John Terry, Ashley Cole, Tiger Woods

It's a familiar story by now. Lurid headlines, a disgraced sports star, a wronged wife, and then the mistresses start to appear. In the case of Tiger Woods it was one, two, three, four... the count went up into the teens. John Terry had just the one infidelity, since the start of his marriage; although, admittedly, with the ex-girlfriend of a team-mate. Then there is Ashley Cole: four more mistresses came out of the closet last month, prompting his wife Cheryl to announce their separation.

Of course, there's nothing new about infidelity – or prurience – but watching the coverage I found myself wondering why we feel so strongly. Why do we care so much what goes on in other people's marriages? Sure, adultery seems glamorous and dangerous, but let's face it, it's also as common as dirt. If you know married people, you most likely know people who have cheated or been cheated on at some point, and whose marriages have survived intact, are perhaps even flourishing.

In the summer of 2004, I got a call from an old college fling who had moved nearby. We met for lunch and I was shocked by how inexorably drawn I was to him, how easily he coaxed me back into his bed. At first it was just the sex, which was new, addictively dark and rough – after 13 years in a committed relationship, I justified it as much-needed and harmless extracurricular. I had known my husband Eric almost half my life. We married young, although we'd already known each other for seven years. At the centre of our relationship was a deep understanding. That we knew each other so well seemed proof of a love superior in all ways to all others. If you had told me that I was capable of doing anything that could erode the faith of this most loyal of men, I'd never have believed you.

I was even more surprised, though in retrospect it was totally predictable, when I realised I'd fallen in love with this other man. With D, I was someone different. A co-conspirator. A playmate. Mischievous, sexy, thrillingly amoral. From the beginning, we did most of our flirting and plotting in cyberspace, through emails and text messages that flew fast and furious between us whenever we were apart. Dirty murmurs, teary yearnings, postcoital sighs were all read and tapped out on my BlackBerry's tiny screen, during any moment I could get to myself. (I started visiting the bathroom so often, Eric must have thought my bladder had shrunk to half its former size.) Who knows if my affair would have survived as long as it did without all those secret communiques, but it certainly would not have been discovered so quickly.

A few clicks of a mouse was all it took for Eric to find evidence of my betrayal. Chaos ensued. I broke it off with D, then found myself drawn back in again. Meanwhile, Eric and I wrangled, tearfully and angrily, for months and months about what our next move would be. Many couples would have just called it quits, but instead we cried, drank, watched a lot of TV and went to bed together at night, except when he didn't come home – because Eric began seeing other women, sometimes staying out all night without explanation, trailing home the next morning full of a remorse that was actually something else, a recrimination.

We had a trial separation. D and I broke up many times until, finally, it ended for good. But throughout it all Eric didn't leave. And I couldn't even comprehend the pain of leaving him. At first I thought we would never survive the pain of staying together either. But as we fought and cried and struggled to understand just what, and who, we wanted, we discovered that something between us remained unbroken.

I expected negative reactions when my book, Cleaving, was published. In it, I wrote about this period in my life and how I had acted so hurtfully toward my husband. I realised that the act of writing about this agonisingly personal material could be seen as a second betrayal, as stark as the first.

There was also the fact that my first book, Julie & Julia, which was transformed into a very sweet and popular movie, was about two marriages (mine to Eric, and the culinary icon Julia Child's to her husband, Paul) that could be held up as ideals of the institution. Julie & Julia the book, but most especially the movie, tells two parallel stories of strong, seemingly perfect unions. The kind of marriages that we all seem not only to want, but expect as our right – perfect harmony, perfect understanding, perfect sex. Now, I had dared to acknowledge that this confection of a marriage was not always so pretty. I knew that some would prefer the simple version.

What I was not prepared for was the depth of the anger – a rage that seemed sometimes more akin to terror. The attacks, especially ones launched from the safe anonymity of the internet, were vicious – commenters on my blog called me a "soiled, narcissistic whore" and accused me of defiling the institution of marriage. People questioned my husband's manhood for allowing himself to be "cuckolded", and for staying once my bad behaviour was uncovered. They might as well have put a scarlet A on my chest. It was as if my adultery, and the damage I had done to my own marriage, went beyond a mere selfish act of indiscretion. As if just acknowledging the fact that one woman could love, or make love to, a man other than her husband threatened to topple the very idea of marriage – to ruin it for everyone. As a female friend and fellow philanderer put it, "It's like we're contagious."

