Cheating Is It Forgivable?

[DaMan]

Please don't be too impressed. I have literally spent 3 years writing and rewriting that. You'll find it in my blog word for word

Also, I am a writer as a hobby, so I put a lot more effort in then is probably due lol

 

[Emanuel E]

Polyamory is defined by multiple partners - whether it's to sport fuck or a long term relationship, it's realizing you are *not* monogamous. Whether this realization occurs before or after the marriage is irrelevant I think.




That would fall under the relationship is lacking in key aspects. 1. Your partner is causing low self esteem. 2. You partner is not helping you overcome this - which ultimately a live long partner, dedicated to death, sworn to be everything you need, to care for you in illness or in health, is suppose to do. When you're in a committed relationship, part of that commitment is to help each other grow and improve, and a failure to do so is a failure in the marriage.

Now some people can't be helped, this is true. So I suppose another one I could add to my two intentionally generic (in order to be encompassing of many situations) list would be a third: the unwillingness to broach emotional issues not linked to polyamrous inclinations.



My post refers to the situation of both men and women, as women do stray just as much as men. Forget cheating with a civ, as women are becoming more confident in their desires and have the financial ability to do so - they're booking male escorts. Those gents are increasingly successful, because while hubby is out of town, or she's on a business tip, she can find a man that makes her feel beautiful, desired and achieve orgasm.

I disagree with the "me now" society. Marriage was historically about political and wealth management, or familial bonding for the interest of both families. Also, as soon as the first son was born, many men and women lived separate lives. Affairs have always and will always be a central theme to marriage. Only in the 1900 were marriages a matter of "choice in the name of love", and with that came the marriage ceremony as glorious celebration, not a dour execution of religious rites. Though that revolution took place, divorce stigma took longer to catch up. So you could marry for love, but you could not leave a marriage for lack of love. People change, and sometimes they do not change in ways that compliment each other.

There is no harm in wanting happiness, emotional and physical fulfillment in the one life you have to live. It does not make you a good person to be in a marriage you are unhappy with and have been unable to change. Or in a marriage that cannot accept you exactly as you are, knowing all the truth, and accepting even the flaws as part of who you are, even if she/he doesn't like everything they see. Such marriages do exist, but they are rare and few. People change, and so must the marriage - even if that means ending it. Unfortunately divorce laws keep people trapped with fear. Now if you feel perfectly at ease lying, your fine misleading her, being a different person outside your home, and are happy to stay in the marriage while you do as you please even if you could get a divorce... well I think that's a form of sociopahty. She has equal right to happiness on the terms she seeks and to joyously mislead her without even the desire to be honest is disturbing.

Re-read my post again. I never once stated monogamy was outdated or irrelevant - I stated that it is the only societally supported mechanism for long term relationships. I didn't say it was irrelevant, I said that the world needed to accept alternative forms of lifestyle to prevent dishonest marriages. Monogamous people dating each other, and polyamorous people dating each other - without being shamed by their monogamous counterparts in society.

Then why are you here? You may believe in it philosophically, but you do not in practice (unless you're single or in an open relationship). If you cannot practice your core beliefs (and I'm assuming this is a core belief though I don't know that) even when they are hard, then you are what Christianity calls "A massageplaneteteria catholic". I believe it when it's convenient for me, and ignore it when it doesn't work for me. People who believe in monogamy live it, even when it's hard. I understand if you believe in monogamy, would like to be honest and find someone you truly can be monogamous with, but cannot leave you current relationship - that's a whole different ball game. I have great sympathy for people in that trap. But to believe in monogamy, to be able to leave and still have an affair, is not a belief. To believe in monogamy and be happy with your wife and still sport fuck, is a joke.

 

[Yuriy R]

Well, then, according to your methodology, you could then simply classify reasons for cheating as just one: they do. I mean, if you going to look at lack of self esteem as a relationship problem, as opposed to a personal one, then everything can be classified as a relationship problem can't it?

Why am I here? Because I'm not involved in a relationship. If I was? I wouldn't be using the services of an sp that's for sure. There are others here who aren't using the services of sp's either. Not everyone who comes here either is an sp, or uses the services of one. (but that's the topic for another thread). In fact, I'd say a lot of the guys who come here aren't in a relationship of any sort (maybe more so over at 'the other site'. I know about 20 over there who are single and only use an sp because they feel they can't find a civvie woman.

As for most women or men who cheat, do so with an escort, that's not true. I know many who have cheated multiple times on different partners and not a one was with an sp. In fact, some abhor the very idea of sp's. If your statement was true, then sp's would be booked solid 24/7 (and I happen to know they aren't). I mean, just because maybe your clients are married, doesn't mean logically that married men only cheat with escorts, that is false logic.

