Coffee Break: Aubrie Pumps

89 Comments

1. If you reach out to a former partner (for whom you were an associate for 6-7 years) to ask for a recommendation form and they say nothing for 3 days, you move on right? I don’t mean I expect a recommendation in 3 days, but I sent an email explaining what was going on, saying I’m happy to set up a call but here’s the gist etc. and have heard nothing. It’s nothing big, but I’d expect the person in a few days say – happy to help/let’s discuss further – and then I could either send them the 1 page form or set up a call. Given the 24-7 nature of partners being on via email, this is a – I’m not interested – right? I have others I can reach out to, but I’m just debating whether to give this guy more time or assume he’s like yeah you work in government now, nothing you can do for me, next.

   1. I would probably ping him again personally. I’m not a law firm partner but emails get buried and missed, especially if they’re not critically important. It’s also not that hard for him to decline by saying “It’s been a while since we’ve worked together, I think you should ask someone else” or something like that, so I wouldn’t assume “ghosting” is his only out.

      1. A lot of people are on vacation this week still it seems, so it have sunk down too far in the inbox. Maybe try next Monday (not first thing) or Tuesday?

   2. How responsive were they when you worked with them? most law firm partners I worked with were pretty bad at email. I would give it another shot (just a forward of “I just realized we never connected about this – wanted to follow up!) and/or if you know they have an assistant or other colleague who is more reliable, maybe follow up with them. My old secretary/boss’s secretary was great about wrangling the boss to do things he wanted/needed to do but due to busyness didn’t actually get to, so if I were trying to get ahold of him I would reach out to her for help.

      1. I forgot to say – yes partners are on email 24-7 but something like this could not fall into an easily categorized/next step response (unlike an email from opposing counsel, potential client, etc.) so could fall by the wayside even with good intentions.

   3. He may very well respond, but I think it makes sense to assume that he’s not going to get back to you anytime soon, and move on to others. It probably has very little to do with whether he’s willing to help or not, more just that this falls at the bottom of his priority list, relatively speaking. I also have found that people have gotten pretty bad at responding to emails during COVID, so maybe that’s part of it too.

2. I’m seeing some comments on professional social media that you should be cultivating your background for web interviews instead of just blurring everything out. Is this really a thing? Should I be examining my bookshelf to make sure everything is properly scholarly and related to my field? Heaven’s sake.

   1. When someone says I “should” do something, I don’t automatically listen to it. It’s okay to exist as a person in this world. Just do your own thing.

   2. This sounds like a “tip’ written by someone who has never worked in an office. At most interviews, they’re looking to make sure you know your stuff but they also want you to be a fun, friendly person who’s fun to work with. A home bookshelf fully of scholarly work treatises would give the exact opposite impression…

   3. That’s crazy, unless your field is something like social media or interior design. Fun fact: When I was zoomterviewing for my current role, I was so focused on the conversations that I only later realized that the painting directly behind me is a giant abstract nude, with a rather large posterior as the focal point. Oops! Maybe it was too abstract for the interviewers to tell, maybe they didn’t care. Either way, I got the job.

      1. That is funny. I like going to museums where the pictures are “so and so’s nude mistress” — 1) where did they put those (like most of these people were also married) and 2) isn’t that a line of work that has dried up but maybe could make a comeback (maybe it is done still, just not in my circles). I have QUESTIONS.

         1. I think you need to view it in the context of the time, and love matches were not the norm/not expected. Especially not when your alliance had political dimensions. If you don’t expect romantic attachment, then the existence of a mistress isn’t really a big deal.

            1. True — that crowd very “mergers & acquisitions” in their marriages.

               I saw a meme recently “My daughter wanted me to treat her like a princess so I married her off to secure our allegiance with protestant nations against France and Spain.”

      2. Yeah it’s your house, its art, I don’t think people care as long as its neat and clean and reasonable. The only time I’ve ever noticed someones background was where it was their very messy unmade bed

   4. I often think advice about job-seeking (and also dating!) is basically made up because there’s no clicks or money to be made on saying the very few obvious things that everyone needs to do.

