Having a work spouse is an excuse to cheat. And there’s no changing my mind on this one. Leave this glamorized – and, nowadays, normalized – workplace trend to the REAL single folks. Have we forgotten that emotional affairs are a thing?
I know I’m about to trigger the steam from people’s ears, but this one gets me so fired UP! When we’re talking about marriage, why are we downplaying THE most honest commitment two people can *promise* to one another? There’s too much emphasis on the insignificance of this trend while I believe it only serves to emphasize the insignificance of marriage.
I’m aware – there are those who will cherry pick and claim that I am trying to say, “You can’t have work friends or work relations with those of the opposite sex!” And that’s not what I’m saying here. In fact, I do my very best to point out the differences between a “work friend” and its perversion, the “work spouse”, and why one can be considered a detriment to the integrity of a committed relationship. So hang tight.
What we unpack in this post..
As I am nose-deep in researching this trend, I stumbled across article after article that PERPETUATES the dynamic among couples – “claiming studies showing this *level* of workplace relations – outside a relationship – are beneficial to mental health“. Cool, cool, cool, yup, improving our mental health…at the expense of the integrity for our spouse, and the respect they rightfully deserve.
How can these *experts* (yes, psychologists) defend such hypocrisy when a work spouse, work husband or work wife literally promotes and embodies emotional infidelity?
So I went ahead and dissected this work-relationship from my perspective as a married woman. Among individuals who are in a committed relationship, this needs to be quickly laid to rest because this is a serious slap of disrespect to your real spouse’s face.
It’s simple: having a work spouse is an excuse to cheat
“Work spouse” is a fancy, boundless label with indirect, implicit meaning
The label itself completely disregards and disrespects your real spouse – period. The worst part is those, without even questioning it, are willing to jeopardize the quality of their real relationship over it. As if having a work spouse is oh-so dire – a requirement, even – for your overall happiness, esteem, and work productivity. Please.
Whether you find the meaning behind it appropriate, acceptable, or *not a big deal* is telling. Having to use the label of a “work spouse” is covering the truth with a lie (calling bad good) because, “See! It has a fancy, pretty, friendly title. It’s totally Disney, so now there’s nothing wrong with it.” It’s a conspicuous and dancing-around-the-bush way of saying,
-“…It’s okay to keep my personal life and work life [relations] completely separate (aka, secret).” **So, essentially having a double life while you’re in a relationship.
-“…I’m [sexually] attracted to you and if given the opportunity I’d have you.” **In fact, you’ve already figured out a way to have it both ways, meanwhile your real spouse remains clueless of your intent to lust over this work spouse behind their back.
-“…you fill in the gaps of my real relationship.” **Then this would mean everyone in a relationship needs a “buffer” or “filler”, which perpetuates the opposite of being content with (accepting) what we already have because our culture pushes having more, more, MORE (perfection).
“…using this label makes it *okay* because I’m drawing a line somewhere in the sand..” **Therefore, weaponizing your “freedoms” by moving the bar between right and wrong as you see fit.
For as long as you establish that label in defense of certain displayed [inappropriate] behaviors with your work spouse, this desensitizes the significance of what constitutes a committed, monogamous relationship and what classifies as unfaithfulness. Oh, hello, emotional affair!
If you can’t see where I’m headed by now, you don’t need to get physical or be attracted to someone for it to be considered a multi-relationship (aka, emotional affair), nor does your real spouse need [any] involvement, consent or knowledge whatsoever for it to be classified as such. In case you need reminding, cheating on your partner starts with you, not in the bedroom.
“There are things I can only share with my work spouse”
Like what, exactly? Certainly not about you and your work spouse’s shared passion for tennis since your real spouse despises it.
Sure, maybe your real spouse wants nothing to do with politics, and your so-called “work spouse” shares your similar views. This bonds you. That’s dandy – doesn’t mean they suddenly deserve special treatment or access to you that your real spouse doesn’t, and it certainly doesn’t make them worthy of a special title.
This level of distinguished comparison is where it all begins and manifests slowly, giving you enough leverage to call it “just friends” without an iota of conviction. In fact, you see absolutely nothing wrong with this type of connection. I see this as a connection compensating for your spouse.
The real problem is when you are more open about your relationship with your work spouse than you are your work-relationship with your real spouse. Then, inconspicuously, it follows with your work spouse becoming the default person you share things with and confide in while the opposite occurs with your real spouse.
The idea that we are to have external connections apart from our spouse is one thing, but the encouragement to seek out emotional consolation and comfort (attention and affection) from someone else is another. The lines become blurred between privacy and secrecy, and of what goes on in your work spouse relationship.
It’s ride or die with your work spouse but your real spouse is simply “too much”
To make things easier, from now on let’s use WS (work spouse) and RS (real spouse).
Here’s where I’m going with this one: that somehow, since it is a work-relationship, you’re more likely to swiftly come to their aid, be at their defense, give them anything they need, be whoever and wherever for them, go out of your way to deliver and impress while being at their disposal…then normalize and justify this behavior while calling them your WS.
But this very same behavior with your RS, and their needs, is somehow classified as “too much”; too demanding, too inconvenient, too exhausting, too needy, too clingy. Wouldn’t this be treated as the “jealous”, overbearing spouse where their needs then become a “chore” obligation? I’d argue its simply the thrill (excitement) of your WS not being your RS, and that you basically get a paycheck for it.
Still, make it make sense. Why would the person you made no promise [commitment] to get served the larger platter, let alone served first (aka, receiving the best of you)?
All I’m saying is, if my husband were prioritizing work-relationship quality, security, fulfillment, and stability with someone – MAN OR WOMAN – over his wife and deem it not only his desire but duty, then he is no longer choosing to be married (to put it nicely).
Work spouse qualities do not equate to a professional work-relationship.
Calling someone a work spouse means you’ve already established unfair comparisons
As in between your WS and your RS. You have already established what your WS can give and is willing to provide you versus what your RS cannot, isn’t and/or won’t. When this happens,
- You can start giving your WS your very best (of your time, energy, and effort) while your RS ends up receiving the breadcrumbs or bottom of the barrel, and they’ll usually end up be to blame.
- You may decide your RS is no longer this or that (i.e., dependable, assertive, caring [toward the relationship]) merely because your WS has proven to be more those things in and out of the workplace.
- You may begin to see your RS incapable of fulfilling any of your [relationship] needs simply because your WS is able to provide you with qualities your RS doesn’t.
- You get the sense that you and your RS are not as compatible (or “in love”) as you think simply because you and your WS are capable of spending the entire day working together (as a “team”) and being in each other’s presence (and it not get “old”, without combativeness).
- You can end up treating your RS as the inferior, or the person who needs to change (matching the level your WS brings to the table), and then being resentful of your RS when that doesn’t happen (while your WS is more attuned to your needs in order to simply maintain a compatible “work” relationship).
- You may dwindle or drop off from feeling the need or desire to engage, connect or communicate with your RS when your WS receives and seemingly deserves it more because you’re in each other’s presence for 8+ hours of the day, 5 days a week.
- You might start expecting your RS to read your mind (to fulfill your needs) in hopes they can live up to your WS (who is the current individual you’re capable of openly expressing your needs/wants to).
GRANTED, all goes without saying one singular person is NOT capable or expected of meeting each and every one of your needs and expectations. It’s unrealistic to expect one person to fulfill your every need/requirement. That’s why we are obviously encouraged to look for connection and support from multiple sources on a platonic level.
We also need to be able to draw lines that question, “Is this [interaction/behavior] really fair to my RS? Or are there deep conversations to be had, boundaries to set, and issues that need to be addressed?“
“It’s not cheating, it’s just terminology”
Oh no? Then it’s totally acceptable for your RS to refer to another person by calling them beautiful or handsome, “Hey, beautiful/handsome.” It doesn’t mean anything, right? Are we really going there?
Terms are only words, yes, but we place meaning in our language. It’s not just nothing, sorry. If a work-relationship is strictly platonic in nature, then there’s no need for additional terminology, is there? Because without it you’re nothing more than colleagues or – *gasp* – friends. So…is it JUST a term or is there more behind it?
In droves they will come, those who will claim that I am adding something to nothing and that I am taking the whole label way too seriously. But I will always come back with how strange it is to be that comfortable using such a word, claiming it has no meaning, and thereby implying the term husband, wife and marriage also have no meaning (value).
So if you’re willing to push the envelope for someone over terminology, why isn’t the terminology of wife, husband, spouse, or married at the tippy top of your moral pedestal? I mean no shade, but the person you choose to commit and stay loyal to is actually entitled to that #1 spot. Your RS earned that rightful title through marriage, which means they stand on their own pedestal (above others) and they stand apart from everyone else. Being given this label of a spouse makes them “special”, honorable, and deserving of something no one else can or should have. Don’t like that? There’s an easy option, and it’s don’t get married.
If you offer or willingly place someone else up on that very same pedestal, what exactly are you doing other than establishing the same level of intimacy and honor as with your RS? By giving someone else that title you’re essentially making it known and clear to your RS that they are disposable and replaceable – that their title of “husband”, “wife” or simply “spouse” is not sacred (for one person only) and holds little to no value or special meaning to you.
Part of me wonders WHY I even had to write this post in the first place when it boils down to respect. Respect for your spouse on a separate and higher elevation from anyone else. If that is somehow triggering, then the issue at heart is very self-focused – serving your spouse above others, including yourself, is inconceivable if it means not getting to do *whatever it is you want to do* without consequence.
wpDiscuz