UBT: I Had an Affair With My Friend’s Wife. Should I Tell Him?

Universal Bullshit Translator
The Universal Bullshit Translator

Once again the Ethicist fumbles with a FW who asks “I had an affair with my friend’s wife — should I tell? And of course the “Ethicist” advises to keep the secret.

***

I can’t even with The Ethicist in the New York Times. I think this is the bazillionth time he’s answered a letter about cheating and been on Team Secret and head cheerleader for sexual entitlement. In fact, it’s almost like he goes out of his way to run these columns and give this crap advice. Either that, or he’s run out of ethical dilemmas.

Gift link to I Had An Affair with My Friend’s Wife. Should I Tell Him? We can all vomit in tandem.

The comments were totally disappointing.

“Snitches wind up in ditches.”

“There’s absolutely no reason for you to actively participate in blowing up this poor guy’s world for an affair that only lasted a few weeks. If I were you I wouldn’t mention this affair to him or anyone else.” (MOST LIKED COMMENT.)

“Let sleeping dogs lie. It ended. You never knew their full story.”

No one ever thinks about the chump.

Because it’s terrifying to imagine yourself that vulnerable, so the majority of people sympathize with the cheaters. I Wouldn’t Want Anyone to Know. Of course, they’d want everyone to keep their secret. The collective mind doesn’t go to the person who didn’t get a vote. Best to keep him in the dark. Let him keep investing in his Potemkin life. No one wants to consider the chump’s risks or what could happen during a “short” affair. STIs. Pregnancy. No, just make it go away. They assume absolutely no harm could occur. In fact, the only harm is the truth.

The letter:

Not long ago, I met a woman entirely by chance in an art class that I wandered into. From the moment we met, there was an immediate spark and chemistry between us — we flirted and we connected, and that flirtation grew into something more.

I was single, but I later discovered that the woman was the wife of a friend of mine. He’s not a close friend — close enough that I care, but not so close that I even knew he was married, let alone to her. By the time I learned this information, my connection with his wife had become magical. Despite numerous mutual efforts to stop it, we had an affair that lasted a few weeks.

Eventually we ended the relationship, knowing it wasn’t right, and we haven’t resumed contact. Now, months later, I wonder if I have a moral duty to tell my friend what happened.

He and his wife seem to have a stable life together. If she chooses silence, is it my place to reveal it? Or should I let them navigate the situation as a couple? I’m torn between honesty and not wanting to cause unnecessary harm. — Name Withheld

My Chump Lady advice:

You should tell the betrayed husband. As a willing affair partner, you conspired in his abuse. You risked his health. His wife made unilateral decisions about their relationship and his health and giving him knowledge is one way to right your unethical behavior.

Whether you knew he was married or was a friend or was the Maytag repair man is besides the point. Once you discovered there was a third person who didn’t know, you were harming this person. What he does with the knowledge is HIS business. He might reconcile, he might dump her, he might not waste the next decade of his life investing in a person who isn’t invested in him. But he won’t be in the dark.

All these “keep the secret” people are siding with a cheater’s entitlement. And ignoring the harm the conspiracy of silence is doing to the chumped partner.

This was a minority opinion.

And at this point I lost hope about trying to change the infidelity narrative. I’d just listened to this excellent podcast series about the Michael Jackson trials and they’re talking to an FBI agent about raising awareness about child seggs abuse. And a woman whose child was victimized has made it her life’s work to stop predators. But she grows heart sick because NO ONE WANTS TO KNOW. They imagine it’s all stranger danger when the facts are it’s family and close acquaintances and people in trusted positions of authority — and absolutely no one wants this information.

Same with chumpdom.

Secrets have CONSEQUENCES. Affairs are NOT what you think. Double lives are ABUSIVE. Talk to Eileen Fox, the woman I interviewed for the podcast this week, who has multiple cancers from her husband’s wandering dick.

No one wants this information.

