# AP dictated style of XW's underwear



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

This all relates to events of thirty plus years ago - it wasn't, and isn't, important but it has always intrigued me.

XW propositioned her BF's H. He wasn't her first "conquest" and was a known serial adulterer who spent weeks at a time in a solely male environment. BF was a rather attractive woman, my X was not. Plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated by the fact that her 120lb wedding day weight quickly became a 150 to 180 lb seesaw. Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked.

One of the things she told me when I forced a confession, which was only partly truthful, was that AP made her wear "French knickers". For those confused _The term is predominantly used in the United Kingdom and Australia to describe a style of underpant that is similar in look to a pair of shorts. French knickers are worn from the hip, concealing some of the upper thigh and all of the buttocks._

Since the garment hid her deformity it might be thought that that was his motivation - however - she claimed that they were often discarded prior to sex and that he reacted positively on the few occasions when she went commando.

I wondered, if the request was not because of her deformity could it have been a way of getting her to do something for him that she hadn't done with anyone else, a bonding thing? I know he asked for, and got denied, that she a) shave and b) go away with him for a weekend.

Any ideas welcomed.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

cp3o said:


> This all relates to events of thirty plus years ago - it wasn't, and isn't, important but it has always intrigued me.
> 
> XW propositioned her BF's H. He wasn't her first "conquest" and was a known serial adulterer who spent weeks at a time in a solely male environment. BF was a rather attractive woman, my X was not. Plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated by the fact that her 120lb wedding day weight quickly became a 150 to 180 lb seesaw. Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked.
> 
> ...


You described your ex wife as "_plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated ......Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked_". Doesn't sound like you found her particularly attractive. 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Just because you didn't see it does not mean others could not. 

Also , the underwear might have been a fetish, one he could not share with his gf but that he felt free to share with your ex wife.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

They're called tap pants in the U.S.

So, what was this butt-ugly deformity?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Lila said:


> You described your ex wife as "_plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated ......Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked_". Doesn't sound like you found her particularly attractive.
> 
> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Just because you didn't see it does not mean others could not.
> 
> Also , the underwear might have been a fetish, one he could not share with his gf but that he felt free to share with your ex wife.


You are an amazing woman.

Do not doubt it.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

I would advise you to take the bag of garbage our from under your kitchen sink, and bring it outside and dump it all over your driveway. Now spend time pondering it, and you will be doing something with just as much value if not more value then trying to understand these people. 

In other words don't ponder garbage just know that it's such. Garbage is just garbage.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

sokillme said:


> I would advise you to take the bag of garbage our from under your kitchen sink, and bring it outside and dump it all over your driveway. Now spend time pondering it, and you will be doing something with just as much value if not more value then trying to understand these people.
> 
> In other words don't ponder garbage just know that it's such. Garbage is just garbage.


I understand your sentiment but I care too much for people to think this way.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Thanks



Lila said:


> You described your ex wife as "_plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated ......Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked_". Doesn't sound like you found her particularly attractive.


She wasn't particularly attractive - but that is with the benefit of hindsight. At the time I loved her - as the saying goes - warts and all. Though when she was 5' 6" and 120lbs she had, other than the normally invisible deformity, a pretty good figure, small waisted hourglass type, and took some care to make the best of her appearance. 



> Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Just because you didn't see it does not mean others could not.


 Apart from many short-lived attempts to lose weight she never sought to attract men through her looks. and she told me that the first she admitted to (a holiday cheating) was terminated by the guy when he saw her deformity - to the extent that they were on the same smallish ship for several more days and he refused even to acknowledge her when their paths crossed. Incidentally her justification for that A was that another married colleague picked up one of his co-workers so "I had to have one too".

She was always the pursuer, she had neither the looks nor the manner to make men chase her - though her reputation may have attracted some - she probably was the female equivalent of the stereotypical male "player". I suspect she saw having sex with married men as a way of getting revenge on their wives. "She may be prettier, more popular, wealthier than me but I'm having sex with her husband in ways his wife doesn't." Years after dumping her I realised that her behaviour is identical to that of a clinically diagnosed psychopath.




> Also , the underwear might have been a fetish, one he could not share with his gf but that he felt free to share with your ex wife.