   5. I have interviewed and hired a bunch of candidates via Zoom. The one thing I care about is that they are not backlit so I can actually see their faces.

   6. I think you’re probably okay…this isn’t interview-related, but I have a little sign in my office that says something about Pizza Hut, but when it’s visible and flipped on zoom, it looks like azz…I usually hide it or adjust the camera so it doesn’t show for meetings if I remember.

      I would definitely remove it for an interview hahaha

   7. I actually bought a bamboo screen to cover up our (somewhat cluttered) bookshelf from view for this reason. I’m sure some people are wondering why I have a screen, but it works for me. I’ve gotten multiple follow up interviews after doing interviews this way, so I assume it’s a non issue.

      1. I am surprised that nobody has proposed virtual backgrounds? Most people I zoom with have landscape or cityscape photos from a vacation or their town or whatever as a background.

         1. If you’re the one being interviewed, you don’t get to choose the platform always. I’ve had people throw me on Google meetings and Ring Central.

            1. Pretty sure most platforms have that option, though.

   8. Yeah, no,

      I mean, okay, having a home office space, with a desk in front of some nice framed art on the wall, or a big bookcase full of impressive things, certainly looks nice. Knowing me, my bookshelf would get cluttered after a while, the wall of framed stuff would make more sense for me, but some of us are lucky just to have our home office setups somewhere other than our bedrooms!

      My Zoom background is the office from Parks and Recreation. People either get the reference and love it, or they just think I have a quirky, woodsy home office. Then again, I work in tech, and all my meetings are with internal stakeholders, so I get that this isn’t feasible for all professions and fields.

3. Hive, What’s your favorite foundation? I need something to look alive on zooms. I have redness and shininess. Must be cruelty free. And easy to apply, preferably with fingers only and not a brush. I want one product not primer and foundation and setting powder. Any recs?

   1. I thought applying with fingers was the fastest way to get the container icky with germs. If you are shiny, I think you want a powder and would think that Bare Minerals would do the trick on that and redness.

      1. Unless it’s a pump container.

         1. True. I’m thinking of the drug-store ones that are just a bottle. Although I find that if you can get a good color match, the drug-store ones are pretty good (my skin is like a teen’s in all of the bad ways, so if it works for them, it probably works for me).

      2. I’ve never understood this concern. I’ve applied with my fingers for years, and never seen any negative effects to the makeup. I guess theoretically I could introduce something that would cause the makeup to go bad, but I’ve not seen this even in items I’ve kept open for several months. Is it really a realistic concern, or just something to get you to buy more stuff?

   2. Hourglass Illusion Skin Tint. Less is more.

   3. I don’t know about cruelty free but I like NARS radiant tinted moisturizer, which also has SPF, and comes in many shades. I personally apply with a brush but that’s because I don’t like applying things with my fingers. It’s meant to be applied like a moisturizer so it would be fine with the fingers.

      Another option is the cc cream from The Honest Company. I ordered it due to an online recommendation and was pleasantly surprised. Definitely more coverage than the NARS, and a bit less radiant, so less issues with shine (though I don’t personally find the NARS shiny). Unfortunately, fewer shades. It’s interesting to me that I like a beauty product from that company as I’m not in their diaper-buying demographic.

      1. cosigned on the Nars tinted moisturizer. I’m a St Moritz in summer, Finland in winter. blended between the 2 a lot.

   4. Face Atelier ultra skin. It’s a pump and is silicone-based so it doesn’t need primer.

   5. I like the tinted moisturizer from Saie. I also use the Dr. Jart’s Cicapair color corrector for redness in place of foundation sometimes.

   6. I like NYX’s mineral veil. Very easy to apply with fingers, comes in a tube. It’s pretty sheer but it tones down my redness. Not a huge range of shades unfortunately.

   7. If you’re shiny, powder is the most effective way to fix that.

   8. Mac Studio Fix Powder Foundation. It smooths flaws, is buildable, but is a true powder (so helps with shininess) without gunking up your pores or feeling tight like liquid foundation.

