Dh exw used to refer to ds and me as that woman and her son, as in You are spending more time with that woman's son than with your own son, or, don't spend money on that woman and her son that you could be spending on your own children (and this with extremely generous maintenance, extra money for school fees, I,e, half, and still paying half of sundry extras such as laptop, etc. and a terrific salary of her own...).
Golden uterus much? Needless to say I was not ow, we met after their divorce, both cheated.
Unfortunately dh and I have also had many issues, they are wearing me down atm. I keep thinking of exw being v bitter when he left (to be on his own), how their kids suffered in the toxic atmosphere she created before me and in the early years of our relationship, and how dh didn't protect me from that. Sometimes I think they deserve each other (and have told dh this on numerous occasions).
Maybe I should have taken heed of the poison arrows and not brushed them off so lightly...
I've seen posts where the op says that her dc are meeting the new gf and then for the rest of the post is referred to as OW!! Errr? I don't think so!
I agree totally, I've been accused on mn of being the OW... But I met dh over 6 years after his fling with the mother if his child was over. It had nothing to do with me!
I would hate to have been given the title of OW when I was his DP (partner) and now DW! I was never the OW that's rather degrading
DHs first wife still refers to me as his ' current partner'. We have been together ten years and married three.....
China - I love the term "golden uterus". It very nicely sums up the way my partner's ex is. She often starts sentences with "But I am the mother of your children.."
OP - You are right, OW is a horrible thing to be labelled as when you had no part in the relationship break down and only met your partner/husband once the relationship was over.
Similarly, I am still referred to as "the new girlfriend" and I think I still will be once we are married and have our own children.
They're just as bad as each other if they aren't used in the correct context. Just like referring to stepchildren or children of the new partnership in a negative way.
But a lot depends too on the way they are intended. I remember a thread not long ago where the defence of those using BM was that it was just an acronym that the posters thought was in common use and no offence was intended. It could be the case with OW too. Equally there will be times when they are used knowing exactly what reaction they are intending to provoke.
I didn't realise people did this, it's so offensive.
It's commonly used in this way on other boards on MN - but woe-betide you if you challenge it as that is the quickest way to get a flaming!
I agree it's horrible to refer to a new partner as ow if they were nothing to do with the breakup. I didn't realise people did this, it's so offensive.
All my various step mums apart from one will always be ow though as they all overlapped each other, bit like a relay race. I think if they start as an ow/om that's how they remain in people's minds.
I'm with you on the name change china, if I was to split with DH, I would keep my name as it is also my sons name, but that's just me and know not everyone feels like that.
She can't still be the "other woman" unless you consider yourself still to be your ex's first woman. And if he's your ex, then you're not his woman
Not all woman feel like this.
In some woman's eyes, the fact that she had borne his DCs bind her to a man for life and she believes he has an obligation to her over and above any other woman in the mans life. She does consider herself his first woman, forever.
It's such a common psychology that its been given a label in the USA - it may seem distasteful to some, but the term golden uterus accurately describes the emotions involved.
It can happen the other way though - my ex is furious that I have not changed my name and I am still Mrs <hissurname>. He has remarried and he considers that there should only be one Mrs <hissurname>, not two of us!!!!
Even worse is when I see any subsequent dc born into the new relationship referred to badly
I do know what you mean but I see the term OW used all the time, regardless of what caused the relationship to break down.
It's fair enough to say that someone was previously the OW - if you're explaining why the relationship with their DSC is strained.
But you do see it used a lot in the present tense to describe someone that was the OW many years ago when talking about things that are nothing to do with the break up of a marriage.
Well if the woman was seeing the man whilst he was still married behind his wife's back, them she is the OW and fair enough to refer to her that way. I also think that even when a man marries the OW and she becomes the wife, there can still be massive problems if the dc are old enough to understand the new wife had a part in breaking up the marriage of their parents. These problems can be lifelong, some step children will never forgive a third person involved in breaking up their home. My brother is mid thirties and despises my step mother, she was the OW and my dad and her live in our ex family home still, using plenty of my mum's stuff with no guilt or shame. Not surprising really.
It is however very unfortunate when people get together with an already divorced person but are still assumed to be the OW/OM.
Good point purple, (after I got my head round it!)
I don't even think it should be used to describe someone who broke up a marriage (leaving aside that it is actually the married person's responsibility not to be unfaithful....)
Once the marriage is finished, then the new partner is "Ex's GF/DP/DW" She can't still be the "other woman" unless you consider yourself still to be your ex's first woman. And if he's your ex, then you're not his woman!
I'd never refer to my DP's ex's new partner as the 'OM' - he's her DP. He once was the OM, but that's in the past. And my DP is certainly not her man. He's mine
Can you imagine if I was to hijack a loan P tread and kick off about that term? We are wrong on this thread (because we exists) and we are wrong on that thread (because we must be OW) grrrr! Sorry for rant, I'm not normally like this
Good point Emily. The term “OW” signifies (IMO) a mistress or ‘bit on the side’ – in other words, adultery or infidelity, a relationship that should not be taking place, or a relationship that broke up a marriage.
“OW” should definitely not be used to describe a subsequent wife or partner who arrives AFTER the end of the man’s first marriage.
So sick of seeing the new women in men's lives referred to as OW I may bring back bio mum!
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.