Including the New York TIme’s Ethicist. Fortunately, when I cannot go on, I have a patented bullshit translator to do the work for me.

Like all virtues, honesty is a complex character trait. It certainly involves a concern for the truth, but that concern does not require blurting out every truth you know, or even every truth another person might wish to hear.

There is no moral certainty just fuzzy shades of gray. Just because some chump would like to make informed decisions about his life, doesn’t mean you need to tell him you’ve been schtupping his wife.

I would never tell someone they have cancer. It could really destroy their world. Honesty is complex. Even when you imagine they’d want to know they have cancer. Save yourself the awkward conversation.

Don’t mislead people with the truth.

Above all, honesty means resisting the temptation to mislead.

The UBT is wondering how can you mislead someone by simply stating what you did?

So it would be one thing if your ex-lover’s husband were to ask you if you had an affair with her. But you don’t seem worried that he suspects anything, so that situation is unlikely to arise.

Not telling is a sin of omission. It’s a lie.

Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin.

James 4:17

In fact, there is an entire school of ethics about this, which seems odd that a professional ethicist is unaware of. Withholding the truth to create a false impression is a form of lying. The false impression here is that the wife is faithful to her husband.

He’s not even a friend!

Nor is he a close friend; in light of the fact that you hadn’t even known that he was married, one might well wonder whether he qualifies as a friend at all. (There’s a category difference between people we count as friends and people we’re merely friendly with.) In any case, what you owe to a close friend who hasn’t asked is different from what you owe to somebody you know less well.

In what world of ethics does doing the right thing only matter if the person is a friend? If you saw a little old lady being mugged, should you not stop to help because you don’t know her? If you were friends with the mugger should you not report the crime?

Honest people also recognize the importance of keeping secrets that others reasonably expect them to keep.

WTF? Honest people don’t let cheaters enlist them in conspiracies of silence. There’s keeping secrets like “I have Anne Frank hiding in my attic” and secrets like “I cheat on my spouse.” Why is the Ethicist muddying the waters?

At the very least, an honest person in these circumstances might want to speak with the woman involved before deciding what, if anything, should be said.

Ask your mugger friend first if you should report the crime.

That’s because honesty involves caring not only about the place of truth in one’s own life but also about its place in the lives of others. It is perfectly consistent with honesty to recognize that some truths are better told by someone else.

Like, people who don’t have direct knowledge of what happened. It’s much easier to discredit such people.

Have clarity!

And then, honesty requires clarity about your own motives. Are you sure that concern for the truth is the only thing driving you? Do you secretly hope that telling her husband about the affair will bring her back to you? Are you, perhaps unconsciously, trying to punish her? Or yourself? Those are the kinds of questions you ought to give thought to.

Those genital warts care about your motives.

We sometimes speak of exercising a virtue “to a fault.” What we mean is a kind of moralism that isolates one feature of a situation and, by overemphasizing it, turns a virtue into a vice.

Keeping secrets is a virtue, telling a man he’s being cheated on is a vice. This is what severe dunderheaded moralists believe.

A decent person answers to more than one virtue,

Just like you answer to your head and your dick.

and therefore to more than one moral concern. Speaking up in this case would put at risk a marriage that you and your ex-lover have already strained. That might be unkind.

Telling the truth is unkind. Truth strains marriages even more than cheating!

To do so without fully thinking through the consequences would be thoughtless. And kindness and thoughtfulness are virtues, too.

You slept with your friend’s wife. Oops! Say no more about it. You wouldn’t want to be thoughtless and unkind, would you?


Discover more from ChumpLady.com

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

50 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rebecca
Rebecca
7 days ago

I have written to The Ethicist more times than I care to think about!

His views towards cheating are hear no affair, speak no affair, see no affair. I’ve tried addressing robbing the chump of their good health, financial security, personal history and stability. I’ve even sent him other articles from the New York Times but to no avail.

Hate to give up trying to change his narrative but it’s like hitting my head against a brick wall.

His motivation for sticking to his “don’t tell” advice? Who knows.

