The Men We Love!

I was recently reading an article online where the writer had shared how some of the literary male protagonists had ruined her romantic life because they are “Oh, so perfect!” The article was fun and so I googled more on the topic where favourite male characters from novels were shared. There were some names that were appearing more commonly as against others. A prime example was Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy from the Pride and Prejudice who was not only part of every single list but was almost always occupying the No. 1 spot. And then there were others who appeared more than often. Here when I listed them down, there was a very interesting observation that cropped up. But, first let me share the ones that I am talking about:

1. Mr. Darcy – Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

Image source: Google Search

The quintessential and undoubtedly most loved male character ever from a novel is Mr. Darcy from the “Pride and Prejudice”. Mr. Darcy exhibits all the good and bad qualities of the ideal English aristocrat — snobbish and arrogant, he is also completely honest and sure of himself. Initially described as someone vain and too proud for our dear Elizabeth Bennet, he backs off when she rejects him and yet is mature and good-natured enough to help her out where he can without any expectations in return. When Elizabeth flatly turns down his marriage proposal and tells him that it was ungentlemanly, Darcy is startled into realizing just how arrogant and assuming he had been. He accepts his folly and goes all out to correct what he had done wrong. Darcy's humbling makes him more sensitive to what other people feel. If he wins our dear Lizzy’s heart in the process, it’s all too obvious. The fact that he is extremely handsome and rich is just icing on the cake.

2. Captain Wentworth – Persuasion by Jane Austen

Much on the lines of Mr. Darcy, Jane Austen also wrote the character of the good-looking Captain Wentworth in “Persuasion”. Although he could never reach the desirability quotient of Mr. Darcy, he wasn’t much behind either, heralding very similar qualities as Mr. Darcy. Again, choosing to walk away when rejected by Anne and yet holding an undying love for her in his heart for years; he doesn’t impose himself or his feelings on her unless he himself is sure of her own feelings. In fact, he felt responsible for Louisa's condition, having pursued her to make Anne jealous and would have taken her as his wife. However, when Louisa turned her affections to James Benwick, he let her go without making it an ego issue. Eventually, getting similar undying love from Anne could only have been the best reward possible.

3. Atticus Finch – To kill a mockingbird by Harper Lee 

Bold, heroic, noble, honourable, confident and optimistic, Atticus Finch from “To kill a mockingbird” is a vision of idealised masculinity. He is a true role model in every sense of the word. A man holding forth a fight for justice against all odds; and yet a very even-keeled type of guy who does not get too worked up about stressful situations. He is not affected by what other people say or think. He is consistent and rooted in his beliefs. A man of great wisdom and character; he is a good single parent too trying to fill his kids with a sense of righteousness.

4. Gilbert Blythe – Anne of Green Gables by Lucy Maud Montgomery

Gilbert Blythe from “Anne of Green Gables” is literally literature’s most beloved boy-next-door. He lets Anne be Anne, a wonderful mess of imagination, goof-ups, temper, drive, and dreams – and Gilbert loves all of that about her. He never tries to make her something she isn’t. Also, he doesn’t let obstacles throw him and he pursues excellence. He works hard for what he has and isn’t showy about his successes. And boy! Is he patient? He fell in love with Anne long before the thought ever occurred to her that he could. And he waited. And waited. He waited until Anne herself was ready and all this while without even being imposing. Like all romantic male protagonists, he loved Anne and they both supported each other throughout the series. All the while, Gilbert was never threatened when Anne succeeded. He was secure in who he was and happily rejoiced in Anne’s success even if he was the one who had lost out to her.

5. Rhett Butler – Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell

On the surface, Rhett Butler from “Gone with the Wind” is a textbook example of the charming rogue. His dark, good looks and supposedly wild behavior are the source of considerable gossip among the ladies. However, he is loved not for his Casanova image but for his undaunting love for Scarlett. Rhett has no dearth of physical courage which can be seen in the fact that he starts off the war as a blockade runner (which takes some courage, even if he insists it doesn't), but at the siege of Atlanta he decides to go off and join the army. Moreover, he helps Scarlett escape from Atlanta during the siege and after he murders a black man, he faces his sentence of death by hanging with seeming equanimity. And yet some call Rhett a coward because he's afraid to tell his own wife that he loves her. Rhett's afraid of Scarlett; deathly afraid, shamefully afraid. Even though he declares his love for her when he is about to leave Scarlett to go into the army and perhaps die, she misunderstands him because he had never really expressed his sentiments till then. He just lets her be herself and gave her all the space she needed while remaining by her side as the anchor she may hook herself on. He is also an excellent father to Bonnie; never once entangled by the gender roles in the said period and taking upon himself the parental duties as he must. The one flaw that holds out as a sore eye is Rhett Butler putting the blame of every flaw in him (his act of indifference or his sleeping with Belle) on Scarlett and he eventually comes across as someone willing to cheat on her and lie to her and treat her as a punching bag for his own insecurities. A bit of put downer there. 