In the midst of this moral hysteria, a series of books have been published suggesting that we have lost sight of what it means to make a marriage work: that an affair need not signal the end of love. At the extreme end of this is French psychologist Maryse Vaillant, whose recent book suggests that infidelity is not only unavoidable, but can be beneficial to relationships; that the "pact of fidelity is not natural but cultural". But somewhere in the middle sit figures such as London-based marital therapist Andrew G Marshall, whose book How Can I Ever Trust You Again?, published earlier this year, examines how couples can recover from adultery. The book is primarily for those who have recently discovered a partner's infidelity, and is careful to balance the needs and hurts of both parties. He calls the perpetrator of the affair the "Discovered" rather than the "Adulterer". (The partner who has been cheated on is the "Discoverer".) "It's perfectly possible to turn an infidelity from the worst thing that ever happened in your relationship to the best," Marshall claims. "Couples who have been through an infidelity are always the most miserable but, after they've done the work, they're the happiest. When you've been hurt so much, and want so desperately not to go back there, you're willing to work harder and look deeper."

Kate Figes, author of Couples: The Truth, published in January, maintains a similar belief in the possibility of reconciliation. Like Marshall, Figes starts off from the assumption that lifelong relationships, and the intimacy and stability they provide, are a basic human need, worth working to save and grow. She sees our modern emphasis on infidelity as a deal-breaker – accompanied by our readiness to judge other couples who attempt to work through it – as short-sighted. "A great many marriages and long-term relationships survive affairs," she notes. "But they need to be able to flout strong social expectations to do so."

So where does that mob mentality come from? Why can't we acknowledge that we aren't always perfect? That, as Eric and I used to say to one another in our darkest moments, no one can know what anyone's marriage is really like.

Back when I was in the grip of my own affair, I read Laura Kipnis's amusing and thought-provoking Against Love: A Polemic, first published in 2003. It proved to me a sort of life buoy at a time when nothing seemed certain and everything grimly serious. With her tongue firmly in her cheek, Kipnis celebrates adulterers as rebels kicking their heels in the traces of an institution engineered to keep people docile and dedicated to the status quo. At a moment when I felt oppressed by my guilt, Kipnis's book allowed a brief moment of levity, breathing room and, yes, a bit of self-justification. I gave copies of it to both my husband and my lover, maybe to expose something of what I was thinking, maybe just to give a much-needed laugh.

Seven years later, Kipnis is not quite so light-hearted. She wonders if perhaps the jolly tone that allowed her to talk of adultery without taboo also allowed her to let go mostly unacknowledged the very real pain of those who have been hurt by a partner's indiscretions. It's easy, and perhaps correct, to criticise contemporary marriage as being built, unrealistically, on the idea that one person can fulfil all your needs – as lover, co-parent and best friend – for all time. But, she says now, that's where we are today.

Once there was a world of arranged unions and marriage as politics and finance; now, in a world of sexual independence, relative gender equality and an increasingly frayed social fabric, we have marriage as intimacy. "It's a double bind," Kipnis says. "Adultery is more of an issue now, because we are closer."

But still it happens, all the time. I think of one friend who wrote to me about the aftermath of her own affair: "I was being really quiet one day in the car, and whenever I'm quiet he gets worried. Rather than ignoring my distance, he asked me what I was thinking. I told him that I wondered if he ever wished I hadn't told him. Amazingly, this is what he said: 'I would go through it all over again to know that we would be here, so much closer and more honest than ever before.'"

There was a time when I thought infidelity was without excuse or redeeming value. And I'd never deny the hurt my actions caused, to my husband, to me, maybe even (who knows?) to my lover. But the fact is that as we stood amid the rubble, Eric and I looked at one another and saw things we hadn't seen before. That hurt, but it also made us realise that everything had collapsed for reasons we'd been ignoring, and that we valued what remained enough to try to build a new home for it.

So we went to counselling. I remember the first day, as we sat in that office together. I thought, if I open my mouth, if I voice what I feel – that I didn't know what I wanted, that I loved someone else, that I hurt – the pain of it will end our marriage. But I spoke. And when I stopped speaking, we were still standing. And here Eric and I stand now, on a far shore, closer than we were before, and stronger. So, no. To those who want endless punishment, who want me in my scarlet A, I cannot comply. I cannot say that I regret.

