Cheating. What are the Virtues You Live By?

[Bulkhead]

I think fucking someone other than your SO, on its own, isn't a bad thing. It's when you do it in a normal relationship that it's bad.

 

Why? Because then you're being dishonest; you're breaking a promise that you voluntarily made.

 

Our society, by default, expects that relationship partners only fuck each other. When you enter into a relationship, you know that that is what's expected and you willingly accept that your partner should trust you to only fuck them. In effect, you promise them that you won't fuck anyone else. By doing that - by fucking someone else - you do what you've knowingly implied you won't do. You've broken your word, betrayed someone else's trust.

 

On the other hand, you can totally have a non-normal relationship. You can communicate to your partner that you don't want to only fuck them, and if you both agree with that then I think it's fine.

[Sarathis]

People who cheat are selfish assholes, plain and simple. I've heard all the lines, all the weak justifications and they all boil down to one thing: "I want." Selfishness. 

 

"She was so hot, bro..." "What he doesn't know won't hurt him." "My gf has been such a bitch lately." "It was only one time and I was drunk..." "My gf and I only do it, like, once a month..." "He was so flattering and I've just been feeling so old and dull lately..." "Our lives have become such a rut the last couple years." "I know she cheated on me at the party, so why shouldn't I get some too?" "I really love my husband but being with ____ is so exciting..." Blah, blah, blah, excuses. They wanted to fuck, so they did it. Ergo, they are selfish assholes. 

 

There's no good reason to cheat on someone you're in a relationship with, period. And don't even bring up that "What if your wife has been in a coma for five years..." theoretical bullshit, either. If you want to fuck other people, be a half way decent human being and either break up with your current, find someone interested in an open relationship and communicate with them, or get a divorce. If your sex life with your current is boring, talk to them and spice it up or move on. If you're dissatisfied with your relationship in some way, talk to your significant other and work it out or move on. If you're tempted by someone hot, recognize that it's normal to be sexually attracted to people other than the person you're in a relationship with, but be a decent person and don't give in to that temptation. If you really think you need to get with that hot someone, break up with your current first, then go after them. Otherwise shut your pie hole, admire from afar, and redouble your efforts to make your current relationship better. And you single people, do yourselves a favor and don't help someone in a relationship cheat on THEIR significant other, either. It's way more trouble than it's worth and, once again, you become a selfish asshole. Plenty of other single fish in the sea looking to get their rocks off, go find 'em. 

[KoolHndLuke]

6 hours ago, Sarathis said:

selfish assholes

Yeah, the world is fucking FULL of them in case you didn't notice. Maybe I've been the "good" guy most of my life and I feel a little envious of other's seemingly having more fun by being selfish assholes and I want to give it a try. To this point in my life I have respected other people's rights and property (mostly). My only weakness is women. When one cute little babe starts wiggling her ass or tits in my face, It is DAMN hard to say no.

 

Another question since cheating is most certainly unforgivable to most people. Where would you rank cheating on a scale of one to ten where ten is say.....murder?

[Sarathis]

19 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

Yeah, the world is fucking FULL of them in case you didn't notice.

All the more reason to try not to be one. 

 

Quote

Another question since cheating is most certainly unforgivable to most people. Where would you rank cheating on a scale of one to ten where ten is say.....murder?

It's an irrelevant comparison. Wrong is wrong and if you're trying to judge something based on how wrong it is so you can justify still doing it... well. I don't really need to say it again, do I? People do what they do and have to live with the consequences afterwards. If you can commit a wrong against someone else and look at yourself in the mirror the following morning and still feel good about yourself... more power to you but you know what you are.

[legendarytoyou]

Me its ALWAYS been a case of personal honor; my first, 2nd and 3rd GF while we were going steady, I wouldn't even look up to look at other women.  To me it felt dishonorable.  I'm not sure how other people view their own personal integrity but that's a matter of self-image.

[landess]

4 hours ago, Alkpaz said:

elderly couples die pretty quickly when their spouse passes away

I always jokingly assume people in a relationship live longer because if one has a problem, the other is there to dial 911.

 

As for others replies to this post, it's insightful to the amount of passion they have for their convictions. As long as we don't start rounding up people whom we don't agree with and line them up for a firing squad - I'm cool with it.

[The First Lady of Hats]

A word once given...