Having listed down the most loved male characters across the world in the English novels, there is one thing noteworthy about the list… One common factor that runs across all these characters is the trait that they are utterly and unwittingly feminist in their conduct. They do not impose on the women they love; give them space to be themselves; and support them in their pursuits. Is it a surprise? Well, not if you see the reason why. 

ALL THESE CHARACTERS WERE CREATED AND WRITTEN BY WOMEN.

I don't have an attitude problem... I have an attitude and you have a problem!

I was once told that I have an attitude problem. I did not retaliate because by giving back to that person, I would have proved him right. The thing is that I do not have an attitude problem. I have an attitude and that person has a problem with my attitude. And honestly, that is not my problem.

I have a (maybe bad) habit of voicing my opinion and calling a spade a spade. I do this every single time without fail and without caring about the reactions of other people. The approach I follow is simple and democratic. I say what I think and what I feel is right but then I do not fight back to uphold my opinion. I let others speak and express whatever they think is right. "To each his own" is my philosophy. Many times people have expressed 'different' or 'contradicting' views. Often I have been rudely condemned and have faced people's ire for that too (thankfully restricted to social media). But I have never retaliated. People can think about it whatever they want. They can assume that I am not fighting back because I am scared of them or that I am weak. They can happily regale in their assumption that they put me down and that I failed to overpower them. Again... To each his own. I just do not feel the need of getting everyone to agree with me.

Just last week something similar happened. I spoke up about something I felt strongly about (and I always try to maintain a polite language and try not to put anyone down). Still, a person whom I considered a good friend (and about whom I had recognized long back that she has a very different way of thinking than me), got a bit worked up because she did not agree with me. Within minutes I had lost a friend for voicing an opinion different to hers. I was surprised a bit that people are not mature enough to accept others feeling differently about the same issue and they find it difficult to co-exist peacefully with - leave alone respect - others having a different point of view. But then, I still do not regret saying what I felt.

Then today, a colleague chatting with another colleague of mine suddenly fell silent as I approached his table in the cafeteria. When I asked what happened and he could not suddenly make up something for me, he admitted that he had been talking about men's rights activism and how he felt about women using the laws in their favour to harass men. I smiled and told him that I agree to what he has said and that there have been cases, a couple about whom I know personally too, where this has been a case. Yet, those are still few in number and the most number of cases are genuinely where women have faced harassment. He started arguing that those are the thing of the past and that the laws are archaic and need to be changed. I did not then challenge back or justify my views. He was all into debate mood by then and kept on repeating his argument again and again. I just sat there, smiled and drank my tea. He tried hard to instigate a reaction. When he couldn't get one, he very stoutly said, "See, even you are convinced that I am right." I smiled and said, "Not yet but unlike you, I am not trying to convince you that I am right." He was taken aback a bit. I then very calmly told him that irrespective of what I think, he still has a right to have a different opinion and speak it up in front of me and I would do the same in front of him. I will not belittle him or judge him for having an opinion different than mine and I hope he would not judge me either. To be honest, even if he does judge me for having views different than his own, I will make sure that it will not impact me at all or for long. Thankfully, we parted the tea party in a joyful mood happily bidding each other a nice day. 