4. Our workplaces makes us get an Amex card for work travel and use their travel agents. I have nothing but horrible experiences with them (never available when you need them, way too many hoops to jump through, bad customer service when you get a live person, annoying “booking tools” are not user-friendly and mean I spend a lot of time doing their work (or my admin does, but I still have to tell her what to input), etc., etc. Are the kickbacks / rebates that good? Because I hate them and would never use them voluntarily and find every other way to book travel to be vastly superior.

   1. I always thought forcing employees to use a designated travel agent was less about kickbacks and more about making sure employees don’t go wild with spending the employer’s cash. Says the person whose husband just bought $2,500 economy class plane tickets when the cheapest ticket on that route was $600 (he had good reasons why he needed this itinerary and his employer permitted it, but I can see a lot of employers not being down with that).

      1. Yea, I don’t understand employer travel policies sometimes. Mine makes us use an “approved” hotel chain, even if I whatever non-approved quirky boutique hotel I want to book is cheaper.

         1. Why would they do that unless there is some huge rebate for them (or they are getting some sort of points they can use for some nonbillable business travel, like Managing Partner goes to visit office A and office B, just to check in)? Usually, if you have to be forced to use something, it’s not that good.

   2. It’s also a business security issue. My consulting firm has a very vested interest in knowing as much as possible about where their employees are at all times when traveling and need to know who is in every hotel or on every flight roster in case something goes wrong. If something does go wrong, they need to start having their agents make alternative arrangements as quickly as possible for people they can locate (and as a volume buyer from most airlines and hotels, my company will definitely have better luck than me as individual trying to do so), and be able to accurately indicate who has not been located and where they are most likely to be to the appropriate officials.

      1. I have heard that and yet I 1000% do not believe it. The people who need 30 minutes and 500 questions to get me from Laguardia to Logan are unlikely to be competent to find me in a true emergency and do anything like re-route me or rescue me (my friends who go to places where that is a legit need have specialized people who handle that and probably do a good job). I honestly think that in the event of another 9/11, I have a better friend and friend-of-friend network to find a floor to sleep on and a Greyhound ticket (I can tough anything out for 48-60 hours and I bet they don’t stop running ever). And they’d likely call or text or e-mail, which is the same way I’d reach out myself, but more promptly. Business that are marginal under good times are IMO not likely to improve in a true disaster. I helped people get home on 9/11 and it was every person and their own wits then (e.g., Manhattan boatlift, driving people home who had their cars destroyed or locked in parking garages, good people in Gander, Newfoundland, etc.).

         1. I’m sorry that’s been your experience. I actually do believe it as a rationale for my firm, since our corporate travel agency is phenomenal and the company as a whole tends to be very security /emergency responsive. I’ve been so impressed with the travel agency in normal course of business that there is no one I think could do a better job in an emergency.

   3. I’m the evil overlord who enforces this policy and the booking tool configuration at my institution.
      Most business travel agencies have various tools built into their product to handle duty of care and travel risk management. They often interface with other service providers, especially in businesses that might send people to higher-risk areas. COVID taught a lot of institutions and businesses that their controls in place at the time for knowing who was where for business were very, very inadequate, particularly when they needed to get them home in a hurry. Running all itineraries through the booking tool means you can see where people are, including layover location, and make contact. Travel duty-of-care is a hot topic in risk management circles and has been for quite a while now. The COVID-associated travel shutdowns only made it more of a focus.
      It’s also about being able to show the institution’s purchasing power. The airlines in particular don’t care that my institution reimbursed X million in airfare to travelers. They just see 5000 individual purchases.
      X million or whatever in corporate spend is a different animal and can get pricing breaks, perks, etc. Perhaps not a big deal in a major market, but in a place serviced by 2 airlines at a regional airport where they know they have a captive audience, it’s the only way to get their attention.
      The “hoops” are most likely due to your company’s rules and configuration, not the travel agency, and are modifiable. I’m on the company side of things, and deliberately keep my booking tool wide open, so people don’t have an excuse to go to elcheapoflights.com and book lord-knows-what. Of course I have audit rules in place to log attempted shenanigans, but it’s invisible to the user. Hating on it because it’s different from the way you’ve always done it probably won’t get you anywhere, but if there are specific pain points, take them up with your institution’s/company’s travel group and there’s probably a solution. If the people who configure the module aren’t frequent business travelers, they may not realize how onerous something is.

