To not let DH go to this woman’s house?

[Fellohesh]

A couple of months ago, we went out with some friends who all met up at our house before leaving together to go to town. Before they arrived, DH put his jacket on but I didn’t think it matched the outfit and I also just didn’t think it was very nice in general. I told him so but he said he likes it so he’s wearing it.

When everyone arrived, one of the women said “what’s going on with your outfit?” to DH, and he asked why she didn’t like it. She said something about the jacket and DH disappeared upstairs and came down wearing a new one and said “is that better?”. I felt hurt at the time that he didn’t value my opinion but cared about what she thought of him. The next day I asked if he fancied her, to which he replied “she’s attractive” I said if we weren’t together would he ask her out and he said maybe (the convo was longer of course but I’m trying to keep this short and give the gist).

He came home from work yesterday saying this same woman is training to be a hairdresser and has offered to cut his hair for free while she practices. He has thick wavy hair and gets a scissor cut so it’s not just a simple trim with the clippers. However, she doesn’t have a salon or anything as she isn’t qualified so it would be at her house. AIBU to say no to this?

Then the marriage is over regardless. She will be watching him like a hawk and that isn’t healthy

Apparently it's "naïve" to expect a married man to have the self control to not cheat on his wife.
Honestly, it's depressing 🙄

Probably if the jacket incident hadn’t happened, then op woujdn’t think twice about the haircut appointment (and my dh goes to a private house for his hair cut). However, the fact that dh immediately responded to friends criticism about his jacket, but had ignored op, his wife, has made op’s senses tingle. Also, this woman is a virtual stranger, a barmaid in the pub, so why was her opinion so important? A line has been crossed somewhere.

What's wrong with being an 'outspoken' woman? The comments on here are going from the sublime to the ridiculous. 'Nip it in the bud?' Yes. Why on earth would she want to encourage her husband to spend time with a woman who is clearly challenging her marriage?

The marriage is over? What the hell? I see on MN constantly that woman are being told that their marriage is 'over'. Does no-one try to work on their marriages any more?

It could be worse, she could have invited him over for a free back, sac and crack wax...

”working on the marriage” is a euphemism for being a doormat.

If there’s no trust or respect there’s no marriage.

Not necessarily for the OP as she seems more rational than most,

Clearly some posters can’t live with their husbands without controlling them or looking through their own phone or recording their conversations. Is that a happy way to live? i mean each to their own and all that but it sounds bloody grim!

I know someone whose husband cheated decades ago but she was determined to stay in her marriage even though they are both hideously unhappy - that’s no way to live!

Hope all stays innocent op x

What I'm getting at is that I see OPs repeatedly being told that their marriage is over when little information is apparent.

I don't agree that working on a marriage is reflective of being used as a doormat. Some couples who are having problems can survive it and go go forwards in a stronger position. And continue to love one another.

I do accept that there are times when it's blindingly obvious that couples should split, and always when the relationship is abusive,

... and on that note, and for info, I divorced my abusive ex-husband and took the fucker to the cleaners.

Broken down, he fancies her and wants to go to her house on his own to have her touch his hair for a while, of course nothing else could potentially happen in this scenario!

I’d also argue she perhaps likes him back, the jacket comment is oddly familiar for someone you’ve just met. I certainly wouldn’t comment on a man’s jacket unless it was particularly nice perhaps.

Totes agree with you. You need to know when things become unreconcilable.

I’m not necessarily saying OP’s marriage is over. There’s not enough to go on and we don’t know what the DH’s intentions are.

But the phrase “work on the marriage” (see also “fight for the marriage/fight for love”) is in my experience a sign of someone who is sacrificing their self respect trying to hold onto something that is long dead.

A marriage should be naturally supportive, loving and based on trust and respect. When you get to the point of having to “work on it” it’s no longer worth keeping.

I don’t believe you can or should come back from infidelity. When someone has shat on you from a great height (or tried to), going back to them and trying to “fix” things is simply debasing yourself. You will not be able to recover the previous relationship and only make them have contempt for you. And its a terrible example to set children.

When its gone, its gone.

Absolutely, it’s one too many little things and we tell women never to ignore their instincts

I don't really understand all this - do you really want to be in a relationship with a man who doesn't cheat because you flail around trying to block his access to it, quiz him about who he finds attractive and check his phone?

If he wants to fuck the barmaid with all the fashion advice - the quicker the better - get it over with and him out the door.

You know you have a whole life to live, don't you OP that doesn't involve this level of anguish?