Image source: Google search

I was not always like that. There was a time when people's opinion about me mattered to me. I just wanted to be in everybody's good books. I would not speak out my views clear cut lest I might offend someone. And it all would bottle up inside me and mess with my head. I was - and still am - a person who had an opinion of her own, sometimes different than the opinion of people around me. I also realized the need of speaking out my opinion clear and loud but I wouldn't because of the fear of condemnation. It has taken me years of struggle, self-analysis and self-discovery to develop the nonchalant attitude towards what people may think of me for speaking out. I am now more confident than ever in the knowledge that I do not need other people's acceptance to be a nice person and what people think about me is irrelevant to my existence. This 'devil-may-care-attitude' which may not go down well with some people is actually a well thought out decision. And now, giving up this attitude for the fear of losing out on 'friends' is actually too big a price for me to keep people around me. I will not stifle my voice just to be with others who cannot respect me for having an opinion, even if it is different than theirs. And one thing is sure... I do not intend to change for anybody's acceptance.

Handloom Sarees: Revival vs. Innovation

Sarees are currently one of my loves and those who know me also know how I have taken to them in the last three years. Since two of these three years, I have also been on a journey of discovery of various handlooms of India all the while collecting many types myself – certainly more than what my family would like me to. In this journey, I have come across many saree enthusiasts, saree experts and of course saree vendors and resellers (and a couple of actual artists and artisans too). I have also understood how this sudden movement to revive sarees and specifically handlooms is being misused, even as many weavers are benefitting from this as well. 

Kunbi Saree (said to be revived)

© Nishtha Khurana

(photo of personal saree)

Not even a week ago, the famous painter and saree aficionado, Alka Raghuvanshi, wrote in her column in the Asian Age how some individuals or groups have been claiming that they have revived certain weaving styles and sarees that fell into disuse. Alka was pretty direct in calling them out and was barely short of taking names. But the people on these closed saree groups / circles already know who she was talking about.

It was a debatable post and one would have liked to see more discussions around what actually would qualify as revival and what wouldn’t. Unfortunately, her article soon turned more controversial than debatable due to people’s attention instead being grabbed by one word in the article (‘dowdy’). Suddenly, more people were taking offense to this word than actually trying to understand the true intent of the article, which was how some people are manipulating their posts on social media to make money. They are charging exorbitant prices for stuff that has always been around and worn by common folks by calling them revived and making them sound something exclusive and rare. 

Kanchi cotton with Bomkai motifs

© Nishtha Khurana (photo of personal saree)

Let me first explore what ‘revival’ actually means. According to the Cambridge Dictionary, “revival” is “the process of becoming more active or popular again” with synonyms being “comeback” and “resurrection” among others. So, going by the literal meaning, revival of something happens when it remains at the same place and it is essentially the same thing (in this case it should mean that the saree should be woven at the place of its origin and the essence of the weaving style should remain the same). This in most cases, as Alka rightly pointed out, is not the case. Most of the Odisha weaves which are being sold as ‘revival’ (and if not ‘revival’, ‘tribal’) sarees, for instance, Habaspuri, Bomkai, Dongaria, Siminoi, are now being woven in non-tribal areas of Naupatna and Sonepur. It is a known fact that there is no weaving happening in these villages anymore. However, I am not an expert on weaving styles and hence would refrain from commenting on it. Similarly, from what I understand, the Kunbi that has been supposedly revived has also been woven outside the Konkan region. (The Kunbi I purchased – per my best guess – is woven somewhere in Karnataka as it was delivered to me wrapped in a vernacular Kannada newspaper). Then again, Bodo and Mismi tribes do not wear sarees. But there are sarees being sold with similar weaves. There is a sudden popularity of Santhal sarees and they are generally more elaborate than the original Santhal sarees. Much like Kotpad and Dongaria tribes, Santhal weavers also weaved shawls or shorter versions of sarees instead of the six-yards that are being sold nowadays. How can we still call it revived? In my limited understanding, it is a new product altogether which has drawn inspiration from an existing product which is no longer in production. 

Dongaria in bright red

© Nishtha Khurana (photo of personal saree)

Then, does it mean that they shouldn’t be sold or probably sold with any other name? I personally believe that as long as they have the weaving essence intact, they should be continued to be sold with or without the same name even if there is a slight design intervention. Why deny the people who are interested in these weaves the joy of wearing them? As long as even a single weaver is benefitted, we should weave them and buy them. Many a times preservation and continued future existence of something demands moving it to a different, more ideal location. There is nothing really wrong with that, even if it does not fall under the classic definition of revival. The debate should actually not be whether these sarees should be woven and sold, the debate should be whether the saree vendors are right in charging exorbitant prices by calling a saree a revival when it has been in existence all along but has maybe become less popular over time and is now becoming popular again? 

