Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I realize that HN is not the place to go if you're looking for people who can give good relationship advice, but an affair that comes about due to genuine mutual interest and is the seed for a strong, lasting relationship is pretty much non-existent outside of fiction. Either the original marriages were open to begin with, or there are other problems, either with the individuals involved or with the marriages themselves.

This is one of the more interesting things I've read inspired by the scandal: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/reconsidering-the-petraeus-...




> an affair that comes about due to genuine mutual interest and is the seed for a strong, lasting relationship is pretty much non-existent outside of fiction

What are you basing this on?

-----


Gut, mostly. I haven't seen an effective study on the matter, so there isn't much else to go on. The terms I'm using are also badly operationalized.

Substantially, all I'm saying is that affairs don't work like your standard relationship: they're always contextualized by the existing relationships.

-----


It reminds me of Louis CK's observation that "no good marriages end in divorce"

-----


Bob Hawke had an affair with his biographer while he was Prime Minister of Australia in the 80s, and they are still married. The incident is barely a footnote on his Wikipedia page covering his long and successful career.

It's beyond me why the Americans feel the need to cannibalise their highest public achievers for trivial personal faults.

-----


Yes, affairs that turn into marriages happen. That doesn't actually detract from my point, which is that they're vanishingly rare. In a population of billions, I'd expect several hundred cases quite easily.

> It's beyond me why the Americans feel the need to cannibalise their highest public achievers for trivial personal faults.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about this scandal myself. I've been super-unproductive today, and this comment thread was an effective diversion. But the article I linked suggests that this scandal is a good opportunity to recognize some more interesting things about Petraeus' history that have nothing to do with his personal life, per se.

My favorite part about the article was what it didn't talk about: namely, Broadwell barely figured into it except as a secondary example.

-----


Yep, thanks for the link. :)

I'm inclined to think that anyone with his success and media profile will inevitably have jealous rivals who think he's a show pony, and that they'd be lining up to stick in daggers now he's down.

So maybe the article is credible, or maybe not, but this kind of thing was always going to to be written regardless of the facts. I'd put far more stock in his undisputable military achievements, which are perfectly sufficient to explain his media profile on their own.

-----




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: