If someone wants to keep a bunch of secrets buried, he or she should just become a loner. Because it's not right to waste people's time by getting into relationships with them while keeping secrets from them. Because in order for two people to have any kind of foundation for a relationship, there can be no secrets between them.
What a fucked up world we live in.

Unfortunately, you are correct. But you should be honest whenever there are no life destroying consequences to worry about. There is a time and place for lies and there is a time and place for honesty. :)

Back to the original topic. I hope Total Biscuit wins this horrible battle against cancer. He is too young to die.

So it's not enough, she deceived him, fucked up his life plan, wasted years of his life and resources. You also want the guy to go to prison and lose a lot of money(after already losing lots of money). That's nice. No empathy whatsoever for the guy but only empathy for the scam artist woman. White Knight, alert.

There's no such thing as a "virgin" female over the age of 18 (or even 16 in some places). As long as a female isn't physically hideous you can assume she has had many sexual partners by the time she's 18. If a female ever says she's a virign, she is almost definitely lying.

It's almost completely different for a young guy, as even the ugliest females still demand that a prospective boyfriend be good looking, have a well paying job and a large social circle, before they'll even consider him.

There's not much point even bothering with your average Western women, as they're all whores. Even worse than that, they're whores who pretend to be pure princesses.

EDIT: In b4 "but you're generalizing!!!1111" white knights.

Even a physically hideous woman can easily get laid nowadays. There are a lot of desperate guys out there.

I'm sorry to hear about TB's condition.

Yes, but it's enough to find a way to detect cells which are dividing uncontrollably and kill them. Easier said than done, of course, but just because cancel can happen naturally doesn't mean a treatment for it can't be found.

So you're saying that beating the crap out of someone is a valid response to a lie about something that doesn't really affect the beater directly.

So what she did didn't affect him directly? So she didn't deceive him, fuck up his life plan, waste years of his life, money and other resources? It's pretty obvious that she did all those things. It would take a lot to make a religious man become that violent. I don't think I need to explain it all. Did she invent a time machine, go back in time and prevent it all from happening and you aren't telling me about it? You are defending a scam artist. It is probably a waste of time arguing with people like you so this will be my last post on the topic. And no, it's not like she scammed him out of a GOG game. I almost forgot to mention that she also scammed him into being in a very vulnerable position. Courts favor wives over husbands in the USA.

Nope.
Nope.

They were married so yeah. And even though most religious people are assholes, most of them are not violent people.

Do you know that the average cost of a wedding in the USA is $26,444?

She lied about her past, so one of his retarded puritan fundamentalist fantasy has not been fulfilled. It didn't ruin or waste his life and resources, no matter his pathological obsessions. People are defined by their present, not their past, except in the eyes of mystical ayatollahs.

And no, there is no reason to assume that a religious person is less violent than a secular person. Not only religious violence (and religion-supported ultraconservative militantism) offers enough exemples of religiously self-righteous brutality, but the very fetishism of symbolic notions (be it virginity, blasphemy, etc) just multiply the potential triggers for psychotic fits of rage about stuff that do not carry so much weight (or even moral charges) when not religiously sacralized.

She didn't just ruin his fantasy. And keep in mind, it is more than just a fantasy from his point of view. Did you forget about the money spent? Weddings cost a lot of money. Honeymoons cost a lot of money. She was probably a house wife so he also had to support her. And it's also really shitty to waste someone's time like that. People don't live forever. And because he was deceived, he put himself in a horrible position where he can be raped by divorce courts and other bullshit.

So you are defending a cold blooded scam artist. Case closed.

And to say the past doesn't matter is delusional. The past made us who we are... Need more convincing? If a guy was once a serial killer, then his past doesn't matter because that was in the past? And then you'd be comfortable with him as babysitter for your children, right?

Unfortunately in this world, money is very important. And so is time. When people scam you out of those two things, they are doing something very harmful to you. Maybe he only assaulted her because of being denied his fantasy but what she did was really wrong.
I never said she is a whore. Just a scam artist. But the point I am trying to make is, people's pasts are a part of who they are... No matter how unpleasant you find this to be, that is just the way it is. There is a reason why employers don't want to hire felons... We are shaped by the way we live since the day we are born. Can some people become better? Yes. But nobody can change 100% into a different person.

For all you know, "what she did" may have been concealing a historical stigma which would have been too determining in the eyes of an imbecile with whom the relationship was otherwise worthwhile. And you know nothing of this relationship, and what had established it. You only endorse the idea that the woman's past life is indeed what defines this relation (the element which, as in the eyes of the religious nut, makes it all-or-nothing), and make the rest a financial calculation.

You could also see it from a different perspective: maybe the cretin's reaction justifies her lie in the first place, as an attempt to valuate what they had (and objectively mattered) and not let a stupid symbolic detail (his obsession with her having known other people before him of not) ruin something valuable.

Again, a bias determines the univocal default interpretation, and the spontaneously re-created narrative, here.
Basically, yes, the underlying "she was a whore therefore she is a whore" underlies your point, in validating her lie as all-defining, in validating his reaction as righteous self-defense, and in assuming the nature of her calculations (scam, all of it wasted for nothing, etc).

If the secret and the guy's obsession had been about another type of stigma, your assumptions and interpretations might have been different.

A very fancy way of describing a scam, basically. I'm not endorsing any ideas. I'm just presenting you with facts when it comes to people's pasts. And no, his reaction doesn't justify the scam. Because in the Western world, people can CHOOSE who they marry or CHOOSE not to marry. This is simply a case of her scamming some rich guy through dating and marriage etc.

You have no fact about what bound them, about how much in love they were despite of what. The only facts you have is that she hid her past because it would have been too important for the moron, and that indeed this past was too important for the moron.

The goal is unknown to you, but you decide it was purely material. You decide her motives were the bad ones and his were the good ones. You have no objective reason to do that.

Three or four words, and you already have a whole story in your head, you already know the protagonists, their drives, how they felt about what and when, by heart, with no deviation and alternative possible. I'm saying that's because some keywords (specific stigma that you endorse as such) automatically evoke to you a series of simple stereotypical narratives that you automatically stick upon these elements, with all the strength of the "obvious".

There are other stories, other characters, other drives, actually closer to how people behave (outside sunday tv movies, i mean), that do fit these facts just as well. You should try a few of these alternate interpretations, instead of jumping on the cliché one that these keywords bring up to you...