      1. Honest question, why do you think you know where people are? Especially now? Between work-from-wherever and personal travel and car trips, you will never know. Even if you isolate yourself just work travel, safety at chain hotels doesn’t depend on how you book the travel. Ditto airlines. Color me skeptical.

         1. Perhaps I wasn’t clear that I was only talking about knowing where people are during business travel. Keeping tabs on personal travel would be weird, creepy and terribly invasive.
            Sure, if someone wants to go radio-silent during work travel, there are plenty of ways to do that, but having a traveler’s itinerary in a consistent, reportable format is a solid starting point toward being able to determine if we need to make contact based on some criteria/event/disaster, or being able to answer public records requests about who we have where, or do we have anyone returning who passed through X airport. These are all things I had to report out on within the last year.
            Remember, for every would-be Indiana Jones, there is another who is constantly seeking reassurance that if something happens on the road, someone is available to get things sorted out.

         2. I can confirm that having worked in two offices affected by disasters (9/11 and Hurricane Sandy) it became VERY important to know where everyone was very quickly. I’m not in travel management, I’m just a manager of people, and not knowing whether your staff survived a disaster is the worst management experience you can have.

   4. I worked for a company that not only made us use the designated travel agency, but also wouldn’t let us book travel using mileage or hotel points accounts, as those were for the company. It was VERY frustrating to have no loyalty status as a frequent traveler.

      (Rumor had it that the miles accumulated were used to fly executives business class and to give them room upgrades. I don’t know whether that was true.)

5. Correllary Q: if I hate planning travel should I use a travel agent? Will I pay more? How should I find one? Truly wish I had an assistant to plan everything and I just show up.

   1. Most travel agents don’t charge you. They get kickbacks from the airlines/hotels/etc. I would try to find one with a word of mouth recommendation. There are a lot of bad ones out there, along with plenty of good ones – like most professions.

      1. Most travel agents don’t charge you. They get kickbacks from the airlines/hotels/etc. I would try to find one with a word of mouth recommendation. There are a lot of bad ones out there, along with plenty of good ones – like most professions.

         1. Being a SAHM who does travel planning on the side is pretty much my dream job. Unfortunately I don’t have the business/social skills to launch my own company so I just plan trips for myself and family/friends (pro bono).

         2. My friend is a Disney certified travel planner and she is really good at what she does. Based on working with her, I’d recommend going the specialist route, especially if you like traveling but hate the actual planning (me!).

   2. A travel agent will generally have a minimum daily spend, but it includes hotels, excursions, and travel expenses. These can vary widely from a couple hundred dollars a day to several thousand. Depending on how you usually travel, it may be a lot easier to reach the minimum than you expect. If you’d like an agent suggestion, feel free to email me: crossedpaws10 at the g mail.

6. A friend asked my help or ideas but I’ve never been wed so I thought I’d ask here.

   2 people were dear friends who married 16 years ago to get benefits in NYC when he was 20 and she 26. 2 kids now, preteens. His career has him on the road about 95% of the time, required of his industry. They basically have him as the provider but barely home and she runs the world and gets the benefit of his finances. He’s had outside relationships through the duration (sometimes play sometimes actual relationships with commitment), she knows and sometimes looks away and has a couple of times years ago told him to go if he wants but he couldn’t afford alimony, child support, and living solo until his recent promotion. He thinks she is okay with this or at least resigned due to raising kids as the priority but now his new promotion means he could cover all costs without being married anymore. He wants to find out if she may be okay with not being married but being friends and calm coparents as he thinks they would each be happier with partners they feel romantic toward while coparenting together.