Probably more so in my case since that word was a vow wi' diamond rings and the works ( well fine, a fat elvis impersonator was my preacher but still. :3 )

Even putting aside Legendarytoyou an' sarathis' honor, I like to think I have more self control than that, look at another wench? fine, indulge? nay. Don't care how tempting, I'd like a private jet too, but I'm not at the airport hijacking a boeing. If'n I found out a significant other had been derping around in places she shouldn't be, I'd likely commit a double murder,

 

and I'd expect the same treatment if I was so weak willed.

[Resdayn]

I see the cheating another form of it escaping from the relationship problems.

 

If there are a problem in relationship try solve it, do not hide or try justify escaping from them, if it fails then end.

 

If couple agreed to fuck anything what it moves and do open relationship, thars another story and not count I think.

[landess]

19 minutes ago, Resdayn said:

If there are a problem in relationship try solve it, do not hide or try justify escaping from them, if it fails then end.

Wise words. And I've lived by those.

 

While not directly linked to cheating, I know there are situations with relationships (like some employers not wanting to pay unemployment), in which one party attempts to make the other miserable enough to leave voluntarily, so they are alleviated of guilt or responsibility.

[KoolHndLuke]

1 hour ago, The First Lady of Hats said:

and I'd expect the same treatment if I was so weak willed.

You should probably expect it even if you are not. Always worked for me. And I don't think I'm "weak willed"- I just like to sample everything that life has to offer and women most of all. It is by recognizing and admitting our quirks or faults that we grow as individuals I think. For instance I respect that you admit to advocating (and practicing) incestuous relations even though I disagree. But I do not fault you for your urges.

[The First Lady of Hats]

25 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

 I just like to sample everything that life has to offer.

It's got a few thousand wenches that aren't already entangled in relations elsewhere

 

26 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

For instance I respect that you admit to advocating (and practicing) incestuous relations even though I disagree. But I do not fault you for your urges.

Think yer got the wrong Hats there

 

Even without the moralitys and the virtues there's the other side o' things.

 Assuming it's the neighbour's husband/wife and they do find out, they're pretty much broken for good. If'n they do somehow stay together and work through it, they're damned sure never going to trust her again and will prolly spend the rest of their married life wondering if she's still derping around with the neighbour and who else she's been fiddling, trusts gone for good.

 

  If'n they don't stay together? They've just lost their most trusted companion an' confidant and the person they fell in love with. If'n they have kids, they're buggered too, he's a weekend dad now, see them a handfull of hours every saturday and they grow up listening to both their parents grumble about what an ass the other one is. Divorce lawyers/solicitors are expensive, they're now paying court costs, legal advisor and probably just lost two thirds of his assets to her, on top of paying child maintanence fees for the next decade.

 

Lost his love, best friend, kids and is now bankrupt because she couldnae keep her knickers up. Thats an expensive fling.

[KoolHndLuke]

14 minutes ago, The First Lady of Hats said:

Think yer got the wrong Hats there

Thought I might. Apologies.

 

You make an excellent point with the story. But, isn't that more the fault of the legal system's leanings than anything against cheating? Women have way too much power in civil courts (criminal also) and they know it. Yeah, I've talked to plenty of guys that lost everything due to affairs outside the homestead. And almost everyone of them would do the same thing over again- only more carefully.

[The First Lady of Hats]

6 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

But, isn't that more the fault of the legal system's leanings than anything against cheating? Women have way to much power in civil courts and they know it

  Probably. Society is conditioned that way. A few centuries, if not millenia of "it's the woman's job to handle the kids." And constant portrayals of the deadbeat husband sorta hotwire our brains to figure it's his fault. Along with the fact a long drawn out divorce is lucrative as fuck for the legal system as well means they've little incentive to change that. It's why the uk had dudes clambering up the Blackpool tower dressed as spiderman waving "Fathers for justice banners" meanwhile a bunch of wenches wrote "Jump!" in giant letters on the sand on the beach (which despite being awfull, admittedly made me chuckle a little.)

 

  Pretty much the same way society is conditioned and hotwired to find murder and theft wrong, it still finds cheating wrong, it's been that way since some stone aged desert prophet wrote his "good book". Folk are a lot more free with their sexuality and who and when they fuck these days. but I think it's got a hell of a way to go before it reaches the point where it's not considered a greivious injury, certainly not in our lifetime I thinks.