I read that it was a common garment (this was the early 1980s) worn by male homosexuals and wondered if that, given his sometimes several weeks without any females around, was relevant. I knew his wife quite well - we were all early 30s and each couple had two young kids. XW and AP did the lets all be friends thing and we went out as a foursome a few times before I got suspicious - and his W (not GF) would have worn them if asked. FWIW he was an alcoholic and abusive (physically and emotionally) with both his W and my XW (and possibly the, at least, two other women he was also seeing).


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Blondilocks said:


> They're called tap pants in the U.S.
> 
> So, what was this butt-ugly deformity?


A non-developed gluteal muscle - she claimed was the result of a botched Vitamin K injection at birth. If it was it would be considered medical negligence today - neonates are always injected in the thigh - but this would have happened 70 years ago.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

ConanHub said:


> You are an amazing woman.
> 
> Do not doubt it.


Explain please.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

sokillme said:


> I would advise you to take the bag of garbage our from under your kitchen sink, and bring it outside and dump it all over your driveway. Now spend time pondering it, and you will be doing something with just as much value if not more value then trying to understand these people.
> 
> In other words don't ponder garbage just know that it's such. Garbage is just garbage.


You're absolutely right - this was nearly 40 years ago and I moved on many years ago. But the thought crossed my mind from out the blue and I wondered if the combined wisdom of TaM might shed light on what seems to have been an unusual quirk.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

cp3o said:


> You're absolutely right - this was nearly 40 years ago and I moved on many years ago. But the thought crossed my mind from out the blue and I wondered if the combined wisdom of TaM might shed light on what seems to have been an unusual quirk.


The point is it's a waste of time. You will never understand because it's just pure selfishness. Which makes their value to your life the same as that bag of garbage.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

ConanHub said:


> I understand your sentiment but I care too much for people to think this way.


To the extent that we are all imperfect I agree with you - but some people, probably outside their control, have so little emotional humanity that the effect of their actions is harmful to those who make up the decent(ish) majority. We should, perhaps, be raising the awareness that some who act like "normal" people are, in fact, devoid of the sharing emotions.

"Garbage" - extreme maybe - but when you take a long view of their effect on the rest of society - justifiable?


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

sokillme said:


> The point is it's a waste of time. You will never understand because it's just pure selfishness. Which makes their value to your life the same as that bag of garbage.


And if no-one has knowledge that will answer the question I'll be none the worse off. It really isn't a big deal.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

cp3o said:


> Explain please.


Ooh. That's personal.:wink2:


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

cp3o said:


> To the extent that we are all imperfect I agree with you - but some people, probably outside their control, have so little emotional humanity that the effect of their actions is harmful to those who make up the decent(ish) majority. We should, perhaps, be raising the awareness that some who act like "normal" people are, in fact, devoid of the sharing emotions.
> 
> "Garbage" - extreme maybe - but when you take a long view of their effect on the rest of society - justifiable?


I might view her as damaged or a very hurting woman.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

cp3o said:


> And if no-one has knowledge that will answer the question I'll be none the worse off. It really isn't a big deal.


Your ex wife knew exactly what she looked like, plain face, thick thighs,deformity and all. To her being able to attract other men, even though they were using her for sex was her way of telling herself she was a beautiful woman. 
She was using these men just as much as they were using her. 
It’s sad.


----------



## 20yr (Apr 19, 2019)

cp3o said:


> You're absolutely right - this was nearly 40 years ago and I moved on many years ago. But the thought crossed my mind from out the blue and I wondered if the combined wisdom of TaM might shed light on what seems to have been an unusual quirk.


I completely get wanting all of the answers, even though it will not help or change anything. It sounds to me like your XW had self-esteem issues and may have been using the affairs to make herself feel worthwhile. As for the French knickers, I am guessing it was his fetish more than anything else.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

cp3o said:


> And if no-one has knowledge that will answer the question I'll be none the worse off. It really isn't a big deal.


Answer - because tap pants are cute and sexy. My husband loved them on me.


----------



## TAMAT (Jun 20, 2015)

Because some % of OM types want to control and own the women they cheat with they get a thrill out of changing people to their will. It's a way of marking territory.