Hell of a Chump
Hell of a Chump
7 days ago
Reply to  Rebecca

Maybe not incidentally, the current Times’ dynasty member (all the Sulzbergers blur together after awhile) at the helm of the Times is the son and grandson of FWs. The stories of reporters who were fired for, say, opposing the Iraq war suggest certain consequences for going off script and certain perks for toeing the line, no matter how hypocritical and heinous.

Stepbystep
Stepbystep
7 days ago

ChumpLady – I know I’ve forwarded your responses to this knucklehead. Have you ever heard back from him? His ethical conclusions seem to omit the right of the betrayed (and other sorts of victims) to their own “agency”.

KattheBat
KattheBat
7 days ago

This is such a load of word salad. Ethicist my muscular ass.

A difference between someone who hasn’t asked and someone you know less well? Who cares!! Letter writer slept with a woman who turned out to be married. She’s a cheater whether he’s close with her husband or not. This part of “Ethicist’s” response makes me think if LW was close with husband, he’d advise to only tell if he asks. I would hope though, that if they were close he’d be aware they were married and not sleep with her in the first place.

And this nonsense about “honest people keep the secrets others expect them to keep.” No duh a cheater isn’t going to want him to talk. And asking her if she wants him to tell husband is just an exercise in futility. If you find out your coworker is stealing money from the register do you ask them if they want you to tell the boss? The sheer stupidity of both these statements makes me feel like I’m pressing my face on a brick wall and wondering why I can’t walk through.

“hE dOesNt sEeM to sUUUUSSPEEECT anything”

Yeah no shit, that’s why it’s called cheating.

I truly just…can not…

Involuntary Georgian
Involuntary Georgian
7 days ago
Reply to  KattheBat

I agree. The idea that the letter-writer does not need to tell the husband because the husband doesn’t suspect anything is just crazy. The Ethicist clearly implies that if the husband already knew (or suspected) about the affair, then somehow the letter-write would have more of an obligation to spill this information (that, of course, wouldn’t even be needed under those circumstances). This reads as an official endorsement of “what you don’t know can’t hurt you” which AFAIK has been thoroughly debunked in just about every other context (eg in medical diagnoses, as CL points out).

The unifying through-line here is that everyone is conspiring to deprive the husband of agency in his own life, marriage (and health). My own personal perspective is that, while it’s true I had a couple of years of happy marriage when I was ignorant of my wife’s affair(s), once I knew the truth I was not only devastated in the moment but it wiped out 20 years of happy memories.

PrincipledLife
PrincipledLife
7 days ago

The ‘Ethicist’ is trying to make dishonesty a virtue. It’s not, and no one knows this better than Chumps. Would the Ethicist want to know if his spouse was screwing randos? Yes, of course he would.

Adelante
Adelante
7 days ago
Reply to  PrincipledLife

Ah, but would he want his husband (Appiah is gay) to know if he were screwing randos?

PrincipledLife
PrincipledLife
7 days ago
Reply to  Adelante

Adelante, I laughed when I read your response. Of course that is the explanation! Here I was picturing the ‘Ethicist’ as a disembodied intellectual in his ivory tower pondering degrees of ethical choice when he’s just another cheater trying to justify his furtive use of random orifices while not enlightening his partner about it.

Say, did you tell me a while back you were on ‘Our Path’? If you did, I’m sorry to have misplaced that info: my traumatized brain is doing better but is still basically swiss cheese in terms of storing info…

Adelante
Adelante
6 days ago
Reply to  PrincipledLife

Yes, I’m on OurPath. I go by “Out of His Closet” there.

Josh McDowell
Josh McDowell
7 days ago

Here’s some nuance…you’re denying someone their agency, to choose what to do next, even if it is painful. It’s going to eat this guy up if he doesn’t, and I guess that will be his consequence; to live with anxiety, fear, and possible health issues. Do the right thing.