I agree with this. He obviously felt it was a bit off Op to even ask you about going in the first place, so hopefully that’s the end of that.

Do people really think that because they've made vows they need do no more? Like that's it? It's just the beginning...
The only time a man may be loyal is if he has no other options.
Then it's made like a boast 'my Nigel would never cheat', or Nigel himself boasts he'd never cheat.
And you look at Nigel and think 'that's because you either were unattractive to begin with and your wife married you for other reasons like money, unless you do something to jeopardise her lifestyle she doesn't give a f* what you do, in fact if it gets you out of her hair she'd welcome it, or you've become unattractive. Nothing to do with how moral you are.'

But the truth is that if a person is reasonably attractive some third party will be there after them, and you know what, if the marriage is at a weak point and a 'friendship' exists with a member of the opposite sex that's when you've got the 3 ingredients for the perfect storm that is an affair.

BTW, I've never known a guy have contempt for a woman who forgives his cheating.
Never.
The other way round? Yes.

@QuintadosMalvados

Do people really think that because they've made vows they need do no more? Like that's it? It's just the beginning...
The only time a man may be loyal is if he has no other options.
Then it's made like a boast 'my Nigel would never cheat', or Nigel himself boasts he'd never cheat.
And you look at Nigel and think 'that's because you either were unattractive to begin with and your wife married you for other reasons like money, unless you do something to jeopardise her lifestyle she doesn't give a f* what you do, in fact if it gets you out of her hair she'd welcome it, or you've become unattractive. Nothing to do with how moral you are.'

We obviously just look at this in fundamentally different ways.

I believe if you make a vow to be faithful you should keep the vow. If someone else breaks the vow then that's on them, not you. They've invalidated the vow. It's not on you, as the cheated party (or nearly cheated party) to be trying to "fix" something which someone else has broken. Certainly not to be running around trying to prevent someone from breaking vows before they've done it.

Also with your "Nigel would never cheat" point: you seem to be implying that the likelihood that you will cheat is directly correlated with your physical attractiveness? I just don't believe this. People cheat for all manner of reasons, but there isn't a sliding scale that dictates that the less attractive you are, the less likely you are to cheat. And again, if you believe your husband is more likely to cheat, it's not your responsibility trying to stop him.

But the truth is that if a person is reasonably attractive some third party will be there after them, and you know what, if the marriage is at a weak point and a 'friendship' exists with a member of the opposite sex that's when you've got the 3 ingredients for the perfect storm that is an affair.

Maybe so. I just don't believe that the onus is on me to prevent my husband or partner from cheating.

I'm not married and would never get married, partly because I think the idea of being legally bound to someone for life is unrealistic and usually unworkable, so maybe none of this applies to me anyway.

But lots of people do manage to make marriages work successfully and I'm pretty sure that's not only because the women take it upon themselves to prevent their husbands cheating.

Do people really think that because they've made vows they need do no more? Like that's it? It's just the beginning...

Yes it is but that shouldn’t have to include policing your spouse’s behaviour to ensure they don’t sleep with someone else. It’s a superficial delusion to think someone has to be conventionally attractive to be given the opportunity to cheat. Attraction isn’t just about looks. Marriage is about trust and there is none if you feel the need to monitor your spouse’s behaviour constantly. It must be exhausting.

I never said it was about looks.
Attractive means just that: other people find them attractive.
You can have an ordinary looking man who is highly charismatic.

Nobody has said she should be monitoring him all the time, either, merely trying to prevent him from these 'friendships' with other women.

This was called good sense at one time but given that people equate her expressing her concern with actually physically stopping him from seeing her, I'm not sure that exists much any more.

Nobody has said she should be monitoring him all the time, either, merely trying to prevent him from these 'friendships' with other women.

That’s an oxymoron if ever I saw one - how does she achieve this “prevention” without monitoring him? What an exhausting and miserable way to live.

A marriage based on one spouse constantly trying to impose boundaries on behalf of the other spouse because the other spouse can’t maintain their own boundaries is a failure. Its madness to think this is a viable way to live.

THIS

Do you honestly believe that the only time a man is loyal is "when he has no other options"?? So all men would cheat if they could?

I don't have a great opinion of a lot of men overall but even I wouldn't say this about men in general.

There are definitely good men out there who have enough integrity to not cheat even when the potential to do it is there.

Asking your husband if he fancies someone just because he changed his jacket when she said she didn’t like it and he didn't when you said the same, is alarmingly insecure.