Arani silk saree with Siminoi motifs
Source: CoOptex

That brings me to another great idea… Innovation. Can these sarees then be called ‘innovative’ sarees? (I hope I am not giving any ideas to resellers to start terming their sarees innovative and charge a bomb again for them.) But this is something that is very near to my heart. The traditional weave in some non-traditional colour attracts me, e.g. Telia Rumals in colours other than red, white and black; or Dongarias in colours like red, teal, pink. When there is some new design intervention, it really beholds my interest, e.g. Batik sarees with non-traditional motifs like Tulips; Korvai Kanjeevarams with the ‘plus’ signs. When two arts are amalgamated, it ensnares me, e.g. Kalamkari on Kasavu sarees; Sozni or Suf embroidery on Venkatgiri sarees. And when a traditional weave adapts designs from another traditional weave, it creates a thing of beauty that I feel is unparalleled, e.g. Kanchi Cotton sarees with motifs inspired by Bomkai sarees; Arani silk sarees with Siminoi saree motifs. 

Korvai Kanjeevaram with '+' motifs
Source: Cooptex

Many of these examples that I have quoted are from experiments by CoOptex, the weavers’ cooperative supported by the Tamil Nadu government. I have tremendous respect for Mr. Venkatesh Narsimhan, the MD of CoOptex, because he is very invested in upskilling the weavers and helping them innovate and come up with new designs and colours in existing designs. These sarees are not reviving anything. They are just giving the wearers a new experience while retaining the essence of their original weave intact. Will I buy them? Of course. I have bought a few and I would love to buy more at a reasonable price. 

So, politics, mud-slinging, ego bashing aside; I am happy that more and more handloom sarees are being woven and becoming popular. Much as we can’t help individual people minting money on this wave, I hope the benefits reap down to the weavers as much as they can. And I also pray that as many traditional weaves are woven as new designs are invented and the saree lovers like me continue to enjoy the six yards in innumerable ways.

Disclaimer: Whatever is stated above is my limited knowledge about handlooms and weaves. There is no claim to authenticity whatsoever. If you know something mentioned is incorrect, please feel free to enlighten me.

Is it really the easy way out?

A few days back, a lady approached me for some advice. She had been separated from her husband since about an year and a half. She had a small kid and had recently filed for divorce. She claims that the person is a narcissist. Apart from the emotional and mental torture, her husband had apparently cheated on her twice. After the first time, he had apologized and made her believe that since she had been away from him for a few months, he went astray. He admitted it to be a moment of weakness which escalated into a full blown extra-marital affair. But he said sorry and promised not to make the same mistake again, so she put everything behind her and reconciled. A year and a half later, she finds herself in the same situation. He again puts it on her saying that she has brought about a lull in the relationship because of the baby and there was a lack of excitement and so he went astray. This time, the lady took a bold step and moved out. She had since been living with her parents. There had been no reconciliation attempts from either side and a divorce case had been filed by her. Now, as is the norm in divorce cases, the couple was referred for mediation. During mediation, the husband had once again apologized. He was promising not to make the same mistake again and requesting her to come back. She had messaged me to ask what she should do? She admitted that there was no surety at all that he would keep the promise (in fact, by now she had understood that he would not keep the promise he was making and that they were just worthless words). She also understood now that although he always made her feel guilty by making her believe everything was her fault, it was in fact he who was in the wrong here. But she was still contemplating reuniting with her husband for her child's sake.

If anyone asks for my advice, I never tell them what to do, especially in cases of marriage and divorce. If I have gone through similar situation, I usually tell them what I had done and why. If I had never gone through such a situation myself, I clearly tell them so. In latter scenario, I often tell them what, in my opinion, were the pros and cons of the choices the person had in front of them. Anyway, this post is not about what I told her or what she eventually decided to do (which honestly I am not even aware of as of now). This post is about what I felt was driving her to consider the option of reuniting with her husband knowing that the promise was fake. They call it "for the child's sake", but it actually means "societal pressure".

It wasn't like she was not able to care for her kid. She had been raising her kid without her husband's support for about 2 years now. She was working and was doing decently in her profession. So, even the finances where her kid was concerned were not really a problem (she was doing fine, as she explained to me and in any case her application for child support was pending in court). Her parents had supported her all this time. But suddenly, they and her friends and her relatives were of the opinion that she should give her husband "one chance to come around" for "her child's sake". (I fail to understand why everyone had ignored the fact that she had already given him "one chance to come around" and that this would in fact be his "second chance to come around").

