To show DH's friend and friend's new woman what I think of them?

[Anonycat]

My DH has a hobby that I don’t share, which is fine. His hobby friends, male and female, form quite a big part of our socialising, with partners. I do often find this quite tedious as they tend to talk obsessively about the hobby, but DH enjoys it and I formed a good relationship with another "hobby widow", a woman a bit older than me (in her 50s) and we always got together at social events to chat about other stuff.

This woman, Anna, and her partner Bill were very kind to another woman I didn’t previously know, Claire, who was in an abusive relationship. Anna and Bill helped Claire leave her abusive husband and let her stay with them for a couple of months while she sorted out a new home for herself. Then Claire left for this new home - and Bill went with her. This came as a complete bombshell to Anna, who was devastated and said she had had no suspicion anything was going on.

Anna and Bill had been together for about 15 years. They had no children together but Bill had a child from a previous relationship. In the early years Anna had given Bill money to support this child, then a teenager, and recently gave a lot of support to the young man and his wife with newborn twins.

I think both Bill and Claire have treated Anna appallingly. I appreciate that no-one really knows what goes on in other people's relationships, and perhaps it was right for them to split up, but I feel strongly about the way it was done.

My problem is that Bill now brings Claire to all the social events to which Anna previously came, as if he has just done a swap, and she chats and laughs as if she hasn’t a care in the world, and expects me to respond likewise. Bill knows how I feel because he asked my DH if DH and I would like to go round for a meal with them and DH told him he knew I wouldn't do that. So far I have just avoided Claire and Bill as much as I can, and been polite but distant, and said as little as possible, but this is getting increasingly difficult to sustain. DH agrees that they treated Anna very badly but just wants to let it go, and carry on as before. He wants me to keep going to the events with him but says my coldness is noticeable and embarrasses him and is getting ridiculous. But even being coldly polite to them makes me feel disloyal to Anna (who I still meet occasionally, and who is still very unhappy).

What should I do?
YABU - these things happen, move on and stop giving Bill and Claire a hard time.
YANBU - in solidarity with Anna you should stop going to the social events or continue barely speaking to Bill and Claire. If they or your DH don’t like it, tough.

I understand how this is easier for everyone! But honestly how much BAD behaviour do you think people get away with, because the people surrounding them don’t want to get involved or pick sides. I’m not saying the OP should be rude to them- but friendly with them….that’s a different story!

Everyone judges other people based on their actions, it's human nature and Claire and Bill have been spectacularly shitty to Anna. OP is Anna's friend and feels some loyalty towards her. OP is entitled to be friends with who she likes and doesn't have to be friends with people she doesn't like. Being coldly polite but not friendly to Claire and Bill is fine.

I agree!!

If Anna is still your friend then by all means blank Bill and Claire, it sounds like a scenario where you need to pick a side.

If not, then be polite when you see them at meet ups but not at the level where you visit each others houses etc.

You don’t know what went on behind closed doors and people are not inclined to leave good relationships.

I think this is sensible. You don't have to be best buds just a bit grown up.

I think you should go, invite Anna to go with you. Sod them!

But her husband wants her to be 'best buds'. She is polite to them but not friendly, which is fine.

OP isn't telling her husband what to do, so why is he putting pressure on OP?

Nope I would not be doing this. Coldly polite is fine.

She moved into their home! Ulterior motive much?

He invited her. Her motives and irrelevant. She can want him all day and night, means nothing if he doesn't choose to let her in.

It was his commitment and his responsibility. He's not a possession to be stolen, he's a person with agency who made choices. Choices that are much easier to make when he doesn't get blamed for them but the woman does. I don't know how you can fail to see that this attitude enables cheating men. But like I said before, it's pushing water uphill. People need to blame the woman, and they will. Don't be surprised when arsehole men take advantage of it.

I’m not missing the point. I was responding to this specific comment of OP’s.

"Everyone should pursue their happiness"? What, regardless of the damage they do to anyone else's life along the way? I don’t agree with you.

Exiting to pursue happiness will always cause damage and morally we should aim to limit that damage, which Bill hasn’t done.

So being fake is ‘grown up’ then?

No the OP is being true to herself and her opinion and to pretend she’s nothing other than coolly civil would be fake and disingenuous.

I can’t bear people who smile to your face when they don’t like you. That’s boring yo do with being a grown up imo

Another one who thinks you shouldn't have to hide how you feel and that your reaction is more than understandable.

Could you arrange to see Anna at some of the times you would otherwise go to hobby events? She must be aware of when they take place too; you could take her mind off things and spare yourself the awkwardness of being around Bill and Claire.

And your husband shouldn't be demanding you bend yourself into a shape you don't want to be just for his comfort in a social situation.

*Nothing to do with being a grown up

(damn apple and it’s predictive text)

As a woman who escaped a violent, abusive marriage I could not disagree more. I actually did go and stay with a friend and her dh whilst I got myself sorted. It wouldn’t have mattered if her dh had been Brad Pitt himself, if he had got down on his knees and begged to share his millions with me, I would never have gone anywhere near him. I am fully capable of taking responsibility for MY OWN actions, and the mere idea of shagging the husband of a friend who had shown me such kindness is repulsive to me.