I wonder, have you never heard that to make a man infinitely more attractive to a woman all he has to do is put on a wedding ring? Are you saying that all these women are escorts? Guess you are.....

 

[Pompal 09.]

In a marriage any personal problem is a problem for the relationship. Your lives are totally merged, no part of you is an island. Even the parts she doesn't know about, effect her life.

If you want the marriage to be sincere and you have a self esteem problem causing you to act in ways that is not in the best interest of your marriage, it's your responsibility to broach the issue of self esteem you are having, and her responsibility as your wife to help you through it. The same is true in reverse.

I'll quote myself:

I think I covered that

I never at any point in any post suggested that. I merely stated that women are increasingly using male escorts as a safe way to be fulfilled outside of their relationship.



Again, I never said it's impossible - I said it's rare. I believe a woman who is willing to love a man that she has to financially support loves the deepest. I do not believe there is any link between love and financial support - she can love you if you can't support her, and she can love you if you can support her. My only suggestion was that supporting you partner is a very normal and respectable part of a relationship.

Now tell me how healthy are most marraiges when his financial circumstances change, and he can no longer support the family the way he used to. Divorce statistic point to the fact that money is the number one cause of argument and divorce. If money was not a key part of marriage, and she was just happy with the ring, this wouldn't be the case, would it?

Also, if marriage is truly and only about love - you shouldn't have to pay her alimony. She should pull up her socks ad take care of herself, if it was only about love. You SHOULD have to pay for child support, but her own needs are her own to take care of. Furthermore, there should be no assets split, if it's just about loving you as a person, then she leaves with what she came with, and you split only what you bought together. But we all know this isn't what happens in divorce.

No my dear, quite the opposite of what you claim. I am saying that not all women who accept financial support are escorts, even if it occurs outside of the context of marriage. Support is part of a relationship, it always has been.

 

[chren03]

Interesting thread.

I agree with Lauren in that few people realise that there are more forms of ethical relationships than just the monogamous model, and to expect one person to be everything for you is highly unlikely. There's some social programming involved as well. We're expected to get a new car, new tv, new cell phone, every few months or years, but are required to keep the same partner forever, in the same contract we agreed upon when we got together. That kind of mixed up message is bound to confuse people at some level, conscious or unconscious. So they resort to the only option they feel is available to them: They cheat. People change and evolve, so do their desires and needs. If we're so enlightened as to the different requirements genders, sexual orientations, races, and disabilities, why aren't we addressing the needs of the married couples as well?

Also, the idea that love is a finite resource is definitely a fallacy (I think Lauren and I read some of the same books... Ethical Slut, anyone?). I've been involved in several happy poly relationships, where the fact that I had more than one partner made me appreciate and love them both all the more.

In her book, Opening Up, Tristan Taormino writes about a spectrum of non-monogamous relationships. For example, what CG seems to have with his wife is what Taormino classifies as Consensual Non-monogamy. The couple is completely dedicated to each other emotionally, but will not rule out play with another partner if the occasion arises. I, on the other hand, am currently practicing a Solo Polyamorous lifestyle, where I have two people I'm seeing, have an emotional attachment to, but I am not a primary to either of them. Still others are swingers, having crazy group monkey-sex at Club Wicked on the weekends, but returning to complete monogamy the rest of the week. Then there's multiple people completely committed to only each other, living and sharing every aspect of their lives together.

Now as for the OP's question: Is cheating forgivable?

To me, cheating is purely on the emotional level. You do something (sexual or not) that will make your partner(s) unhappy with your behaviour. We all make mistakes, so perhaps one or two slip-ups would be forgivable, but repeated cheating constitutes emotional abuse on the part of the guilty party, and masochism (not the fun kind) on the part of the cheated-on partner.

 

[Natalie L]

Dreamblade: you said you're been in poly relationships in the past that made you appreciate them more. Did they know that they weren't the only woman you were "involved" with? That's the key to the whole thing, if both partners are aware and agree to the open relationship then there should be no problem, it only becomes a problem when one of the partners is getting sum on the side, and the other is sitting at home thinking all is good in denmark. THAT is cheating.

I knew a swinging couple (before and just when I started going to "the other site") and it became a problem when the husband became emotionally involved with the third. It ended up ruining the marriage.

I think it also depends on oppurtunity. For the life of me I can't figure out why some guys (no matter how big of an asshole they are) women flock to. I have never (maybe once?) had the oppurtunity to be in any way involved with more than one woman. Would you be a polygamist if you only ever able to find one woman? I think not.......