LessConfusedNow
LessConfusedNow
6 days ago
Reply to  Josh McDowell

This is why CN has been so helpful to me. I would not have thought of the “agency” viewpoint on my own without reading about it here. I have my own “agency” story with FW.
We dated for about 2 years and then we broke up. While we were broken up, I really wanted to reconcile. I reached out to him and we started talking. I repeatedly went over to his apartment and we would have nice talks and cuddle. I was sooo hoping to get back together and he never led me to believe it was NOT a possibility. About a week after one of these trips to his apartment, I saw him driving in his car with another woman and later found out he had a girlfriend. As soon as I found out about the girlfriend, I cut it off. I think about agency because, had he given me ALL the information, the whole truth of the situation, I would have made (and ultimately did make) a decision to NOT invest further in (and hope in) the relationship. I have never thought about how that was an uneven dynamic between the two of us. My FW had CRITICAL additional information that he was pursuing another relationship with someone else but never let me know. Why? The only thing I can think of is kibbles. Like I said he was the Master at lying by omission.

Last edited 6 days ago by LessConfusedNow
Involuntary Georgian
Involuntary Georgian
7 days ago
Reply to  Josh McDowell

I don’t understand why the agency argument isn’t front-and-center in this conversation (on the NYT site, that is). It’s not that complicated and people seem to have accepted it in just about every other context. Nowadays it’s not OK to lie about cancer diagnoses; it’s not OK to lie about STIs; it’s not OK to lie about adoption – all things that, a generation or so ago people were willing to keep from the interested parties – but somehow adultery doesn’t get the same treatment.

Hell of a Chump
Hell of a Chump
7 days ago

As much as editors and owners likely wanted to bark down #MeToo– a movement that’s all about firming up public conceptions of sexual consent– the way the paper (through establishment sock puppet Michiko Kakutani) trashed Susan Faludi’s groundbreaking Backlash in 1993 (which, among other things, reported on sexual harassment in multiple industries), they could hardly backlash against the movement by outright promoting rape so I think they approach the issue obliquely by trying to soften up the public’s conception of sexual consent regarding infidelity instead. In any case, this is what the Times has always done regarding the whole gamut of reporting as a means of grubbing credence as a progressive news source while actually kowtowing to the powers that be, which, for the moment, is particularly r*pey and knuckle-dragging.

For instance, to grub liberal credence, the Times eventually had to allow some brave reporters to investigate on Weinstein (ten long years after editors knew what Weinstein was about). But from the multiple bizarre attacks on Sarah Manguso’s Liars (also about sexual consent at root), I sense there’s a lot of anxiety behind the scenes about how many media heads were taken down by the movement and the umpty gabillions this cost the industry.

Anyway, even if Noam Chomsky has been disgraced in the Epstein era, I still don’t think he was wrong when he described the Times as a kind of self-appointed gatekeeper for liberalism, setting an artificial and power-coddling line determining what is “healthy progressivism” and “dangerous radicalism” (Chomsky described it as “This far but no further”). So, according to the Times, calling out violent rape is healthy liberalism but (spoiler) calling out rape by deception that costs a victim their uterus is “dangerous radicalism.”

Hell of a Chump
Hell of a Chump
7 days ago

Oh and like most major media media corporations, the NY Times shares an agenda with the p*rn industry because the private equity company that owns about 30% of Times Company stock is solidly invested. Like the dating app industry, the porn industry (which is currently more profitable and powerful than all other media combined) arguably depends on a cheating mentality for market growth since limiting the market to only single consumers would put a ceiling on profits. So both industries and their many media investors profit from softening up public prohibitions against cheating.

