwise, it WILL affect your daughter in a negative way. Newly-divorced parents think that they can keep their feelings to themselves, and that their children will not notice, but they are wrong.

If you can find a manageable way to refinance the property and pay off your in-laws, do so. BEFORE you withdraw the money from your 401K, be sure to (1) thoroughly check out tax/penalty information with IRS, and (2) work out a plan for repayment. If you cannot make payments on your CURRENT salary, do not borrow the money. Leaving a house voluntarily is a lot less traumatic than being forced out by foreclosure.

It will be much better for your daughter if you disengage yourself from all monetary obligations to your ex-in-laws. Bonne chance, et meilleurs vœux pour votre nouvelle vie.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj][quote=HiggyBaby]Shame on him for not keeping it in his pants.[/quote]

In my view the shame isn’t that he couldn’t keep it in his pants; it’s that he couldn’t acknowledge that he couldn’t keep it in his pants. He should’ve either (1) long ago told Maria that he wanted have sex with other women (and she probably would’ve divorced him then), or (2) divorced Maria long ago so that he could have sex with other women without all of these problems. But, as we know, that wouldn’t have “looked good” for someone running for Governor… so he tried to have his cake and eat it too… and here we are. I would like to see an unmarried politician just stand up and say, “Hey, I like to run around with different women. Just like the rest of my (political) colleagues. The difference being that I’m single.” That person would never get elected, of course… that’s too much honesty for most folks to handle.[/quote]

davelj, many years ago (shortly after their marriage) I read an interview with Maria Shriver in which she was questioned about rumors regarding her husband’s proclivities. She, of course, was evasive, but it appeared to me that, while she did not endorse or encourage Mr. Schwarzenegger’s extramarital dalliances, she recognized the possibility (and perhaps the probability) that they would occur. There has always been an abundance of speculation on the extensive length of their courtship, and its on-again/ off-again nature, with most people concluding that it resulted from Arnold’s alleged affairs. I got the impression from the interview that Ms. Shriver felt that she had come to terms with this behavior, and believed that a successful marriage was possible.

That being said, there’s a huge difference between overlooking your husband’s occasional (or even frequent) extramarital dalliances, and the current situation. Mr. Schwarzenegger impregnated another woman, and kept the fact that he had a child by her secret from his wife and family for several years. That, in itself, is a pretty monumental douchebag thing to do. But far worse is the fact that the woman in question was permitted to maintain a place of responsibility and trust within the Schwarzenegger/ Shriver family. We have no way of knowing what kind of relationship was maintained between Ms. Baena and Mrs. Shriver and her children, but as a housekeeper, she was a participant in intimate family moments and events. Given the length of her employment with the family, it would not be a stretch to assume that a warm and friendly association existed.

Added to that is the fact that the children of the two women were born less than a week apart. Ms. Shriver’s feelings of betrayal in these circumstances cannot be overestimated. Anyone can make a mistake, as Mr. Schwarzenegger certainly did in engaging in an extramarital affair with a married member of his personal household staff. But to compound it to this degree, in my eyes, is not only incredibly arrogant on his part, but unthinkably cruel and heartless.

It’s just a sad and sordid tale all around.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj][quote=HiggyBaby]Shame on him for not keeping it in his pants.[/quote]

In my view the shame isn’t that he couldn’t keep it in his pants; it’s that he couldn’t acknowledge that he couldn’t keep it in his pants. He should’ve either (1) long ago told Maria that he wanted have sex with other women (and she probably would’ve divorced him then), or (2) divorced Maria long ago so that he could have sex with other women without all of these problems. But, as we know, that wouldn’t have “looked good” for someone running for Governor… so he tried to have his cake and eat it too… and here we are. I would like to see an unmarried politician just stand up and say, “Hey, I like to run around with different women. Just like the rest of my (political) colleagues. The difference being that I’m single.” That person would never get elected, of course… that’s too much honesty for most folks to handle.[/quote]

davelj, many years ago (shortly after their marriage) I read an interview with Maria Shriver in which she was questioned about rumors regarding her husband’s proclivities. She, of course, was evasive, but it appeared to me that, while she did not endorse or encourage Mr. Schwarzenegger’s extramarital dalliances, she recognized the possibility (and perhaps the probability) that they would occur. There has always been an abundance of speculation on the extensive length of their courtship, and its on-again/ off-again nature, with most people concluding that it resulted from Arnold’s alleged affairs. I got the impression from the interview that Ms. Shriver felt that she had come to terms with this behavior, and believed that a successful marriage was possible.