Put it simply, if you can only afford to own one car at a time, you'll only drive one car. If you can afford to have 2 or more cars, you'll drive 2 or more cars. If you have "game" and can get more than one woman at a time, you'll have more than one woman at a time...........



So much for equality between men and women........why do you stress HE can no longer SUPPORT the family? Since when did it become HIS responsibility? You cannot state in one sentence that a marriage is a complete merging of two people then later say the exact opposite. Wait, you can, you're female lol.....

BTW: your idea of marriage is 100% different than mine. I find relationships/marriage are the coming together of two distinct individuals who maintain themselves as part of the duo. Yes, there are some factors that affect one, and therefore effect the relationship but those are limited to factors that involve the relationship. For example, monogamy. Yes, I feel that if two people who believe in monogamy they can be together. But if one doesn't, the relationship won't work. But say, the man likes baseball and the woman likes hockey, the relationship can work. Or if he likes bowling and belongs to a league and she doesn't, it can still work. According to your idea, if one partner likes bowling, they both have to like bowling.

Maybe one reason so many marriages don't work is that two too similar people are getting together. I find that the more different you are, the better the relationship. That way, each will continue to be exposed to new and exciting things. Where problems arise is when (and no one can deny this) two people come together and the first thing (mostly the female) says is: I love you, you're perfect, now change.............

See, I don't believe someone can or even SHOULD be "everything" to me. She should be my wife, partner, best friend but to expect everything? that's bullshit. (and vice versa). She should have a life outside the marriage just like I should. Guys need to BS with the guys, women need to BS with the girls (which is why I think CG's relationship works). I need to have my space, she needs to have hers. Any time I was ever involved with a woman, and we spoke of moving in together or buying a house, when looking at a house there would always be a discussion like: hey, I get the garage and the basement, you get this bedroom and the den. Those rooms are hers to do with what she pleases, and the basement is mine. My "space" is offlimits to her. If I want to put pictures of donkey sex on the walls, that's my choice. If she wants to put pictures of hot firemen on hers? more power to her.

Sorry, if you think that a marriage is a 100% erasure of one's self, and a complete immersion into the marriage, no wonder you believe in polygamy..........

 

[Spider_Titan]

Yes, they are aware of each other. This is why I stressed the ethical nature of the relationships. Cheating can happen in an open relationship as well, don't get me wrong, but since the relationship model encourages communication, it tends to happen less, especially among experienced open people.



That's because swinging is a form of open relationship that excludes emotional attachment outside the couple. Polyamory encourages emotional attachment. Both relationship models are valid, just different. In your friends' case, the circumstances changed, but the primary couple were unable to re-negotiate their dynamic. That actually supports Lauren and my statements instead of disproving them.



I'm not a polygamist. That term means one man, many wives. I identify myself as a polyamorist (I guess, never referred to myself that way), as one capable of entertaining multiple ethical, healthy, nurturing, loving relationships at once. That means that in the future, I may be involved in an MFM triad as likely as an FMF one. But since I identify myself as straight, it would be a V-type relationship, not a triangle.



It has nothing to do with game, but with honesty, communication about your feelings, and your responsiveness to your significant other(s)'s feelings. Your car analogy is more apt towards time management skills within a poly relationship, than towards the ability or desire to have one.



In 2010, the man is still considered the breadwinner in a couple. Statistically, men still earn more than women for the same position. Furthermore, tradition dictates that men go out and work, women take care of the household. The merging argument is still valid, you're arguing the dynamic.



You're missing the point. The societal ideal is that two people must be everything for each other. Little details like you liking baseball and her liking hockey are within the error margin, but what about sexual needs? What if your partner occasionally enjoys something you do not? In the monogamous model, there's only two solutions: sacrifice or breakup. The polyamorous model offers many different solutions.

Furthermore, what happens when a regular on your night with the boys, one of the boys is a woman? If you have such a woman friend who likes hanging with the guys, ask her what most wives think of her: is she just another dude, or is she a potential threat?




Good that you don't feel this way, but many people still do. Why are matching his/her sweaters still sold? How many wives hassle their husbands for being out with the boys and vice versa? A female friend went to visit her college friend in Guatemala not long ago. They hadn't seen each other in 15 years. Her friend's boyfriend became jealous of the time they spent together visiting the sites.