LessConfusedNow
LessConfusedNow
7 days ago

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about “lying by ommission.” My ex seemed to be a MASTER of this and also of giving false impressions. I think there is a category called “deception” and lying is one component of deception but there are many other ways to deceive. And leaving important information out or not telling the whole truth or staying silent when you should speak up are all components of deception. Like I mentioned, my ex was a MASTER at this. When he left, I questioned him if there was someone else. He sent me a video of his apartment and asked, ” Does it LOOK like I’m living with anyone else?” And of course it didn’t and factually he wasn’t actually “living with” the other woman. But he was seeing her, and going to her house, and doing things for her, and buying “I love you” necklaces…..but technically he wasn’t living with her. Very deceptive. And the result was that I was left very confused as to what was going on. Ultimately I realized I couldn’t continue a marriage with someone so deceptive. And it seemed very natural to him.

SortofOverIt
SortofOverIt
7 days ago

They are all such utter b#stards.

Obviously every aspect of the betrayal is terrible.

But the thought of you sitting there confused, seeing your partner leave and NOT knowing why, it’s awful. But for you to outright ASK and he says “does it look like I am living with anyone?” It’s just so incredibly gross.

I have said this a million times, but once I got out and looked back, the part that I found the most hard to swallow about the affair was all the deception. It really wasn’t “oh he was in love with someone else”, sure, that wasn’t fun either. But what really upset me was the idea of me living my life, being a perfect little wifey while he was involved in a full blown affair that I was unaware of. They were long distance so a lot of communication was done via phone, while I was cleaning our home, doing our shopping, taking care of our kids, he was probably sitting on his unshapely ass texting her. That mundane, every day kind of deceit really is SO hard for me to get over.

ChumpOnFire
ChumpOnFire
7 days ago

LessConfused, I am in the same boat. My FW is the king of deception and withholding information. I’m so close to being divorced from this douche, and I can’t wait to get out of the hamster wheel of crazy. Before I figured out what was going on with his double life, he manipulated me like a wizard. I’m actually grateful that he had an affair that led me to file for divorce. The confusion and gaslighting is so detrimental to our mental health! So glad you got out, too.

Involuntary Georgian
Involuntary Georgian
7 days ago

This particular type of lying is called “paltering”: he deliberately answered you in a way that he knew you would misinterpret (and he counted on you misinterpreting). In his mind he didn’t lie because he “only” tricked you into inferring something that is contrary to the truth.

I once ran across a paltering experiment. The details don’t really matter, but the conclusion was that the palterers sincerely believed that they weren’t lying – it was the fault of the paltered-to for not understanding the situation correctly, even though it was completely clear from the circumstances that the palterers were using language in unconventional ways in order to deceive. At least with a straight-up lie of commission everyone agrees that it’s a lie; still not great to be lied to, but there’s a common moral framework that both parties acknowledge (even if, of course, one party has violated it). With paltering you don’t even have that, and the liar is internally blaming, and sniggering at, the other person for being duped. Honestly, IMO paltering is even more corrosive than lies of omission or commission.

The most famous example of paltering is Bill Clinton’s “it depends on what the definition of “is” is”, which (as I understand it) is fair game in a courtroom where lawyers are expected to try to trick and undermine each other. But that kind of adversarial relationship is not what I desire (or watch out for) in my spouse.

Savlona
Savlona
7 days ago

Now I have a precise word for what my FW was doing!
‘I’m going to a social club ‘ ( it was a sex club)
‘ I’m going out with a walking group ‘ ( naked kink walks, turns out it’s a thing 🤮)
But apparently he didn’t lie, just gave me partial truths…

CakeWalked
CakeWalked
6 days ago
Reply to  Savlona

Beware the partial truths. I know know in these lies of omission my FW was telling me exactly what he was up to. I have filled in a lot of blanks since the divorce with the most likely outcome.

OHFFS
OHFFS
7 days ago
Reply to  Savlona

Naked kink walks? That’s a new one to me. I wonder if they know they could get Lyme disease. After all, you have to be deep in the woods to do that without getting arrested.

Savlona
Savlona
6 days ago
Reply to  OHFFS

One can only hope, though a nettle patch would suffice…

Daughterofachump
Daughterofachump
6 days ago
Reply to  Savlona

On a related note, there are places where I never, ever wanted to get sunburned. Or a mosquito or chigger bite.

PrincipledLife
PrincipledLife
7 days ago
Reply to  Savlona

Naked kink walks?!…good Lord the bizarre sexual cul de sacs we are exposed to as partners of the deeply disordered…

Daughterofachump
Daughterofachump
6 days ago
Reply to  PrincipledLife

I could have happily lived the rest of my life without knowing this.

Imtired
Imtired
7 days ago

NY Times is biased. The media has their own agenda. I am surprised by his narrow pedantic view on infidelity based on his background. Maybe being in his ivory tower of academia has dulled him.

Daughterofachump
Daughterofachump
6 days ago
Reply to  Imtired

More likely, he’s a cheater himself and rationalizes it. If I were his husband, I’d get checked for STIs and start looking carefully at our finances.

Rensselaer
Rensselaer
7 days ago

Ah, yes. Part of the process of processing is learning just how many ways there are to lie. Who knew!?
I have also learned that some people have reality based thought processes and others are fantasy based. I live in realityville and he lives in delululand where everything he does and says can be rationalized as a reaction to what someone else has done or said.
Oh, and the writer needs to reassess how he views friendship.

Elizabeth Lee
Elizabeth Lee
7 days ago

Here’s what I wrote as a comment:

Why is it always “ethical” to keep secrets about somebody doing something bad? Oh, I’m wrong. It’s NEVER ethical to keep these kinds of secrets UNLESS it’s about a marriage partner harming their spouse.

People who have extramarital affairs open up their spouse to the possibility of STDs, unwanted pregnancy, and emotional harm. And TELLING the spouse is not the cause of the emotional harm or the STD or the pregnancy. It’s the actual extramarital relationship that causes the harm.

In this letter, the writer says that he knew he was doing something wrong in having a sexual relationship with a married woman. If the writer had stolen something you would tell him to return it or make restitution in some way. But stolen sex cannot be returned. What kind of restitution should be made? At the VERY LEAST he owes honesty to the person he harmed.

I wish the “Ethicist” would try putting himself in the place of the victim here instead of always looking out for the best interests of the perpetrator. Why does he do that?

Hell of a Chump
Hell of a Chump
7 days ago
Reply to  Elizabeth Lee

The problem is the problem, not talking about the problem.

CakeWalked
CakeWalked
6 days ago

I wish that were embraced by more people. Generally speaking, I think “we dont want to know” and “we dont want to hear about it” comes down to “ugh…now that I know something, I have a responsibility to maybe do something about it. And I dont want to be burdened with that. I have other things to worry about”.

Adelante
Adelante
7 days ago

Or, in CL speak: “The problem isn’t what I did, it’s your reaction to it.”

Hell of a Chump
Hell of a Chump
3 days ago
Reply to  Adelante

What she said. 😀

CakeWalked
CakeWalked
6 days ago
Reply to  Adelante

That too. Put responsibility back onto Chump.

lulutoo
lulutoo
7 days ago

Why do they even call him the “Ethicist”. Why not be honest and call him the “Non-Ethicist”. And I also can’t stand it when people say (about affairs), Well, maybe the couple has an ‘agreement’. If they do (they don’t! but if they do, you are not hurting them by telling. Right?

SortofOverIt
SortofOverIt
7 days ago
Reply to  lulutoo

This is something that stumps me too. Look, as you can probably tell from my comments, I am not a professional writer. And while I think I am a pretty decent person, I wouldn’t go so far as to say I am an expert on ethics, especialy not to the extent where I should be writing a column on ethics.

But be that as it may, I think I would do a much better job than this clown. Because damn, he gets it so wrong every time infidelity is brought up.