She is actually not the only one who has been in this dilemma. In fact, every single woman who had opted for divorce, with a kid or not, has gone through this dilemma - whether she should give her marriage one more chance.* Many of them already knew deep inside that this is not going to work and yet they thought and sometimes decided to give the marriage a second chance. I did that too and I had thought back then, "At least, it would clear my conscience and I would not feel that I did not try." Similarly, everyone feels that they should not feel or someone should not tell them that they did not try or that they took the easy way out.

After all, the society believes that making a marriage work is a difficult job and divorce is the "easy way out". If only the people knew what one has to go through to reach the end of a divorce, they would never say such a stupid thing. Choosing divorce over reconciliation is not an easy way out. For the divorce process would be the hardest battle that a woman would ever fight in her whole life. 

* I would like to hope that every man also goes through the same confusion but I have not been privy to many men discussing their marriage and divorce stories with me so I am not so sure about that.

Divorce rates are rising everywhere... And that's a good thing!

It is no surprise that the divorce rates have shot up over the last 60 years ever since the Hindu Code Bill was passed in the 1950s. The latest census statistics, which allow the people to select one of the options, namely, never married, separated, divorced, widowed, married; tell us that the number of divorced people have grown exponentially in the said period. Moreover, there are even a higher number of people who have chosen their status as separated. This status can be attributed to people in the middle of divorce proceedings (considering the time taken in litigation in the slow-moving Indian courts) or to the people living separately but not opting for divorce because of the stigma associated with same. This is taking into account that some people may not even report separation or divorce because the society still looks down at such marital statuses.

Image source: Google search

Yes, that's true. The society looks down at the divorced status (even more than the separated status). There are always discussions and arguments like how our grandparents and parents "worked through" their problems and did not simply opt for divorce. And the good old Indian morals come into the picture where our own dear country is concerned. Our upholders of 'sanskaar' and the older generations in our families claimed that the divorce rates in India are low because of our great family values and morals. And now they rue that the divorce rates are increasing because there is a conspicuous decline in these values.

A lot of people act like higher divorce rates are actually indicative of a loss of morality, ethics and a sense of commitment and responsibility. The people proclaiming our great values and ethics lament and blame the phenomenon on 'westernization'. They claim that families are breaking down because people have no patience to give their marriages a chance. But the truth, in my opinion, is entirely something else.

The truth in my opinion is that in the older generation, people "worked through" their problems in private because women just continued to "adjust" and bear with what was metted to them. The women hand no financial and social security; no incomes and assets; and hence did not have any option or choice but to 'work it out'. Add to it the social stigma attached to the status of divorce. So, they simply chose to continue living in abusive and unhealthy relationships for the lack of options, for the sake of their children, or to stay away from the social stigma of divorce. It was actually all about keeping up appearances. Honestly, how is it possible to have a healthy marriage if someone feels disrespected or insulted by their partners more often than not?

But the rising divorce rates in my opinion is actually a sign of social and economic progress of women and greater autonomy now enjoyed by women. It means that fewer women are dependent on men and can decide for themselves what they want their life to be. With education and awareness to back them, women are now breaking free of the rule that told them to stay quiet in front of a man. More and more women are becoming financially independent and don't rely on their husbands, or anyone else, for survival. Even if kids are involved, women are now able to earn and take care of them, if required. With this financial independence comes a stronger sense of self-confidence and the ability to walk out of a bad marriage. Higher divorce rates actually mean that women are leaving abusive and unhealthy relationships at higher rates. It means that women are finally standing up for themselves because now they can. How can that be a bad thing really?

The stigma won't go away overnight, but the least we can do is stop pretending that Indian values, morality, ethics and our culture are being threatened by an increasing divorce rate.

I am sick of Women's Day!!

Yet another "Women's Day" has gone past and by the end of the day, I was just so sick of all the "Happy Women's Day" posts and WhatsApp messages. (I sometimes also feel the same after reading the Mother's Day posts.) I had totally ignored the newspapers yesterday as I did not want to go through all those articles about how great women are. "Oh, women are just so compassionate." "Women are the nurturers." "They are beautiful creatures of nature." "They are so intuitive." I just wanted to stay away from all these stereotypes just as much as I wanted to avoid looking (and getting angry over) all the advertisements of Women's Day offers, the spa and beauty packages, the jewelry gift ideas, and discounts. Despite that I still stumbled upon a saree shop giving discount equal to half the age of their women customer, and it irked me no end. All these messages, posts and advertisements are irritating to me.

