Seems like that's one of the number one justifications women use to rationalize their behavior.
Check out this article that Field Marshall Watkins posted about on his End of Men blog:
In the article that was the basis for his post, One in Ten Men Could Be Victims of Paternity Fraud, he details the story of a man who is informed by his cheating whore of a wife that the eldest of three girls that he's raised into adulthood is not his. She cuckolded him straight up.
But get her quote from the article...it really takes the cake:
He was the son of a painter and decorator, she the daughter of a tyre fitter and secretary. Lydia was 15 and still at school, Mark two years older and studying to be a baker.
He says: ‘It just worked. She was quite artistic, musically talented – a very good singer. She was basically an innocent girl from a small town who hadn’t really been anywhere, and my history wasn’t so dissimilar.
‘She was my first serious girlfriend. Until then I’d been more interested in cricket than girls.’ They married four years later in 1982.
Lydia has since said that Mark quickly became controlling and manipulative, hitting walls when he was angry and constantly threatening to leave her.
She also claimed that the gradual chipping away of her confidence left her emotionally vulnerable, which is why she was drinking heavily the night Elspeth was conceived.
Lydia, then a secretary with a computing company, was at a conference and ended up in a hotel room with an older colleague, Allen Mottram, known as David.
So let's get this straight: when he got angry, he'd hit the walls (probably because he wanted to hit YOU but he knew that would be wrong).
And he "threatened to leave her."
How is that "controlling?" If he threatened to leave you, tell him "GO THEN."
Instead, you take no personal responsibility, claim you were "emotionally vulnerable" and than cuckold your husband.
Isn't female empowerment in our Brave New World Order wonderful?!?!