And yeah, the excise of “maybe they have an arrangement” is so flimsy. Sure, they might. But like you said, if they do, then speaking up shouldn’t be an issue. (also, that excuse makes more sense if you go to dinner and see your married neighbor having a romantic dinner with someone who is not her husband. The AP was the one asking here, and if there was an agreement, she probably would have told him that)

I also found it weird that he said “don’t blow up the poor guy’s life over a 2 week fling”. The “poor guy’s ” wife found her AP at an art class. Sure, that affair was short lived, but do we really think that is the only one she had? Come on. (Which isn’t to say that if it WAS the only one and it “only” lasted 2 weeks then sure, don’t tell the chump, But just saying, there is zero reason to think that she has been faithful otherwise)

Finally, we should never keep affairs a secret because of stories like Lacy Peterson and Shanann Watts.

PrincipledLife
PrincipledLife
7 days ago
Reply to  Tracy Schorn

Maybe if the innocent parent was on their deathbed, or a soldier returning to duty the next day in a time of war. But even then you’d have to weigh so carefully whether keeping the innocent spouse from information key to understanding their life was at all justifiable. I hope to never be in the position of having to deliver such news…or withold it.

2xchump
2xchump
7 days ago

What an awful terrible friend to have..one who keeps going with a married woman until the urge subsides. Nothing teaches the lesson better than consequences. This guy writing is on a path to more of the same. Sorry is as sorry does and no confession is not sorry at all
Shame on the advice!!

OHFFS
OHFFS
7 days ago

The “Ethicist” is right about one thing. I’m not buying the “a friend, close enough to care” thing either. If this was a friend close enough to care about, he would absolutely have known he was married. This is a guy he does not know well at all, probably a co-worker or friend of a friend. Their interactions consist only of brief small talk about the weather and such, otherwise he’d know the basics about the guy, like being married. He’s just pretending it’s a friend so the “Ethicist” will believe he wants to tell for noble reasons. In reality, he wants to tell in order to break up that marriage to get the “magical connection” back with the FW. Still, he should tell, even for the true noxious reason. The guy needs to know the truth about what’s been happening in his own life. Everybody does, whether they actually want to hear it or not. It will hurt them at the time, but ultimately it can only help them, provided they use the information to set themselves free from vile people and their lies. They may choose to keep being chumped instead, but at least they would have freedom of choice, which is an essential human right. Anybody who would take this right away from others with deception is not a good person or a safe person to be around. That’s why he should why he should tell, whether it’s a true friend or not. This man is not safe with his wife. She will risk his health and violate his rights and his consent again.
The “Ethicist” can go kick rocks.

Last edited 7 days ago by OHFFS
Daughterofachump
Daughterofachump
6 days ago
Reply to  OHFFS

She might even tell him that a child that isn’t his, is his. It happens. More than one would like to think. To the point where some men secretly get DNA tests for their newborn children.

ChumpOnFire
ChumpOnFire
7 days ago

Tracy, thanks for the UBT of the ethicist’s latest stumble. I wrote a comment on his column. Who knows if it will be published, but here is is regardless (and thanks for all the great material in your response to him above):

By advising this person to keep the secret, the ethicist is endorsing the cheater’s entitled behavior. What is ethical about condoning deceit? What is ethical about ignoring the unilateral decisions the cheater made about this man’s sexual health? STIs happen every day to betrayed partners. Why is keeping the cheater’s secret more ethical than informing the betrayed person about the affair? I don’t understand why the ethicist routinely preaches telling the truth in other matters of betrayal, but when it comes to sexual infidelity, he sides with the cheater.

thelongrun
thelongrun
7 days ago

I don’t want to say I get actually depressed when Tracy brings up this scumbag The Ethicist, but I’m not far off from that.

[And I apologize for using scumbag or scummy or scum so much in my language, but I’ve come to the conclusion over the years since D-day that cheaters and those that support them in any way tend to be among the lowest of the low on the evolutionary moral chain.

And even scatological insults fall short of what they deserve, to me (sh*t is fertilizer! It has value!🤣).

Scum doesn’t have much if any value in life, and to many seems a tame insult, so it flies under the radar for many people, and definitely censors, I believe (I’m talking to you, Google!🤬).