One of the messages, which I received from multiple people yesterday went like this: "You're one half of the world and the reason for the other half." Excuse me? It's not like women reproduce on their own? Yes, they bear children. But that is because at least one of the two sexes has to bear the offspring after the two together reproduce. And nature / biology, granted that physiology to the female sex. That's it. Period.

I hate all these messages. They all are like, "Let's celebrate women because women are this and women are that." I myself just forwarded one simple "Happy Women's Day" message because the others which were going all gaga about how great we women are were just stupid. They were just so against the whole idea and the whole spirit of International Women's Day.

The whole idea of International Women's Day is about gender equality, not telling the world how special women are. We should be arguing that we are not very different from the other half of the population and hence we should be treated as their equals. What we actually do is the exact opposite. We tell them, "Oh, we are so different from you all. We are special. So, please give us special treatment." That's just plain revolting! We are not special. We are not extraordinary. We are just like you. Biologically, we and you have different functions and just like our jobs, we fulfill those functions. That doesn't make us different and that definitely doesn't make us special. We do not need this chivalry really. This day which had a lot of meaning initially has been reduced to a marketing gimmick.

P.S. (added as an afterthought) A friend of mine today wrote about "benevolent sexism". The way we celebrate Women's Day nowadays is a perfect example of "benevolent sexism". Please Google it and read about it. And please learn to differentiate. It is actually more harmful to the goal of feminism that hostile sexism is.

Please also read my previous linked post here.

I was never a big Sridevi fan… Here’s why!

This has been on my mind for some time; basically, ever since Sridevi passed away. I have been seeing people’s post about how sad they were and how they were devastated by her death. I felt none of that. Of course, I was shocked when I woke up to the news on 25th February, but that was mostly because I had been seeing her pictures at Mohit Marwah’s wedding just a day before. She looked all gorgeous and decked up and one could not have imagined that she would be no more in few hours at the most. But the thing that I am trying to say is that, I was not a fan and somehow there wasn’t much respect for her in me almost throughout.

Image Source: Google Image Search

It is true that I have enjoyed many of her movies like Mr. India, Chaalbaaz, Lamhe, Gumrah and off late English Vinglish, which I totally loved as a movie. I do think that she was a very accomplished actress and celebrated as deserved. She also lived her life on her own terms and I must give her credit for that too. But for me to be a fan of a person, be it an actor or a sportsperson, I think it’s very important for me to relate to their public persona. And one thing I could never relate to are people who get involved with other people who are married. That applies to both men and women. I would not call Sridevi a home breaker because I consider Boney Kapoor equally responsible, if not more, for breaking up his marriage to Mona Kapoor by getting involved with Sridevi. Calling Sridevi a home breaker kind of absolves Boney Kapoor of his responsibility which is wrong. 

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not the person who believes that a marriage once solemnized should become your whole life’s bondage. A marriage should be happy and should make you a better person. If not, it’s better to call it quits. But, one should give it a proper closure before allowing another person in your life. That is only fair to the one person you had once vowed to stand by in good and bad times. I would have revered Sridevi and Boney Kapoor differently if Boney had first called it quits with his first wife and then gotten involved with Sridevi and if Sridevi would have gotten involved with him only after he ended his first relationship. There are many other examples in the film industry and sports world of such people; Lara Dutta – Mahesh Bhupathi; Shilpa Shetty – Raj Kundra; Aamir Khan – Kiran Rao; Dharmender – Hema Malini; Jennifer Lopez – Ben Affleck; Madonna – Alex Rodriguez; Brad Pitt – Angelina Jolie; and many more. They are all happily married (some are separated again) now but at least one of them was committed to another person when they formed a bond.

While it is easy to say that they had the guts to follow their heart, do give a minute to think about the person who probably trusted them and continued investing in a relationship that was already a lost cause. They deserved better. Their kids deserved better. They deserved a proper closure without the feeling of being deceived. Infidelity, even if it may result in happy legal relationships later, can never earn my respect.