   Is there a way to broach this that won’t ruin everything if she is not okay? He thinks he could just stay and be quiet til the kids are 18 (6 years) but if she would be okay with it being done now and they could move into a new way of living, he thinks they would both be happier in the long run. He would rather keep things calm for the kids if she would be very angry or vindictive since she’d for sure get full custody and he would want to see them when he can be home from work. He fears bringing it up and starting a huge war but also fears not bringing it up, suffering through, and finding out later she would have been fine ending it at this point or that not bringing it up means resentment would grow and result in poor coparenting later.

   Any thoughts would be helpful, thanks!

   1. It sounds like the husband is the friend who came to you with this?

      He needs to figure out what he wants and talk directly to his wife. Hiding from her possible reaction, or trying to game out different contingencies with others, is way beneath the level of seriousness this topic deserves.

   2. This doesn’t answer your question at all, but it sounds to me like the husband is just trying to justify his desire to get divorced. These people have been married 16 years, have two kids, it sounds like she’s a SAHM… that’s not a marriage of convenience.

      1. This is the answer.

      2. Right??? They “married to get benefits”…uhh why did they have children then!? And stay married for close to two decades? It sounds like you’re trying to justify to yourself that they’re not “really married” (are you involved with the husband?) but sorry, this marriage sounds as real as any other. If he wants a divorce, he should tell his wife if he wants a divorce. Keep in mind that if he’s sleeping with you or pursuing you, you’re probably getting a half truth about the situation and I really doubt he’ll leave his wife.

      3. Clarifications, the husband is the friend. They married for convenience and then she wanted kids knowing his whole life would be on the road. They wed when she knew he was also dating someone else and there have been at least a dozen either play friends and a few actual lengthy side relationships, some or all of which she has known about. Apparently she told him to go if he wanted about 10 years ago but he did the math and couldn’t afford to keep her and the kids in their current life and afford to live separately so he stayed. He says he thinks she sees it as her being a single mom either way but at least not divorcing him years ago meant she got his income and an excellent lifestyle. He thinks he owes her that lifestyle for all he has put her through so he has planned to wait 6 years until the kids are out and then sit down with her when he would only need to give her alimony and when they can hopefully just be friends like when they first met.

         Now he has the income to cover all the bills and living solo. If she would be angry or vindictive, he’d rather wait 6 years. If she would be okay with it since she too isn’t getting her needs met in the marriage, he’d rather go now and save 6 years of time for them both and maybe resentment.

         I think he genuinely wants to do the right thing but he doesn’t know if they are both on the same page but too afraid to talk but could then split calmly and as good coparents or if he would be shocking her and creating drama for his kids. He is gone so much that a calm split would not change the kids lives’ much since he’s barely home anyway but an angry reaction would hurt them and that’s what he wants to avoid.

         I have no clue how to guide him or what to recommend here.

         1. “I have no clue how to guide him or what to recommend here.”

            It’s not at all your place to get involved in this! Stay out of it, even if he’s trying to drag you into his mess.

         2. If he’s gone so much, does he really want to be solely responsible for his kids 50% of the time? Most courts will default to relatively equal custody (absent proven abuse, substance issues, etc.), and that sounds like this guy would absolutely hate that. Dudes like this don’t realize how good they have it until they divorce and realize how hard it is to actually step up and parent and run a household. His wife is – by his own admission – doing 95% of the parenting and household work. She may be benefiting from his finances, but he’s absolutely benefiting from all her unpaid labor. He doesn’t have to be a parent! And this guy is even allowed (ish) side flings, so he’s really having his cake and eating it too. Divorce is going to be a very rude awakening for him, and if I was his friend I might point that out.

         3. He is on the road so much that she would get complete custody, a calm split would not change the children’s lives, but most importantly, he has zero sense of whether his wife of 16 years is actually ok with their arrangement or whether he might unveil an ugly truth if he pulls back the curtain. But of course, he’s only worried about the kids!
            I think he is massively overstating whatever good his “parenting” is doing at this moment. This wouldn’t be the first time the kids suffer because the parents stay in a crappy marriage.

