Weighing in on The Three Way Thang…

By jen

The Article

This story has been floating around the blogosphere for the last day or so and I am just now getting around to reading the stuff. Former Gov. McGreevey if you remember resigned from office a few years ago for having an affair with an aide and being gay, who cares? The point is, he had a press conference, told the world he was gay and regretted any harm to his wife and kids.

His ex-wife Dina wrote a book, they are having an ugly divorce, etc. She has made herself into the perfect victim wife and I get it. I mean if your man cheats on you with a woman, that is one thing, but cheating with a man brings in a whole other set of issues. That said, it seems the former First Lady of New Jersey liked to get her freak on as well.

A former aide to James E. McGreevey said today that he had three-way sexual trysts with the former governor and his wife before he took office, challenging Dina Matos McGreevey’s assertion that she was naive about her husband’s sexual exploits.

The aide, Theodore Pedersen, said he and the couple even had a nickname for the weekly romps, from 1999 to 2001, that typically began with dinner at T.G.I. Friday’s and ended with a threesome at McGreevey’s condo in Woodbridge.

They called them “Friday Night Specials,” according to Pedersen

Teddy P, as I like to call him, was a handsome twenty-something who served as driver and aide to the former Governor during his campaign and after being elected in 2001.

“I wanted to get this out now because it was so offensive to me that she goes on television playing the victim,” Pedersen said. “She’s trying to make this a payday for herself. She should have told the truth about the three of us.”

Pedersen did not say if he was gay or bisexual and only described having contact with Matos McGreevey during the trysts. He also said he never knew for sure if McGreevey was gay.

“I had heard the rumors in circles outside of work,” he said. “In hindsight, there might have been light interest (in me), but it didn’t seem like he was gay. It did enhance their sexual relationship having me be a part of it.”

So apparently this was a “Dina Sandwich” scenario and Teddy P didn’t have any fun with the Gov. I guess one can make the argument she still didn’t know he was gay, after all their three-ways didn’t involve male on male contact. The issue here for Ms. Matos-McGreevey isn’t the infidelity and probably isn’t the gay infidelity. It is the public humiliation and let’s be honest, there is a huge difference between an affair and standing on TV in front of America and having your elected leader husband announce he likes boys. That had to sting.

She got a book deal out of it though, that has to be worth something. There is a child involved in this marriage and the couple is in the middle of a messy divorce which goes to trial this summer.

Matos McGreevey claims the onetime Woodbridge mayor duped her into marriage in 2000 to further his political career, and that she had no clue about his sexual preference until just before he resigned in August 2004, when he announced he was gay and had an affair with an aide.

Well, sweetie after your “Friday Night Specials” became a part of your life you had to know he at least had some variety is the spice of life tendencies. You could not be totally blown out of the water by the fact he liked boys.

She has demanded full custody of their only child, Jacqueline, plus alimony and more than $600,000 in damages.

Full custody to the exclusion of the child seeing dad? I am not on board with this, sorry. I am not sure how old this kid is, but unless she is old enough to decide she doesn’t want to see her daddy, then he should have a right to a relationship with his child. Just because he likes men doesn’t mean he cannot be a father to his child. I firmly believe taking divorce to trial is a bad bad bad thing. Unless you are dealing with abuse and obvious fraud, the damage to the kids in these situations is not worth it.

McGreevey has denied any fraud and, in court filings, countered that he fulfilled his duties as husband because he gave his wife a child and companionship. He has demanded equal time with their daughter.

He has a point about fulfilling his duties as a husband. They obviously had a sex life, one more exciting than most it would seem. They have a child and had a pretty high profile life together. The highlighted statement leads the reader to believe this is going to trial over the issue of time with the child.

A trial before Union County Superior Court Judge Karen Cassidy is scheduled to start in May. Pedersen could be among the first witnesses to testify.

I hope she is not going to court and trying to claim the child will be exposed to some sort of sexual voodoo that will damage her forever because daddy likes boys. I would think the testimony of Teddy P that mommy like two boys at a time might sort of negate the wholesome environment argument.

I am a heterosexual mom in a marriage with a heterosexual dad where there are no extra bodies in our bed like pretty much every other married couple with kids. I would hazard a guess that we all keep our sex lives in the bedroom where they belong and I think that is probably the same philosophy gay parents abide by as well. I am not sure the confusion caused by seeing Daddy in a relationship with a man (not in dry humping some guy in front of the child) is worse than suddenly never seeing Daddy again. I just know that divorce is hard enough on kids. A very public divorce must be even harder. We are going on three years here with this particular one and at some point you have to do the right thing and realize it isn’t about you it is about the child. Yeah he pissed you off and humiliated you and for that he will answer someday, karma is a bitch. It works both ways and a nasty divorce for the sake of getting some revenge will come with a cost, one your daughter will probably have to pay.