To use your words - he could want me all day and night but it means nothing if I don’t choose to let him in.
Does my being married to a total twat give me permission to act like a total twat? No, it does not. I am responsible for me.
Bill is, quite obviously, a rancid specimen and responsible for his own actions, but Claire is equally responsible for hers. That does not “blame women” or enable cheating men, it means everyone takes responsibility for their own actions. Like actual grown ups.

Fantastic post!

Of course it's to do with her!

Her friend has been betrayed. The OP should not be expected to socialise or in fact, have anything to do with that couple if she doesn't want to

I am fully capable of taking responsibility for MY OWN actions

And yet, it seems, not capable of making men take responsibility for theirs.

You can't go around declaring that women are responsible for men because if they weren't available, men would be faithful. It's repressive, misogynistic, sexist and ultimately completely meaningless. The fidelity of a man who is faithful only for lack of opportunity is worthless.

It's good that you didn't shag a married man, but it doesn't exonerate him from his commitment. When Ben and Emma make a commitment, it's nice that Jill doesn't get involved in it, but it's still Ben's responsibility. If Jill doesn't doesn't involved, it's still Ben's responsibility. Marriage is opt in.

And if unmarried Claire is just as responsible for Bill's marriage as he is, then marriage is worthless. It's added nothing on him. It makes him no more responsible than a random person.

The emotive nature of your post doesn't change any of this. If you had shagged someone else while married, that would have been on you.

@NonPlayerCharacter I very clearly said “Bill is responsible for his own actions”. Which he is. And I did NOT say that Claire was responsible for Bills marriage or indeed Bills actions. She is not. She is however responsible for her own actions. And there is literally nothing “repressive, misogynistic or sexist” about that. Women have a choice, same as men. Bill could have kept his pants on. Claire could have said no. No one forced either of them to do anything, they BOTH chose it. And I would say exactly the same if the genders were reversed.
If in this scenario, it hadn’t been “Claire” who moved in, but “Kevin” and then Kevin and Anna did the dirty on Bill, I would place equal emphasis on Kevin as I do on Claire. Anna would be responsible but Kevin would be too, since he is responsible for himself. He could have said no. Frankly, for me, it’s got bugger all to do with gender, it’s to do with behaviour and taking personal responsibility for your actions. You don’t get a pass to behave abominably because you happen or happen not to have a penis, it’s irrelevant.

It is extremely repressive, misogynistic and sexist to say women are responsible for men's actions. It's the very cornerstone of misogyny. But I know you won't accept that.

It seems pretty clear to me what's happening here. You did not shag a married man while vulnerable, and you are very proud of that, rightly. However, it now forms so much of your self image, which abuse always makes fragile, that you need to feel "more" righteous by upping the blame and opprobrium on women who made rge opposite choice. The worse they are, the better you are. As you've never been a MM, you don't have the same need to heap opprobrium on them because it won't have the same effect on your sense of self.

It does make sense as a thought process, but it's still misguided. It's dishonourable to shag a married man, sure, but as he was the one who promised fidelity, he is the ultimate safeguard. One's righteousness in staying away from married men isn't eroded by that fact. We literally make these promises precisely because we know we can usually find someone else if we want to.

And an insistence on holding women responsible for married men doesn't make someone more righteous. It just erodes men's responsibility, erases the commitment of marriage, reinforces sexist double standards and makes it easier for men to cheat.

What the hell is the point of Bill getting married if it literally leaves any other person in the world just as responsible for it as he is? We should let men know that marriage doesn't actually represent any greater responsibility for fidelity and care than they had beside. They'd probably be keener to do it once they realise that. Keener to fuck around, too.

This is a derail, so sorry OP, I'll stop now. I just find it so hard to see MM shagging around and people falling over themselves to blame the women. Completely unable to see that they're upholding sexist double standards, enabling male cheating, making marriage worthless (since it apparently doesn't make a man any more responsible than some uncommitted woman) and all the rest of it.

This is an excellent post. Women are not children or simpletons with no thought or free will or control over our own actions. We have agency. It is not feminist to infantilize us and reduce us to passive objects without the ability to control our own actions; it is misogyny.

Absolutely 💯 👏👏

Of course Bill is to blame for being a lying cheating scummy POS who can’t keep it in his trousers. That goes without saying.

But let’s not pretend the woman who knowingly sleep with a married man are complete scum who deserve every bit of scorn that comes their way along with the cheating wanker they’ve shacked up with.

To call both people involved out as disgusting isn’t sexist or misogynistic - it’s the same regardless of the sex.

Men are responsible for their behaviour and women are responsible for theirs. Ownership of a penis or a vagina doesn’t make anyone more or less accountable

Exactly this. My blood isn’t boiling because I don’t know them, but I find that keeping my nose out of others people’s marriages serves me well. Support your friend, but I absolutely would not be getting involved in it. I’d be polite, and get on with my day tbh. Not your business.

For me it wouldn't be about revenge or soldiarity with Anna, it would be that these people behaved in a way that meant I would not want to be friends with them.
Its not about judging its about spending time with people you don't hold in contempt and I prefer not to

Possibly the worst case of ‘arm chair psychology” I’ve ever read on here.
By your post, it is clear that, providing you yourself were single, you’d have no compunction in shagging a friends husband. In that case all I can say is, I wouldn’t. And I’m glad you’re not my “friend”.