The reason why CG's relationship works is because he and his wife are secure in their feelings for each other. Not because they have separate interests. It's because those separate interests do not threaten them. If Mrs CG went out with out with some male friends, CG would cheerfully wave to her as she left, secure in knowledge that she wouldn't break their current relationship contract... well, unless she was going out with Ang or sumthin. :he:



Not erasure, merger. It's not the same thing. The idea of the modern marriage is that one person fits perfectly with another, so they become an even greater unit. It's a fallacy, but one most people subscribe to. It sets expectations that are quite unrealistic on both people in the couple. But again, for some people, it works great, but it would be nice if people were aware that there are other ethical relationship models out there, and didn't ostracise those living them just because it's different.

 

[xdkirbyxd]

Word my brother......we are so on the same page here. Hence why I have never, and probably will never, get married. I don't even believe two personalities should merge.

As for your different sexual needs/wants example. Then, imo, they shouldn't be together. If you aren't compatible on this subject, what else aren't you compatible on? See, I think there are a few intrinsic areas where two (to make the relationship function) must be 100% compatible. They should be similar in emotional maturity, intellectually similar, and physically compatible (including sex, level of physical fitness etc). But I think we're saying the same thing here....

I mean, the mere thought of someone totally merging their personality with mine? *shudder*, gives me the creeps........

 

[Geoff The Phantom Skier]

I used to believe in monogamy, so much so that I lived it for 20 years. Now I won't believe it again, nor will I promise it. I understand really well how much effort it takes to keep that promise, and I don't have it in me to go All-In like that again.

Some of you are being rather simplistic about things....people change as years and decades go by. Two people might be perfectly sexually compatible when they get together at 20, but desires and preferences are not cast in stone.

Also, the wear-and-tear Life causes to a relationship can be significant.

I'm not saying I think infidelity is ok, not at all. I'm actually pretty old-fashioned about these things...I think if you promise fidelity, you should keep that promise. If you can't, you should divorce. It's grossly unfair to change the rules after the game is underway.

If both parties agree that it's an open relationship, that's not cheating. Cheating is sneaking and lying and hiding things, which are more damaging to the relationship than the actual sex is. And what if one partner gets involved in a significant emotional affair but there's no sex involved, is that cheating?

 

[misa]

word my sista!!

Simplistic, yes. But life IS pretty simplistic. As you said, if you promise fidelity, you keep that promise. Can't get much simpler than that.

Sure, people's tastes and sexual appetites change over time and hopefully with open communication you both can learn and grow and explore new things...together...Unless you're in an open relationship and BOTh decide that exploring new worlds sexually is something to do.

As for emotional attachment to someone without sex, that IMO is also a form of cheating.

I've never been married but have been in some pretty long relationships and to be honest, while in those relationships I've met women I've "clicked" with. It seemed that when I was single, finding ONE was like finding a needle in a pile of needles but when I was involved? Shit, it was easy. The thing is, did I pursue these other women? No. I exhibited some self control due to the committment i had with my SO at the time.

Which brings me to my final point: self control. Our society these days seems driven by the lack of self control. I am finding teens and abults are walking around with the attitude that to deny yourself something is somehow wrong, that one must explore all avenues of indulgence. Want to fuck 3 women at once? go for it. Want to expand your mind with crack, coke, lsd, heroin? go ahead and we create a whole industry to support your decision. Want to build a 100 story skyscraper with a 10,000 sq ft bedroom? Have at it. Have a loving wife, 2 great kids and a nice life in the suburbs, yet meet some hottie in the steno pool who wants to blow you during lunch hour? Hey, more power to you!

I am going to post this in the golden rules thread too but:

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

 

[Evelyn]

It depends on the circumstances. It also depends on your understanding of "cheating".

I believe that if someone expects monogamy from their partner, they have a responsibility to meet their partner's sexual needs, within reasonable limits. Obviously, there are always exceptions (trauma, illness, etc.), but like Dan Savage, I believe that a person who demands monogamy is "cheating" on their promise and obligations to their SO if they unilaterally take sex out of the relationship, or refuse to indulge them in harmless and relatively tame kinks/fantasies. In other words, you cannot both expect your partner to be sexually exclusive to you, and refuse them a healthy dose of the sex they want.

Personally, and given that I always make it very clear that monogamy is not a de facto requirement for me, and that the boundaries of the relationship are always open for discussion, I would take it as a sign that there is a big problem with communication in my relationship if a partner was to cheat on me. Which doesn't necessarily means that I would kick them out, but some real communication work would need to be done.

 

[Carton Size]

I totally agree. When I said it's unfair to change the deal after the game is underway, I meant that for both parties.

