Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Watching this video, I didn't think it was real. Even if it was... there are 3 offenders.
Things that actually happened:
The guy used schemed to call her out on public radio, had the anger/motivation to follow through with it, told her to get her crap out of his house, and cited cheating as the reason. At the end of the recording it could be noticed that he felt vindicated for righting a violation against his integrity.
The radio hosts mediated the whole thing. They made the call, they set up the woman for the blow (smiling while doing it, you can hear it in their voices/chuckles.)
The woman, really didn't do much during this event, but she played her part too. First she hesitated about answering whether she was cheating and then she said it was a past mistake. Fear/surprise gripping her (not sadness), she cried. When questioned about the recent affair, which would prove her to be a liar, she had nothing to say and then she began to redirect the focus on the man that outted her infidelity.
Personal verdict? All are equally pathetic. All showed calculated, exploitive manipulations. Whether it was to hurt someone, hide something, or to boost ratings, they did what they felt was best for their interests.
I felt this way after I saw the video and it saddens me that after reading through various posts, I'm in the crowd of the few. It would seem there is a problem of filters.
If you thought it was funny, you're pretty blind to the situation or just happily ignorant. It's totally ok, not every moment is seen with a critical eye and you're probably a happier person for that reason.
If you thought the radio station was wrong, well this is their job, stunts like these are not uncommon, and we have some freedom of speech left. Freak shows will always have their ring leaders.
You'll be not-so-surprised what I've saved for last.
Both the man and woman acted out of passion and showed a lack of control. The same part of the brain that is responsible for lust is the same part that is responsible for fear and anger. Wiki it, google it, scientific american it, Paul Ekman it... it's a pretty reasonable theory.
So why is it that people are siding with one over the other?
What goals/adjendas/perceptions are at play here? Here's what I see.
Mothering/Fathering. There are a few posters here that are on a mission to 'protect' which ever individual is more valuable to them.
Not surprisingly, many defend the woman. They do so with name calling of the man, projecting personal emotions onto the issues(they place themselves in the same scenario... and you should avoid the people that need to fear repercussions for behaving irresponsibly), and most defenders simply say how mean it was to make her cry. She's crying out of emotional overload, fear and shame, not pain. Sad people don't make excuses and defend themselves from what makes them sad...
The people that defend the man... yeah, about that. What's the best way to remove yourself from a problem? Making it the focus of your attention and planning and plotting and keeping in your mind for as long as you can? No. Being cheated on sucks, and it's about a thousand times worse if you build it up in your head. Write a hateful letter, and don't send it, and move on.
For the name callers out there... you're not fooling anyone. If you think you're the shining light that will guide us all, we're in for a much darker and ignorant future. Please leave out comments like:
"Is this another last post? Really, "box of rocks" comes to mind."
And please don't discount actual research to prove a very un-evolved theory
"Do your research, real research, don't just booble it and quote the first thing you see that might back your assertions."
Hell, why don't we cut out personal insults like this, since we're mature adults here have no need to succumb to emotions and post immature things like discounting peoples basic cognitive abilities .
"Because you say so, and you have great reading skills, right? You must have missed this, conveniently."
All I really want to say is stop worrying about who YOU are and actually focus on ALL the people Immediately relevant to situation that has been presented.
And for your white knights and ladies, showing sympathy unequally in a situation where no one is innocent is sexist.
Oh good lord. 40 pages over this? Have we forgot that we reap what we sow? An eye for an eye? The golden rule? The truth shall set you free? All's fair in love and war?
She publicly shamed him when she cheated in public. And he, in turn, publicly shamed her by exposing her. There is nothing unfair about this. There is no written rule that one must respond to classless acts with acts of class.
In many countries, the cheater would be stoned to death or publicly humiliated. She should be glad she does not live in any of those countries. And in my country, the person who cheats should feel so ashamed that they should be sorry forever and impale themselves in a ritualistic fashion to express everlasting guilt. Did she say she was sorry? Not once.
The guy did good. Not exactly the high road, but not as bad as what many made it sound like either. I didn't particularly enjoy witnessing her downfall, but she needed a wake-up call. And he gave it to her, much better than many guys would have done. Most guys would have cheated back, or beat the crap out of her. This was a civil and even-handed method. Public humiliation is a great tool that is underused in modern times, mostly because we have all been guilty of similar transgressions in the past and tend to write it off as a socially acceptable "mistake". It is valuable to see that there are consequences to actions. And no, your soul doesn't shrivel up and die when you are humiliated. You survive and remodel your behavior.
Look at above post by Benzerz: Finally, a voice of reason... and a sound psychoanalysis. Stop making this situation a personal one. People act and react. It is what it is.
Oh good lord. 40 pages over this? Have we forgot that we reap what we sow? An eye for an eye? The golden rule? The truth shall set you free? All's fair in love and war?
She publicly shamed him when she cheated in public. And he, in turn, publicly shamed her by exposing her. There is nothing unfair about this. There is no written rule that one must respond to classless acts with acts of class.
In many countries, the cheater would be stoned to death or publicly humiliated. She should be glad she does not live in any of those countries. And in my country, the person who cheats should feel so ashamed that they should be sorry forever and impale themselves in a ritualistic fashion to express everlasting guilt. Did she say she was sorry? Not once.
The guy did good. Not exactly the high road, but not as bad as what many made it sound like either. I didn't particularly enjoy witnessing her downfall, but she needed a wake-up call. And he gave it to her, much better than many guys would have done. Most guys would have cheated back, or beat the crap out of her. This was a civil and even-handed method. Public humiliation is a great tool that is underused in modern times, mostly because we have all been guilty of similar transgressions in the past and tend to write it off as a socially acceptable "mistake". It is valuable to see that there are consequences to actions. And no, your soul doesn't shrivel up and die when you are humiliated. You survive and remodel your behavior.
Look at above post by Benzerz: Finally, a voice of reason... and a sound psychoanalysis. Stop making this situation a personal one. People act and react. It is what it is.
I agree. I enjoyed every minute of it. Every action, there is a reaction. Next time, she'll go to the guys apt.
I think there is something very sadistic about public humiliation. This guy had a right to be upset, but he should have had some dignity and class if he wanted to break up with the woman he claimed to have loved "for years".
If the person you claim to love hurts you and your first response to them is to hurt them worse, you didn't know what true love was in the first place.
She dodged a bullet by seeing him for the vengeful, spiteful person he really was before she ever married him.
And for the person who asked me on rep if I'd say the same thing if the guy was the one who cheated - well, DUH, that's what I said above.
Again, it doesn't matter who cheated, man or woman, If the person you claim to love hurts you and your first response to them is to hurt them worse, you didn't know what true love was in the first place.
I think I've just found another "test" to weed out guys who are all wrong for me. We've heard of the waiter test, and I also pay attention to how a guy talks about his exes. If he constantly bad mouths his ex and makes out like he was so perfect and his ex was just a b**** that's a red flag to me. Now I have another one to add. If I play this radio clip for a guy and he laughs and thinks it's just great, I'll be moving right along and dumping his a$$.
I have another test, too - if a woman has a guy who's just a friend, dump the b*tch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