[CramHunter]

On 12/16/2018 at 3:19 AM, The First Lady of Hats said:

  Pretty much the same way society is conditioned and hotwired to find murder and theft wrong, it still finds cheating wrong, it's been that way since some stone aged desert prophet wrote his "good book". Folk are a lot more free with their sexuality and who and when they fuck these days. but I think it's got a hell of a way to go before it reaches the point where it's not considered a greivious injury, certainly not in our lifetime I thinks.

Well, most cultures that experienced a rapid explosion of the populace adopted some kind of complex society. I'm by no means an expert on the topic, but most hunter-gatherer tribes were pretty egalitarian, this all probably vanished after people all across the globe settled down and discovered agriculture. People often have a hard time identifying with a community if it gets too big. Anonymity comes with big groups of people, and while there are certainly positive aspects about it, it also seems to reinforce negative aspects of the human mind like cruelty and anger. Which is why a mob can whip itself into a frenzy and commit atrocities whereas the individuals who form this group wouldn't have done so individually. So, I think most cultures at this point had to deal with new problems, and had to come up with solutions in order to keep everything going. So I'd argue to be very cautious when it comes to dismissing any kind of 'decency' or moderation when it comes to sexual behavior, because by abolishing them, you might just open up a can of worms that was closed a few thousand years ago.

 

And that's just one aspect. Health aspects like STDs, who are incidentally on the rise again and might return in full force with a vengeance as super bugs, are another major concern.

[Jazzman]

On 12/17/2018 at 5:12 PM, CramHunter said:

/ checked. Not bad but...

Actually, social groups beyond the critical max of some thirty people (a number that never got crossed in egalitarian hunter-gather societies of the past one million years we have archeological evidence of) seemingly inevitably develop hierarchic, thus non-egaliatarian social structures as in the million years that precede the age of the hunter-gatherers, when man was still organized in patriarchal family groups of scavengers in the open steppe, equipped with the mindset of chimps on steroids to stay alive, exposed to the large predators.

 

The reason for the shift from long-standing hunter-gatherers to half-nomadic pastoralists and already stationary farmers some 10.000 years ago is caused by the invention of effective stockpiling, composting of food scrapings behind the hut and herding/breeding techniques and thus an abundance of food at hand (leaving droughts and climate change aside), a hunter-gatherer clan simply can't compete with. That abundance of food throughout the seasons led to an explosion in the population and the coming of villages and kingdoms which made the egalitarian one man - one vote principle obsolete, sth. we today almost always realize first after a referendum - it gets nullified on the fly by the hierarchic structure we are living in, by the powers that be, the patriarchal dynasties of yore, now backed by (worthless but yet commonly accepted fiat) money. We get cheated all the time, cheating is a social phenomenon, a Darwinian sports of the fittest that came into being with the first agriculturalists, the first breeders, with 'ownership'. And there's no later ideology that has ever changed it to the slightest to this very day...

 

A renaissance of the old egalitarian principle would be possible only when we develop a 'clan structure' made of family and friends as the basic form of modern society. Being in a age of individual isolation - no family, no friends, no lover, no children, no nothing, just pissed of 24/7, complaining about each and everything, surrounded by a world full of adversaries beyond the children's room - aka the Age of Stupid, I don't see that mythical day of egality for all ever coming back tho. More likely I'd face the return of the Messiah (he might talk to the god of my ancestors, Viracocha, the gas planet Saturn, just another cheating bird of a feather. I for one got better things to do)... 

[KoolHndLuke]

 We're kinda moving in that direction with the Welfare State already since they support mothers and their children and don't really care who the fathers are. Plenty of mothers around here with children from many different "lovers". Would participate myself except I am seemingly not of the "right" background and those people typically have a lower standard of living than I care to deal with. I had one old girlfriend in particular that was very proud of her five children by four different fathers and she was married while we were seeing each other. I didn't care about her being "hitched" to someone else so much as I didn't like that she was a nasty ho that didn't take care of herself.

 

 Why is it when a person in a relationship decides they want to be with another that we call that other person a "thief"? You know "You STOLE my husband you fucking Whore!!"- that kind of thing. Did she "own" him? Does "commitment" in a relationship really translate into "ownership"? Personally, I find that idea disturbing to say the least. Reminds me of the poor dog my neighbor found a few ago and led her back to his house and then tied her up so that she has to sit through the weather and may never be free again. She whines almost every day because her "owner" controls her and doesn't treat her very well. I have half a mind to "liberate" her to a better home.