Restaurant: Zilli Green, London W1

When it comes to the teething troubles that almost invariably plague new ventures, sweet-natured reviewers such as myself lean towards the charitable. Aware of the technical difficulties, and sensing any sign of good intentions and improvement to come, we pull our punches. But when those early dental difficulties suggest the root canal-tormented love child of Shane MacGowan and Esther Rantzen after a tasting session at the spinach farm, what's a chap to do?
In so many regards is Zilli Green a total shocker that it's hard to know where to begin. So let's start at the very beginning (a very good place to start) by observing that in choosing Valentine's Day for its opening, the TV chef Aldo Zilli showed a gift for savage irony. Half as romantic as genital warts, this is the ideal destination joint for anyone planning to surprise their beloved next 14 February with divorce papers and the news that the locks have already been changed.

Sebastian Vettel edges out Ferraris to claim Bahrain grand prix pole

Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel will start the first race of the 2010 season on pole position after edging out the Ferraris in qualifying for the Bahrain grand prix. Last year's championship runner-up put in a stunning lap in the closing 10-minute qualifying session at the Sakhir circuit to beat the Ferrari pair of Felipe Massa and Fernando Alonso into second and third, with McLaren's Lewis Hamilton fourth and the returning Michael Schumacher down in seventh place.

Vettel, who finished the 2009 campaign by winning two of the final three races, was brilliant throughout all three sessions, finishing second in the opening 20 minutes, before topping the middle 15-minute stint and then coming out on top at the end. The young German ultimately finished with a lap of 1min 54.101sec, with Massa 0.141sec adrift and Alonso a further 0.4sec down.

"It's a big surprise," said Vettel. "In winter testing no-one really knew where they were, although it was clear we were pretty strong, but close to each other. Yesterday wasn't as good as we hoped, so it was a long night for the mechanics, but everyone was keen this morning to push. I knew we had a great car, but you have to get it together, so I'm very happy to be on pole. It's a very nice feeling."

Hamilton won his first battle of the Britons with team-mate Jenson Button at McLaren as the world champion struggled during the course of the afternoon and will start eighth directly behind seven-time champion Schumacher. The 41-year-old, on his comeback after three and a half years in retirement, was again bettered by his Mercedes team-mate Nico Rosberg, as he was in all three practice sessions.

Vettel's team-mate Mark Webber starts sixth, with Robert Kubica in his Renault ninth behind Button, and Force India's Adrian Sutil a fine 10th.

In the dying moments of Q2, Button managed to scrape his way into the top 10, edging out his Brawn team-mate from last season in Rubens Barrichello, now with Williams, by 0.162sec. Behind the veteran Brazilian will be Force India's Vitantonio Liuzzi and the second Williams of promising German rookie Nico Hülkenberg, who was only half-a-second down on Barrichello.

The Saubers of Pedro de la Rosa and Kamui Kobayashi will start 14th and 16th, with Toro Rosso's Sébastien Buemi splitting the Spanish and Japanese drivers. On his debut, Renault's Russian rookie Vitaly Petrov knows the task he now faces after seeing team-mate Kubica's performance as he will start 17th, finishing a yawning 1.7sec behind the Pole at the end of the session.

It was no great surprise to see the three new teams occupying the bottom six positions come the conclusion to the initial 20-minute session. And it was Virgin who were best of the newcomers thanks to Timo Glock, and that after seeing a wheel roll off his car in final practice earlier today due to a loose nut. The German will start 19th, edging the Lotus Racing pair of Jarno Trulli and Heikki Kovalainen into 20th and 21st places, with just 0.6sec separating the trio.

Glock's team-mate Lucas di Grassi was a further 0.2sec adrift, leaving Hispania Racing's Bruno Senna and Karun Chandhok bringing up the rear of the now 24-strong grid.

Fish and chips

Today is, as you might have heard, the last day of National Chip Week 2010, and, typically, the Potato Council's PR people have produced a colourful variety of tenuous, tabloid-friendly stories for our amusement. However, you will have to look elsewhere for analysis of Aston University's research that chips make people "13% more cheerful", or a discussion of whether or not anyone in Portsmouth really uses the phrase "snag and chips".

No, instead, as Jesus might, Word of Mouth asks you all to take a moment and consider the chippies. Because, in National Chip Week, that is surely who and what we should be celebrating: their dynamism, their flexibility, their resilience.

Forget all that media 'fast food' brouhaha about how great Leon is; how Mexican street food will be the 'next big thing'; or how evil McDonald's are. With 276m portions sold last year, fish 'n' chips is still - 150 years on from its birth - Britain's most popular takeaway meal.

