So, you think her giving him the wrong impression was right on her part? I'm sure she'd have found someone who was more "progressive" about these things if she was open about it as opposed to lying. Also the part where she trapped another dude who has no idea about her past (again) shows what kind of person she is.

I have a feeling that it actually found a kindred spirit in you, married you, but then discovered that you've lied to it, and you're not a virgin, and had experience with other diseases before, so it divorced you.
No, it's usually the wrong thing to do. There's a good chance for such things to be discovered eventually. However, I can certainly imagine her deluding herself that it will be fine, and that once he gets to be with her some more it won't matter to him. It's hard for non-zealots to understand the mind of zealots. In her mind it probably wasn't a big issue, just some silly thing he's hung up on.

Either that or she measured the kind of effect that this knowledge can have on people, and she's even more resolved to not let others know about it.

And maybe she doesn't want someone who is progressive about it, but some puritan with whom she can overcompensate this past.

And maybe, etc etc...

But yes, let's parachute certitudes all over this headline, because things are ever so simple.

What are you talking about? Your post doesn't make even a tad of sense.

Is there any reason why this scenario (which is not made up by any creep who has that fetish) is not applicable?

Of course, but his wife was an idiot and if she doesn't sue him then that's completely fine by me.
I don't think that's what you mean. Saying that would be implying that he perhaps doesn't need to be punished.

Possibly, but I think you got my meaning. Anyway, thanks for the heads up on the possibility for misunderstanding.

Self awareness......Its just a few nanometers away...........

Hey, come on now, that's not true! Don't be so hard on yourself! You do have a lot of character, it's just that you have a horrible character.

Sorry, I kinda lost track of all of gog's retarded trolls. Is that supposed to be a message from the "are you so sure all blacks aren't lazy" group, the "are you so sure all greeks aren't parasites" squad, the "are you so sure all muslims aren't terrorists" gang, or the "are you so sure all refugees aren't criminals" team ?

But I was just going by the info that she is keeping another guy unaware as well, she knows how that ended for her last time and at this point if she is looking to avoid all that drama she could just be open about her past, is what I was saying along with the fact that it was her mistake to keep it secret the first time, maybe unintentional but still wrong.

I'm sorry if my words were offensive, that was certainly not what I was going for.

I just meant that even this can be interpreted different ways. Generally speaking, I think that lies are immensely dangerous things, be them "succesful" or not (if they are, you still lock a person into a false belief about the world, which is a hideous responsability in itself), so I do not think that any occurence of that lie was the right thing to do in the absolute. But I also think that each occurence can be motivated by very different thought process (from scam-like cynical manipulation to an attempt of preserving the 'right' things at the cost of one 'wrong'), and we cannot infer much about this thought process, even in the second case (as I said, having been beaten up and thrown out after the revelation may also have locked her further down in the belief that her stigma is not sustainable, and that she won't ever be accepted -or won't ever be accepted by the sort of personality she's attracted to- if her past is known).

We have few dots, even with the second part of the story, and we can interpolate many different believable lines through these dots (from girl-prisoner-of-her-past to girl-seeking-mercenary-weddings, and everything inbetween). I just think it's dangerous to assume too much, or believe in a too clear picture, on their basis.

I have absolutely know idea of what I'd do in her position (depending, also, on what we take from her position), it's a shitty situation and there may be no clean way out of it. But I find it hard to judge, especially that univocally. The factors of the previous drama are multiple : her lie, but also the truth (and its revelation), the mentality of the husband, her history, society, etc...

We could be discussing so many different versions of that girl, living through the same events, but living them in a different way under different perspectives, with a different mindset...

Hmm an interesting element of personality probably akin narcissism here where you classify yourself as automatically superior before you know the person's entire opinions on the matter. I expect this is one of the many posts where you put in a one liner in an attempt to seem smart and classified the person instantly based on a few words they posted, if you even bothered posting at all. So although you seem to be against negative aspects of racism / anti-secularism, you seem to want to see yourself as superior rather than convince other people its the right way to go or pointing out why something is racist / anti-secular. If someone truly cared I'd expect them to put the idea first; before the ego.

Anyhoo; I was saying you answered your own post that not everything is so simple and its pointless to argue without knowing the full story.

Anyway, most importantly; who all are the non retarded trolls then? Point names and name fingers and I shall seek apprenticeship with them!

Is that a descriptive clarification of your post_156 ? We can just skip it, then ?

I'm still wondering why it apparently matters that she was a mudshark. As far as I understood it her husband was simply a religious lunatic but no racist.

Yeah, I actually am not familiar with the term "mudshark", and, just looking it up now, it makes things even weirder. :-/

That is in the 2nd paragraph, sir.

And FYI I wasn't trying to seem smart, because (a) I didn't make any preconceptions of your behavior / outlook on anything and (b) asking you anything in a normal manner is difficult enough, you fixating on the quoted part of my post without replying to the other is an example of it; and just proves its isn't really smart to talk with you in the first place other than if I agree with you. Anyhow, avoid like a ninja and slash like a cricket bat!