As usual, you just said it better. :mdr:

 

[Dawn S]

Thing is, I take what you're suggesting that you make a deal at the beginning of the relationship, and you then have to stick with it till the end. I used to see it that way and became very miserable in my relationship because I felt I had to abide my word, even when my needs changed. Both parties must be comfortable in the possibility that either can re-negotiate at any point in time the boundaries of the relationship. They don't have to, but they can.

 

[Mysterio]

I didn't say there can be no re-negotiation...if both people are truly okay with changing things, of course that's a good thing.

What I was thinking of was more a situation where one person wants to change the game, and the other doesn't. When that happens, the game should be ended.

And I'm not saying the person who wants the changes is necessarily an asshole, either. The whole "till death do us part" concept, well, people live a lot longer now than they used to. While I deeply admire people who can still like each other after 60 years together, I think it's quite rare.

 

[Twitch]

Maybe.

All discussions of poly aside (and they're interesting asides), I'm going to assume you're talking about a monogamous relationship because most people who are attached here are involved in theoretically monogamous relationships. Did my SO cheat because they had a need I was not fulfilling? Had we discussed it, and had I failed (for lack of trying, lack of desire to try, or for lack of understanding) to fulfill it?

In that case, cheating is forgivable.

Whether that need is sexual (oral sex, fetishes, variety) or emotion (feeling wanted/loved, romance) I really only think its forgivable after a discussion with the primary partner. If they cannot fulfill your needs, then I completely understand looking elsewhere.





As a random aside to the poly discussion, do you guys/ladies think cheating in a polyamorous relationship is worse than cheating in a monogamous relationship? I can see myself completely forgiving (although not forgetting) cheating in a monogamy, but once we're talking about an open arrangement with an accepting and flexible partner I think cheating is the ultimate unforgivable.

 

[Monk]

An interesting statistic, which I wish I could actually hunt down, but I read so many damned things it's impossible to keep track of it all.

An anthropoligist interestingly noted, that as our life spans increase, so do divorce rates. When you're going to likely die by the age of 40, from poor nutrition, war or disease or by the hands of your heir - as was the case of our ancestors (even the rich), it's easy for a marriage to last a life time. However as we started to live to 60, 70, 80 and 90, it became increasingly difficult for relationships to last a lifetime.

Ethical Slut is an excellent read, and I highly recommend it to anyone who has the serious desire to live out life with multiple partners and be honest about it.



I couldn't agree with this more. I have really learned to appreciate how utterly unique my long term relationships are from each other. They fulfill completely different desires and needs. Where one is a bookish and adores orchestra and theater and fine wine, and evening gowns another loves muddy hikes, good vodka, and and loud rock bars, and torn jeans, and yet another loves fetish clubs, tatoos, gothic fashion and ethnic food.

If you are a person who truly has an urge to explore all the nooks and crannies of life, then it is likely that you need mutliple partners. It's not fair to expect the bookish man to enjoy fenish clubs, or the mountain climber to take me to the orchestra. If they're unhappy with the entertainment, who am I to force it on them or tell them they aren't making me happy.




I admire this. I have decided that if my current relationship with my SO comes to an end, I am not going to enter into another such relationship, but dedicate my energy to my partners in bounded intimacy. I spend so much time with them and they are there for me even through hard times, I do not feel lonely or fulfilled.

 

[Annettest]

It has always been said...never do anything you wouldn't do in front of your spouse...so that being said, if you and your spouse have committed to being faithful to each other and one cheats...then YES it is cheating and NO I would NEVER forgive:

 

[Pompal 09.]

.

If it was me making the mistake then it is totally forgivable because I am a man and everyone knows we are slightly less evolved and can't help ourselves .

If it was her then it would depend on how drunk she was and if his dick was bigger than mine .


For the record . I have never cheated nor knowingly been cheated upon .

 

[@N$W3R$]

Hey ang, you took the words right outta my mouth. That's what I've always said to the married guys over on that "other board" who profess to what they're doing is perfectly ok.

I mean, there was one wingnut who wasn't even over his honeymoon yet and was asking the members should he book an sp (because he and his wife were inexperienced and the sex wasn't the greatest).....

 

[Lily]

I'm usually simply 'non monogamous' or 'just dating' as opposed to being in a 'poly' relationship. Polygamoury (is that a word?) or having an 'open relationship' is a formally structured arrangement just like monogamy, IMHO. Personally, I would probably have a hard time being in a serious relationship that was 'open', but context matters.

I think 'cheating' in an open relationship would be far harder to forgive, because 'affairs of the loins' are tolerated under that arraignment, so that just leaves 'affairs of the heart'. And 'affairs of the heart' are very hard to truly forgive, or even get over in any real way.