Moreover, while its popular image may be one of greasy, old-fashioned stolidity, the British chippy has, in fact, never been more energetic. Patronising Michelin star chefs may occasionally swan in to show everyone how it's done, or not, but at a grassroots level the British chippy is already modernising, already fighting its corner.

Shopkeeper dies Huddersfield

Police today launched a murder inquiry after a shopkeeper died after a robbery at a convenience store.

Gurmail Singh, 63, was taken to Huddersfield Royal Infirmary following the raid at Cowcliffe convenience store, Cowcliffe, Huddersfield.

West Yorkshire police said the father-of-two suffered a head injury during the raid yesterday evening and died in the early hours of this morning.

A small amount of cash, cigarettes and confectionery were stolen in the robbery, which happened at 8.30pm, a police spokesman said.

The robbers are described as four youths in their late teens wearing dark hooded tops and tracksuit bottoms.Witnesses tried to block the door to stop the offenders leaving, but after a struggle they made their escape.

Detective Superintendent David Pervin, the senior investigating officer, said: "Mr Singh was a well known and popular local businessman who had been in this area many years. I appeal for anyone with information to contact us as a matter of urgency.

"In terms of the witnesses, we can confirm this was a group of six people who heard a commotion at the shop and went to help. None of them were injured during the incident."

Police are appealing for any witnesses to ring 0845 6060606 and ask for Huddersfield police helpdesk. A postmortem examination is due to take place tomorrow.

Blog home Oscar nominations

The Oscar nominations are announced tomorrow, and Brits would be forgiven for feeling pretty cheery about it. Colin Firth is bound to get a nod, after all; ditto Helen Mirren, Carey Mulligan, Daniel Day-Lewis, maybe even Christian McKay. All richly deserved – even if at least two of the films they're in are utter rubbish.


But here's the bad news: this year, the Brits won't win anything. Not a sausage. Last year Slumdog Millionaire swept the board and Danny Boyle became an international darling. This year, the big turquoise shadow of Avatar hangs heavy over everything, alleviated only by flickers of awards action for The Hurt Locker. But let's not get ahead of ourselves. Here, then, are our predictions for what will make the nomination grade tomorrow (make sure to check back at 1.30pm GMT for full coverage). But what have we left out? And are we being too pessimistic about our prospects this side of the pond?

Obama unveils $3.8tn budget

President Barack Obama today will send to the US Congress a budget with a record $1.6tn (£1tn) deficit, as he boosts spending on job creation, his healthcare overhaul and defence while ending Bush-era tax cuts for wealthy Americans.

The budget deficit is the largest ever in dollars, and at 10.6% of US gross domestic product it is the largest proportionally since 1945, when the the war-time US ran a budget deficit of 21.4% of the economy.

The budget for the financial year beginning on 1 October, totals $3.8tn and includes billions to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and $100bn aimed at job creation measures, including tax cuts for small business and incentives to hire new workers. It includes a 6% increasing in education funding and eliminates what Obama calls wasteful subsidies for banks that lend to students.

It includes aid to states and cities and social safety net programmes and would impose new fees on the nation's largest banks. Projects slated for large cuts include the Nasa space programme that was slated to replace the Space Shuttle.

"We must do what families across the country are doing," Obama said at the White House today, "save where we can so we can spend where we need."

The budget will allow some major tax cuts to expire, including those for families earning more than $250,000 per year passed under George Bush, a tax cut Obama faults for much of the current budget mess. The plan would include tax hikes for well-heeled Americans, which may prove political unfeasible in an election year.

While the budget raises defence spending overall, Obama pledged to cut military programmes not requested by the Pentagon but sought after by congressmen seeking money for the districts.

The president has come under heavy political pressure to curb budget deficits, and recently proposed a three-year discretionary spending freeze to take effect next year when analysts assume the economy will have largely recovered. The budget deficit is in large part due to huge spending on fiscal stimulus measures. Yet Obama has also made it his primary task to lower unemployment, currently stalled at 10%.

Today the president renewed his call for a commission charged with making what he describes as the tough choices to bring the budget into line. The idea had in the past been supported by both Republicans and Democrats but was rejected last week in the Senate.

According to budget estimates released to reporters, the deficit would decline to $778bn, or 37% of the US economy, by 2017. The improvement is driven by assumptions the US economy will grow at a rapid clip over the next six years.