Talking from a psychologist's point of view.....

Maybe "Tiree" knows they were doing wrong by Y with the hypothetical Z who probably does exist and is also probably telling "Tiree" they are better off without either X or Y. If Y has identified a pattern in "Tiree"s behaviour, higlighted by a conversation with X, then that could explain everything. You know how you look at a picture of two men looking at each other for weeks and then suddenly one day it becomes a candlestick?

This whole thing is getting beyond reason, and "washing the dirty linen" as someone else put it, no matter whose it is, just makes it more and more difficult for either party to talk to the other. For instance, someone believes they have identified X and formed an opinion of 'her', believing 'her' to be attention seeking but with some problems.... This will put X on the defensive and if they do have problems, make them even more unstable than they may already be.... self esteem is a very fragile thing and you, along with "Tiree" could have done severe psychological damage to X and Y. X knows they are not entirely innocent, has "Tiree" given them a chance to explain or apologise? Or maybe X is so pissed off with "Tiree"s behaviour that they are glad not to have to bother talking with them.

So, what about Y? Does Y not have any issues? It seems that Y told "Tiree" where to go and what to do there, would they have done that with no reason? And how about the relationship between X and Y? I would suggest that Y is in need of a conversation with X as well, if indeed they haven't already communicated. I'm sure if X knew how much Y would be hurt as well, then X would have held back. But if a troubled X knew that Y also had problems, would the considerate thing be to alert Y to "Tiree"'s alleged behavioural pattern and get the hurt over before it was too late and Y got too deeply involved?

It is human nature to try and make yourself the innocent party in all things, but there are times when you have to admit, firstly to YOURSELF that you are not innocent. You may have been wronged, but bad things happen to good people a lot more often than you would credit. If you have formed a pattern in your lifestyle, which is very hard to break, despite other commitments, then you have to realise that sometimes others will not see that pattern as an acceptable way of life. If "Tiree"'s behaviour was following the previous pattern then it is only to be expected that sooner or later someone emotionally involved with them is going to object.

Some examples: A is shagging B, but also shagging C. A boasts about it to D. A through to D all frequent the same social circles. D may not object to A's way of life, the odds are that at least one of the others will. It's only a matter of time before A gets caught out.

A is shagging B and C simultaneously, A's long term partner D having left, because A was shagging E, F and G. B knows about D, E, F and G, but not C. B converses with H, sees the pattern (remember the candlestick?), realises why D left and decides to ditch A, who appears to want their cake and eat it.

"Tiree" has to decide whether it's better to retrieve a longstanding friendship or rely on a passing shag. If someone has been friends with you for so many years, it's probably despite your failings and human frailties. A passing shag is just a passing shag and sooner or later, if there is no real bonding based on shared experiences, that shag will vanish, especially if you DO have a social behavioural pattern that you continue to follow. "Tiree"'s relationship with the hypothetical Z (who appears to be the only one they are speaking to) may not last so well when the next passing shag comes along. And Z may not be so tolerant as X appears to have been over the past however many years.