It reminds me of what one coworker told me how he got a thrill going out to eat with a wife and her husband when earlier in the day he had been making out with the wife.

It's natural for thoughts about the affair to last a lifetime. I met was with a lady in her 90's who was still tormented by her long dead husbands affairs, a while back.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

cp3o said:


> This all relates to events of thirty plus years ago - it wasn't, and isn't, important but it has always intrigued me.
> 
> XW propositioned her BF's H. He wasn't her first "conquest" and was a known serial adulterer who spent weeks at a time in a solely male environment. BF was a rather attractive woman, my X was not. Plain face, thick thighs and large breasts accentuated by the fact that her 120lb wedding day weight quickly became a 150 to 180 lb seesaw. Not given to much make-up, uninspiring hair etc.. - sort of slightly sub-average but with a deformity that though truly ugly, was only visible when she was butt-naked.
> 
> ...


First off, who knows really and she probably does not either. 

I feel weird answering this but here goes... 

I have had women, that for some reason, were so into me that they would do whatever I asked.

I took advantage of that on multiple occasions, but never anything weird, but I did do that on several occasions. 

And frankly it was usually a preferences in shaving, underwear, lingerie and some other things.

I don't know if that answers any questions or not...


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

cp3o said:


> A non-developed gluteal muscle - she claimed was the result of a botched Vitamin K injection at birth. If it was it would be considered medical negligence today - neonates are always injected in the thigh - but this would have happened 70 years ago.


Whew! Good! 

I thought maybe she had a goiter.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Andy1001 said:


> Your ex wife knew exactly what she looked like, plain face, thick thighs,deformity and all. To her being able to attract other men, even though they were using her for sex was her way of telling herself she was a beautiful woman.
> She was using these men just as much as they were using her.
> It’s sad.


I don't think it was about feeling beautiful - I think it was about power and revenge. She had no empathy, no fear of the consequences of her actions and could not do the "with" type emotions (love/care/share) - only the "at" emotions - rage/anger/revenge and was always highly competitive as regarded other women - would do pretty much anything if told that another woman did it - or, indeed, had refused to do it. Had a holiday fling because a colleague did so, had to be married by her 21st birthday because a friend had been, had to have children because her age group were already parents etc. etc.. Made her very open to instant manipulation if someone worked out the key. She was also unable to turn down a "dare".

She seemed to have a need to believe that everyone was as incapable of fidelity as she. She offered me a conditional hall-pass and when I didn't take it up even tried to set me up with her friend(s) so that "we will be equal". When that didn't work I discovered halfway through a dinner party of four couples that the "afters" weren't intended to finish with coffee!

As to using the men as much as they were using her - undoubtedly - though I suspect that some of the men were innocents who she "played" and ended up wondering how they got to risk their marriages.

I think I have a pretty good understanding of my XW's motives and why she was incapable of being other than she was - I was just intrigued about why an apparently normal wanna-be alpha male would have chosen "French" knickers.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

20yr said:


> I completely get wanting all of the answers, even though it will not help or change anything. It sounds to me like your XW had self-esteem issues and may have been using the affairs to make herself feel worthwhile. As for the French knickers, I am guessing it was his fetish more than anything else.


Yes to self-esteem issues. For example - she didn't apply for university because she (erroneously) thought her grades would be inadequate. 

I married her naively (arrogantly?) expecting that her lack of self respect would be cured by a couple of years of (my) TLC. In hindsight - she is no more able to develop genuine self-esteem than I am to grow wings, (and yes - I'm inclined to be a KISA)

As to the fetish - yes - but why? Seems rather odd to me - perhaps he peeped on his mother wearing such - I'm not concerned - just mystified.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Blondilocks said:


> Answer - because tap pants are cute and sexy. My husband loved them on me.


Without wishing to pry - what about them/you made them cute and sexy. When my XW tried cute, sexy or coy she just came across as awkward and false (to me at least). I don't disagree that on a smaller woman they are very effective - but the amount of material in XW's could have provided the shelter on a camping holiday for a herd of buffalo (well - maybe I exaggerate a little - but _I_ can't see how 60 lbs overweight can be cute.)