So I’ve adopted my insults regarding cheaters and the like to mainly revolve around the notion of scum. If anybody has a harsher way of insulting these types of people, that doesn’t set censors off, feel free to let me know!😁]

Anyway…to me, my primary thoughts are…this person is either a cheater himself or herself (not sure about the gender, or transgender status at this moment), or an ally to cheaters, or a cheater waiting to happen.

So, this person’s in a position to influence people that are clueless and weak in character. And that’s not a good thing. Tracy’s intellectual skewering of him shows that he/she/they don’t have a clue what they’re talking about, despite claiming otherwise.

And so, I tend to discount anything this idiot says. But, thank God Tracy’s willing to address these cretins. At least the better viewpoint is out there, if anybody’s willing to look.

We can’t control others, right? We can only present them with a better cognitive view, and hope they see things more clearly. But, I doubt that any of us are holding our breath for it to happen.

stillachump
stillachump
7 days ago

I’ve heard this crap from so many people. Don’t tell the chump if their spouse is cheating because you will ruin a perfectly good marriage!
What’s so perfectly good about it if one of them is cheating?
Personally I’d want to know so I don’t waste any more time with someone who has been deceiving me. I had a friend whose spouse said he would not tell her if they cheated on her because then she would leave him. So to me that means you cannot trust him anyway. But he said he’s never cheated in any relationship and he’s 99 percent sure he would not do it now. But cannot promise he would not cheat. I’m thinking of suggesting she get out because it sounds to me he’s basically saying he’s going to.

susie lee
susie lee
6 days ago
Reply to  stillachump

Yeah unless it was some kind of new age marriage vow, I am betting he didn’t 99 percent vow to forsake all others. He is leaving that opening so he can say I never said I wouldn’t, and you stayed.

Daughterofachump
Daughterofachump
6 days ago

I just about burst into flames when I read the Ethicist’s answer to this letter. I have no idea why he constantly supports cheaters, unless of course he’s a cheater himself. I wrote a pretty hot comment in response to the column. Probably didn’t get published.

I’m absolutely on Team Tell. Because, as our leader Chump Lady and many chumps have pointed out, the chump spouse is making decisions about his or her life on the completely false premise that they have a faithful spouse. And they’re left open to possible infection by STIs, theft of marital assets, and, in the case of male chumps, the very real possibility of raising and financially supporting children who aren’t genetically theirs.

IWhat is with the Ethicist? And what is with all the people who supported cheaters in the NYT comments?

jahmonwildflower
jahmonwildflower
6 days ago

Ugh. I recall, back when I was slowly learning about all of the various betrayal objects, I learned of one, much, much younger than him, who was married and living with her husband in the DC area at the time. However, she actively was “dating.” She had contracted some serious STIs/STDs from her many “dates. ” I contacted both her, and her husband, as I was early on and trying in vain to find all the many betrayal objects. She was still living with her husband, now back in TX, where she was from, apparently. My ex was livid I had contacted both her and her husband. He said, “You’ll ruin their marriage.” Hardly. She had ruined it long ago. Now her husband knew the truth. He could do with it as he pleased. I told as many husbands I could find of the betrayal objects who were married. I say the best thing to do is tell. I sure wish someone would have told me back in the 1980s when he began cheating!!

marcos24
marcos24
4 days ago

The affair with my partner was never a love it was just a cheating distraction that ruined something real . Up to today I still regret my life because I trusted her and didn’t believe she was a cheat . But thank God I came across( Nicolascaryb @ gmailcom) he helped me spy into my partners phone without her consent

kalifah
kalifah
4 days ago

The affair was a distraction, loyalty would have been better story . Though I didn’t want to put this story here but some people might not believe but it’s the truth .. I was with a toxic and dishonest woman but I didn’t have proof until ( Nicolascaryb @ gmail.com came to my rescue. Giving me access into her phone without me touching her phone within just 12hours . Please contact him if you need to know maybe your partner is a cheat or loyal .