She said she knew she ran the risk of being villified. I didn’t want to disappoint.
To recap what she said:
And she decided it was worth it, based on the “depth of her feelings”. No mention of the wife, or the apparent betrayal of the wife. The wife he still had, for whatever reason. I have to assume that the wife didn’t know about his affair—after all, if the wife knew and was OK with it, my guess is that there would be no “pain and humilation”, would there? If I am incorrect in this detail, if indeed the wife was totally OK with his affair, then I retract any villification. If there was no betrayal of the wife then that means there is no reason for anyone to be villified.
So, the information she gave us is that she decided to engage in an affair with a married man, because of the “depth of her feelings”. (No mention of the wife’s feelings, needless to say.) And also this:
“…but sometimes it just doesn’t work that way.” Of course, that just covers everything, doesn’t it? And since when is the guy’s unhappy marriage and his inability to unload a wife he apparently no longer loves an invitation for her to help him (apparently) betray his wife? His unhappy marriage is his problem, no one else’s. Anyone else who gets involved with him and his problems is responsible for their choices, and their behavior.
I get every indication (based on her post) that she made a decision based on the “depth of her feelings”. Sometimes, decisions based on feelings alone are pretty damned selfish.
But hey—I will admit that there is some vague possiblity that she will come back and tell some incredibly melodramatic and heart-wrenchingly “star-crossed lovers” soap opera story which will bring us all to tears and earn her a spot on the Dr. Phil show. Indeed if such is the case, of course I will apologize profusely for my coldheartedness, and try to remember to tape her appearance on Dr. Phil.