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

cp3o said:


> Yes to self-esteem issues. For example - she didn't apply for university because she (erroneously) thought her grades would be inadequate.
> 
> I married her naively (arrogantly?) expecting that her lack of self respect would be cured by a couple of years of (my) TLC. In hindsight - she is no more able to develop genuine self-esteem than I am to grow wings, (and yes - I'm inclined to be a KISA)
> 
> As to the fetish - yes - but why? Seems rather odd to me - perhaps he peeped on his mother wearing such - I'm not concerned - just mystified.


*I cannot help but think that all of us who marry think that we can save our beloved and help them overcome all of their perceived warts and deficiencies! 

Fetish or insecurity? I don't know ~
Did the two you ever try considering marriage or pastoral counseling?*


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

cp3o said:


> Without wishing to pry - what about them/you made them cute and sexy. When my XW tried cute, sexy or coy she just came across as awkward and false (to me at least). I don't disagree that on a smaller woman they are very effective - but the amount of material in XW's could have provided the shelter on a camping holiday for a herd of buffalo (well - maybe I exaggerate a little - but _I_ can't see how 60 lbs overweight can be cute.)


At the time: 120 lbs, long dancer legs and (shhh) high heels. The rest wasn't too bad, either.:wink2:


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

TAMAT said:


> Because some % of OM types want to control and own the women they cheat with they get a thrill out of changing people to their will. It's a way of marking territory.


 I'm sure you're right. She said she refused his request that she shave.

She propositioned him but, ISTM, that he, being a seasoned player, immediately took control and treated her openly like the 3rd alternative cum-dump he saw her as. He studiously, indeed brutally, avoided any appearance of emotional involvement with her.



> It reminds me of what one coworker told me how he got a thrill going out to eat with a wife and her husband when earlier in the day he had been making out with the wife.


 I think they both got a kick out this sort of thing - I was encouraged to go down the pub with him (I didn't) but we went out as a foursome three or four times (and his wife was gorgeous!).



> It's natural for thoughts about the affair to last a lifetime. I met was with a lady in her 90's who was still tormented by her long dead husbands affairs, a while back.


When my medication was changed a few years ago all the questions that I'd ignored for twenty-plus years hit me. Got the change reversed, lost 50 lbs, put in some serious study and got my peace. So - I'm not tormented, not even hurt (I'm in too good a place now to want to risk losing it by changing anything that happened on my path to here) but, occasionally, something triggers a memory - and sometimes that memory can be explored without emotional risk. Hence - why would he choose "French" knickers rather than a different style, or maybe a different garment?


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

BluesPower said:


> First off, who knows really and she probably does not either.
> 
> I feel weird answering this but here goes...
> 
> ...


Thanks - I'm sure it was control - just wondered why he choose as he did.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

arbitrator said:


> *I cannot help but think that all of us who marry think that we can save our beloved and help them overcome all of their perceived warts and deficiencies!
> 
> Fetish or insecurity? I don't know ~
> Did the two you ever try considering marriage or pastoral counseling?*


I suspect that your first para is generally correct - but that the exceptions amount to a sizeable minority.

Pastoral counselling no - I wasn't/am not a believer in god(s) (nor was she - though we met through a church). - so a pastor was not an option. And since my father was an evangelical CofE minister and my mother learnt her religion in the Salvation Army Citadel I would have questioned the value of any advice from someone who rated superstitious belief as superior to a secular training.

My X did set up a meeting with a MC. Since I was by then aware of the depth of disdain she had shown, not just for me but also for our pre-school kids, I regarded the marriage as dead. (I did try to permit a new relationship to develop but gave up on that after twenty-seven months when, just as the emergence of AIDS was scaring us all silly, she gave me an STI.) The MC seemed unable to cope with my lack of desire to "forgive and forget" so I didn't go again. My XW may have attended a further session alone (she said she did but I didn't check).


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Blondilocks said:


> At the time: 120 lbs, long dancer legs and (shhh) high heels. The rest wasn't too bad, either.:wink2:


_tap pants are cute and sexy. My husband loved them on me_ Well - he would wouldn't he :laugh:

I'd have loved them on my XW when she was 5' 6" and 120 lbs despite her "nut-cracker" thighs (as she was when we wed). Very soon she was heavier than me - and I'm 6' 2".