         4. Found the other woman.

            or one of them….

            1. Right. This story doesn’t even make sense. Why would he be paying for this woman’s whole life in a “marriage of convenience?”

               Newsflash: he’s not leaving his wife. The end.

            2. Bingo. “How can I advise him on the least expensive way to get out of this?”

               Let me break this down for you: he did not “marry for convenience.” He’s a playboy who is too rich to want to be taken to the cleaners for adultery, so he messes around on the side and soothes your conscience by wringing his hands about what he owes his wife.

         5. Listen to what you’re saying.

            He’s poor and a serial dater. With inflamed views about how much he’s providing to his family and kids. Yuck no thank you.

      4. All I have to say is, what a crap dude. Spend most of the time away from your family, making your wife run your household and raise your kids while you bang other people? Being a completely absent husband and father? And she’s “okay” with it because what choice does she even have?

         1. Yeah. This doesn’t sound like a mutually open relationship to me. It sounds like he cheats and she accepts it because she doesn’t have the means to leave.

         2. People here have the worst “friends!” Like the dude who dumped his girlfriend of 12 years because she was just a “temporary college gf” and how could she not have known he wasn’t going to marry her?

   3. Wow, a philanderer who cares only about his own happiness! He wants to be friends! Wants to “keep things calm for the kids”! He does 5% of the parenting, yet he wants to be able to see the kids whenever he’s home! And is it any surprise that he’s wondering how to split up with his wife of 16 years without having her get upset?!? It’s really all about what’s best for “him,” right?!?

      I want to know why on earth you are friends with someone like this? Your description of his wife is insulting to all stay at home moms and to all women. In what way does she “run the world and get the benefit of his finances”?!? What does that even mean?

      1. Friends with him because he is connected to the family which is why he asked my advice as few seem to know what is going on behind the scenes. My description was how he described how he thinks it is for her when I asked him why he thinks she stayed not how I see her. He says she knew he wasn’t monogamous when they wed and it was about financial benefits not something romantic back then, then she wanted kids but knew his career was on the road, so the deal was that she would keep the house and the kids while he traveled and sent his entire check home. They have lived well. He isn’t sure she ever thought of him romantically and he has not thought of her romantically ever. She tells him to stay on the road as much as possible even when he tries to take time off to come home for breaks and he thinks she is happier as a single mom than with him around but she hasn’t initiated ending things due to financial benefits. He hasn’t initiated as he thinks of her as a close friend and doesn’t want to harm his kids who are preteens and at the age of thinking he is amazing.

         If he lived at home, I’m sure they’d fight often and it’d be clearly better for the kids to split but he now wonders if leaving would be worse because all it’d change is she might be very angry with him since either way she is a single mom who would stay in the home whether they are together or split. But he fears staying as there could be building resentment which would harm the kids and shouldn’t both be open to find romantic love? (I told him I hope she has had flings or has someone on the side that he just does not know about and he said it’d be a relief to find out she has or does.)

         Does he try to find a way to bring this up and risk upsetting the status quo or does he wait 6 years til kids are out? How do you ask someone this type of question? I can’t imagine fishing for whether she’d be happier split up and there being a way to walk it back if she says no. (And I do think he should be done regardless as even if she would not be happier now, I think she likely would be after the dust settled and I’d hope she finds someone amazing who adores her.)

         1. If they can’t just sit down and talk about this, and apparently haven’t done so for years, I just don’t believe that this marriage is as transactional as you say. Obviously feelings are involved, and he hasn’t been forthright.

            1. This. Exactly.

         2. This is a mess you don’t want to be part of. He is not a good dude, family friend or not. Stay out of this. I truly wonder if the wife would agree with this assessment.

         3. Why tf did he marry her then?

         4. Back allllll the way from all this. Take what he says with a grain of salt.

         5. This is EXACTLY the story a married guy tells a woman he wants to fool around with. You know that, right? I’ve heard this story nearly verbatim before, and from more than one guy.