That being said, there’s a huge difference between overlooking your husband’s occasional (or even frequent) extramarital dalliances, and the current situation. Mr. Schwarzenegger impregnated another woman, and kept the fact that he had a child by her secret from his wife and family for several years. That, in itself, is a pretty monumental douchebag thing to do. But far worse is the fact that the woman in question was permitted to maintain a place of responsibility and trust within the Schwarzenegger/ Shriver family. We have no way of knowing what kind of relationship was maintained between Ms. Baena and Mrs. Shriver and her children, but as a housekeeper, she was a participant in intimate family moments and events. Given the length of her employment with the family, it would not be a stretch to assume that a warm and friendly association existed.

Added to that is the fact that the children of the two women were born less than a week apart. Ms. Shriver’s feelings of betrayal in these circumstances cannot be overestimated. Anyone can make a mistake, as Mr. Schwarzenegger certainly did in engaging in an extramarital affair with a married member of his personal household staff. But to compound it to this degree, in my eyes, is not only incredibly arrogant on his part, but unthinkably cruel and heartless.

It’s just a sad and sordid tale all around.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=davelj][quote=HiggyBaby]Shame on him for not keeping it in his pants.[/quote]

In my view the shame isn’t that he couldn’t keep it in his pants; it’s that he couldn’t acknowledge that he couldn’t keep it in his pants. He should’ve either (1) long ago told Maria that he wanted have sex with other women (and she probably would’ve divorced him then), or (2) divorced Maria long ago so that he could have sex with other women without all of these problems. But, as we know, that wouldn’t have “looked good” for someone running for Governor… so he tried to have his cake and eat it too… and here we are. I would like to see an unmarried politician just stand up and say, “Hey, I like to run around with different women. Just like the rest of my (political) colleagues. The difference being that I’m single.” That person would never get elected, of course… that’s too much honesty for most folks to handle.[/quote]

davelj, many years ago (shortly after their marriage) I read an interview with Maria Shriver in which she was questioned about rumors regarding her husband’s proclivities. She, of course, was evasive, but it appeared to me that, while she did not endorse or encourage Mr. Schwarzenegger’s extramarital dalliances, she recognized the possibility (and perhaps the probability) that they would occur. There has always been an abundance of speculation on the extensive length of their courtship, and its on-again/ off-again nature, with most people concluding that it resulted from Arnold’s alleged affairs. I got the impression from the interview that Ms. Shriver felt that she had come to terms with this behavior, and believed that a successful marriage was possible.

That being said, there’s a huge difference between overlooking your husband’s occasional (or even frequent) extramarital dalliances, and the current situation. Mr. Schwarzenegger impregnated another woman, and kept the fact that he had a child by her secret from his wife and family for several years. That, in itself, is a pretty monumental douchebag thing to do. But far worse is the fact that the woman in question was permitted to maintain a place of responsibility and trust within the Schwarzenegger/ Shriver family. We have no way of knowing what kind of relationship was maintained between Ms. Baena and Mrs. Shriver and her children, but as a housekeeper, she was a participant in intimate family moments and events. Given the length of her employment with the family, it would not be a stretch to assume that a warm and friendly association existed.

Added to that is the fact that the children of the two women were born less than a week apart. Ms. Shriver’s feelings of betrayal in these circumstances cannot be overestimated. Anyone can make a mistake, as Mr. Schwarzenegger certainly did in engaging in an extramarital affair with a married member of his personal household staff. But to compound it to this degree, in my eyes, is not only incredibly arrogant on his part, but unthinkably cruel and heartless.

It’s just a sad and sordid tale all around.

[Author]

Posts