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

cp3o said:


> This all relates to events of thirty plus years ago - it wasn't, and isn't, important but it has always intrigued me.
> 
> XW propositioned her BF's H. He wasn't her first "conquest" and was a known serial adulterer who spent weeks at a time in a solely male environment. ......
> 
> ...


For gosh sakes. She is your ex-wife. Let it go and move on with your life! It matters nothing in your life what she did, what motivates her. Focus on your life, you left her long (30 years) ago.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I'm loving this thread! :grin2:


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

Young at Heart said:


> For gosh sakes. She is your ex-wife. Let it go and move on with your life! It matters nothing in your life what she did, what motivates her. Focus on your life, you left her long (30 years) ago.


Thanks for your advice. 

I believe that I have "moved on" - partly by removing her from my life 25 years ago and partly by understanding how someone who is intelligent enough to teach a science subject to mid-teens can be so odd/weird/unusual/damaged as to recommence a sexual relationship with a man who, a few months earlier had raped her, dumped her "brutally" (verbally and physically), humiliated her in front of his pals in a bar and made it crystal clear to her that she was his third option side-piece sperm recipient. She also admitted, without any pressure, context, vocal inflection or other indication of regret/remorse that she put her D3 and S4 at risk of abduction for a few minutes on her back with her BF's H whilst out of sight and earshot of her desperately-desired kids.

I knew when I married her that she had low self-esteem - but come on - this was a bit more than a 12 month blip in her level of self-respect.

Oh, by the way, she was also capable of rage-fuelled violence. I once pulled her off S8 and demanded to know why she was raining blow after blow on his arms, torso and head. Apparently she was perfectly justified because "HE SAID NO".

So, I have a good understanding of what causes her to be as she is. Her behaviour is pretty much classic psychopath - as defined in DSM5. She, and I suspect one sibling, inherited a genetic variation from her father whose behaviour she mimicked closely. Her behaviour leads to a score in the low 30s on the Check-list (revised) and doesn't seem to match closely any other condition. There is nothing that I, or anyone else, can do/could have done that would impact on her underlying condition.

I have been in a loving/caring/sharing relationship with a very attractive lady (apparently we are both often taken as being in our early sixties) for 20 years. Though we both have a degree of baggage from past relationships we have a great lifestyle sharing house, dog, garden, village society, local volunteering, holidays etc. as we grow (not too graciously) old together.

This thread was not about my XW. It was an attempt to find out if anyone had any idea as to why her FB would have chosen to insist that she wear the particular style of underwear he required? It doesn't matter - it just amuses me. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear initially.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Hurt people hurt people. 

It's a very important lesson to remember. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

Every guy has a kink. His was bloomers. She wore them as payment for his attention and validation.


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

CP30 are you a Star Wars fan?

Remember on _That 70s Show_ when Donna dressed up as Princess Leia for Eric... with the Cinnabon hair? Same thing with your ex-wife.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Another possibility is a shared naughty secret.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

bandit.45 said:


> CP30 are you a Star Wars fan?


 Enjoyed the first three - the handle is a sort of pun.



> Remember on _That 70s Show_ when Donna dressed up as Princess Leia for Eric... with the Cinnabon hair? Same thing with your ex-wife.


 Don't think it made it across the Atlantic.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

MJJEAN said:


> Another possibility is a shared naughty secret.


Such as? The fact was not a secret - it wasn't until months later, after I'd conned her into an admission, that I learnt she'd swapped styles at his request.


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

cp3o said:


> Enjoyed the first three - the handle is a sort of pun.
> 
> Don't think it made it across the Atlantic.


Aw you missed out.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

cp3o said:


> Such as? The fact was not a secret - it wasn't until months later, after I'd conned her into an admission, that I learnt she'd swapped styles at his request.


For a time before she confessed she and him shared the underwear secret. He knew she was wearing them for him, she knew she was wearing them for him, it was an intimate connection, their dirty naughty delicious lil secret.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

cp3o said:


> Such as? The fact was not a secret - it wasn't until months later, after I'd conned her into an admission, that I learnt she'd swapped styles at his request.