            There was a man in my office who swore up and down he was just married for the kids, his wife knew that, he was free to fool around, and he hit on everything with lady bits in the office (and out). When he and his wife finally got divorced it was uuuuuugly, because in reality they very very much did not have the agreement he’d been claiming they had.

            I don’t know why you’re in the middle of this, sleeping with him would be my guess, but back way out of it.

            1. “This is EXACTLY the story a married guy tells a woman he wants to fool around with. You know that, right? I’ve heard this story nearly verbatim before, and from more than one guy.”

               Absolutely. Some version of this “oh, don’t worry baby, it’s not really cheating because my wife and I are in a loveless marriage” story has been passed around for centuries. Every generation puts a new spin on it but the core BS justifications stay the same. I doubt very, very seriously the wife in this situation has any idea that:
               – She and her husband never thought about each other romantically
               – They are basically still together solely because of the children
               – He cheats on her when he’s traveling for work
               – He’s on the road 95% of the time because they don’t have a real marriage, and not because they need the money/it’s important for his career, etc.
               OP, you are getting sold a bill of goods here. Be smart and walk away from this. If you don’t, don’t be surprised by any negative fallout that results.

            2. Yup. Even if you’re not currently involved with him in any way, please consider the possibility that he’s hitting on you and trying to get you into bed?

         6. “He isn’t sure she ever thought of him romantically and he has not thought of her romantically ever.”

            These people had two children together. They thought of each other romantically long enough to make that happen.

            This guy sounds like an a** and I am really questioning why you want to come anywhere near trying to “advise” him in this situation. Unless he’s interested in you or you’re interested in him. This sounds like the classic “poor me, I am in a loveless marriage story” that men have been telling women since humans were all living in caves. This is not a new, original, or particularly creative version of the story. I would absolutely love to hear the wife’s side of the story here; I doubt very much she would co-sign even 5% of what’s in the husband’s narrative. This situation is really none of your business and my answer back to your “friend” would be “sorry, can’t help you with this.” And then don’t return any more of his messages.

            1. Right? They’ve slept together at least twice and likely much more than that, given that it can take people months or years to conceive each child. If they married each other purely for legal reasons, with no romantic feelings, why have they been sexually intimate? Why are they raising children together? Why is he afraid to talk to his wife? This isn’t a marriage two friends entered into for legal reasons. This is a man who is bored in his very traditional marriage and stepping out on his wife. He’s telling you this wild tale because he’s trying to get you to sleep with him, if you haven’t already. Don’t fall for it.

   4. He needs to be an adult and talk to his wife himself. If he needs help getting to that point, perhaps a therapist or counselor might help without personal biases (vs from friends).

      1. Right? It’s insane you think anyone else might be able to answer this.

      2. I agree that a good therapist or even a mediator is what they need. The situation sounds too complicated emotionally and practically for them to try to figure it out themselves. And then definitely therapy for the kids.

   5. Omg such trash

   6. Does he really think the kids will be in no way affected by their parents divorcing, whether now or later, even if it is “calm”? Has he even considered that?

      1. TBH based on the description of the dad and how little parenting he’s doing, they might be better off without him around at all. But I don’t buy for one minute that the kids think their dad is “amazing” like OP says. They’re 12. A 3 year old might fail to grasp how badly he’s failing his kids and family, but a preteen certainly wouldn’t (even if they had no knowledge of the affairs). And it’s not like 12 year olds are known for being super fond of their parents in general. I think this whole thing is either a) fiction by a bridge dweller or b) a very gullible OP who’s involved with or being pursued by this man.

         1. I mean, they may think he’s great if his only contribution to parenting is fun times. I’ve seen families where that dynamic continued into adulthood (where mom is associated with chores, homework, and washing behind the ears, while dad is associated with vacation, theme parks, movie nights, and barbeques).

   7. What were the “benefits” to the husband? The wife got to be a SAHM and live well of his check. And he got…? Is the wife a beard?

Comments are closed.