Not that it matters now... 

But does it strike you as odd that you had to Conn her into an admission... 

If you have to do that, what does it really matter???


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

BluesPower said:


> Not that it matters now...
> 
> But does it strike you as odd that you had to Conn her into an admission...
> 
> If you have to do that, what does it really matter???


Con as in I had circumstantial evidence that my gut feelings were right - but nothing specific. (This was 1981 - and they communicated only by wired 'phone and face-to-face. Small video recorders were the size of a house brick and usable wireless technology didn't exist). It was catch in the act or bluff.

I caught her in an indisputable lie, that she had not been with those she claimed she had spent the evening with, and threatened to go round to her best friend's house and beat the truth out of her husband in front of his wife and kids. I wasn't going to do it but she bought it and caved. She admitted to the affair and two of her previous dalliances. 

The information that the change in underwear style was his suggestion was one of the least important (and least bizarre) disclosures that came out over the next few days.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

MJJEAN said:


> For a time before she confessed she and him shared the underwear secret. He knew she was wearing them for him, she knew she was wearing them for him, it was an intimate connection, their dirty naughty delicious lil secret.


You may well be right - I just recalled that she said he always wore boxers - and I suppose that french knickers might be seen as a female equivalent of boxers? - a sort of bonding thing? 

Although she was the instigator he, both then currently and previously a serial adulterer, immediately took control from her and played her until she would put up with almost anything he chose to impose, however demeaning; the knickers may have been an early step down that path?.


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

So you tossed out a fat, homely, cheating ho with a caved-in ass...

Count yourself lucky and move on. It's not worth obsessing over.


----------



## cp3o (Jun 2, 2018)

bandit.45 said:


> So you tossed out a fat, homely, cheating ho with a caved-in ass...
> 
> Count yourself lucky and move on. It's not worth obsessing over.


With great respect Bandit - I know what obsessing is and this isn't it. 

Four(ish) years ago my GP decided to switch my medication. I went from sleeping when my head hit the pillow to going over the same questions/situations (relating to my XW) in my head for literally 3 or even 4 hours, every single night, before falling asleep. I walked the dog; every step I took was accompanied by the same unwanted thoughts. There was no respite - driving, eating, pretty much every moment the same litany. 

I got the medication change reversed and faced the "demons". Started going to a gym for the first time since secondary school (I was in my mid 60s) and took control of my enjoyment of eating. I clarified the question that was behind my thoughts, read the standard literature, gathered data, analysed the data, applied the standard tests and the answer emerged. Not one I'd anticipated but the only one that fitted the data. 

I'm now forty pounds lighter, 5" slimmer at my waist, my BP is "optimal" and I'm back to sleeping easily - I can even sleep in a store, when I so chose, whilst my 20+ year partner tries on a selection of potential purchases. (My tendency to snore ensures she doesn't over-dally).

I have always noticed the odd, the out of the usual - it's just me. I read the words rather than the sense. It seems I may be the only resident in our village who noticed the spelling mistake on the cricket club sponsor's hoarding and, yes, I notice inappropriate " ' "s - as in _sofa's for sale_.

Part of forty years success in sales/business development was due to my ability to pick up on things that others missed. The, to me obvious, conflict between a person's words and their "body language", the precise use of words to convey a concept whilst leaving the door open to an alternate interpretation, the confident assertion which is at odds with the detail. When something unusual comes to my attention I try to understand it - sometimes I can - sometimes I can't. If I can't I'm humble enough to admit my inability and ask if others can shed light. This "fetish" came to mind after being buried for years and I thought perhaps, among the wide experience of those at TaM, there might be someone who had a neat answer. But I'm not losing sleep over it, walking the dog is filled with thoughts about varied subjects, including the posts of others, but this oddity is not amongst them. I threw it out - it hasn't found an answer from experience but some suggestions have been interesting. 

My thanks to those who offered their thoughts - it was, for me, an intriguing minor mystery - it remains, for me, an intriguing minor mystery - one of thousands that I will never know the answer to. The answer is of no consequence in itself - it could have no impact - it's just that I don't like being ignorant if I don't have to be. It appears that I have to be - and that's OK, it is but one of many such unknowns.


----------