 

The fact is that there are many, many people that are in "bad" relationship/property situations and don't think they can leave due to one reason or another. Sometimes fear of the consequences (ie losing everything in a divorce), maybe a sense of duty to the children, etc. I just shake my head and wonder why they do that shit in the first place. I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time- the allure of that *special love* that so many of us seem to want.... and never really find.

 

 Maybe "love" (and commitment) to one person is not the best way to go about it for some people (I say most)- especially in today's society where people are discovering more about themselves and subsequently their (perhaps) better possibilities in life. We have known or heard (or are or have been) men and women that admit they are "torn" between loves because they love different things about each person. Why do we think that everyone should choose and make a commitment?

[wokking56]

On 12/15/2018 at 8:03 PM, KoolHndLuke said:

You make an excellent point with the story. But, isn't that more the fault of the legal system's leanings than anything against cheating?

As THE FIRST LADY stated this is a matter of conditioning that has been going on forever.

30 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

Why is it when a person in a relationship decides they want to be with another that we call that other person a "thief"?

I agree with this, the so called "thief" couldn't steal your spouse if they weren't out looking for something in the first place.

33 minutes ago, KoolHndLuke said:

Did she "own" him? Does "commitment" in a relationship really translate into "ownership"?

I'm pretty sure that humans became "possessive" as soon as they acquired possessions. I can see it now some paleolithic prehuman "No Gork that my pelt leave alone". We carry on this proud(?) tradition to this day. My house, my car even though they still in all actuality belong to the finance company. So upon entering a committed relationship it quickly devolves from a protective partnership to a possessive co-op.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

3 hours ago, KoolHndLuke said:

 We're kinda moving in that direction with the Welfare State already since they support mothers and their children and don't really care who the fathers are.

Because that's how the state plans to remain in power. You create a generation of single mothers who cannot do it all on their own (and such claims that they can is complete bunk and propaganda to accomplish this) and need a helping hand. But since the male is out of the picture because society is broken to the point where all male rights have been robbed, they can only ever turn to the state. This new generation is then indoctrinated to see the state as the provider, which they then must keep in power so as to remain taken care of.

[SkyAddiction]

Bottom line, people cheat because they're unhappy. How many people in this thread, regardless of response, can honestly claim they ended up with the man/woman/gender-of-choice they wanted?

 

I'll never intentionally cheat, and I've never violated that. Having said that, I've unintentionally enabled someone to cheat twice. Perhaps it's my inherent Stoicism, but I consider direct dialogue to be extremely important in a relationship.

I like sexually assertive women. I like that they can articulate what they like and want. I like that they don't lie to me (no woman can accurately fake an orgasm if you've experienced a woman having one). It makes for a trusting environment which allows the two of you to explore what connects you without any superfluous acts. No one goes home frustrated, and no one is diminished. In fact, it builds  upon the base of the relationship.

 

Every so often, that can get me in trouble with her partner. Note that it's her inability to be truthful that eventually gets her in trouble, and I've no doubt the same holds for men in the reverse scenario.

 

How to handle it?

1. Be truthful with your partner - you might find you like a specific kind of sex that they'll indulge.

2. Be a little bit selfish about sex. Tell your partner what you want/like, and you might very well get it.

3.  Talk about non-sexual means of building that relationship.

 

What not to do?

1. Lie to existing partners - they'll only resent the both of you, and they'll seek that most human of validations: revenge.

2. Lie to new partners - you're only going to frustrate them and confuse them. If, say for example, being bound during sex, is your ultimum satisfactio, then communicate it, ask for it, get consent, and do it.

 

Hopefully people see how this applies to all sex - we like what we like, and we should ask for it from our lovers.

[patches13]

Here are the lessons I've passed onto my children.

 

Easy decisions, hard life.

Hard decisions, easy life.

 

I follow them and hopefully my kids will follow them. Cheating is always a easy decision imo.

[Jazzman]

There are far too many unknowns in the equation as to why folks are monogamish instead of monogamous, the cheat thus almost inevitable when chance comes. Consequently there is no golden formula that'd solve the interpersonal problem, and esp. no moronic gender policy game to be played with the involved...

 

Merry Xmas, ye fuckers!

?

[GrimReaper]

On 12/18/2018 at 8:12 PM, Kamen Rider Kuuga said:

Because that's how the state plans to remain in power. You create a generation of single mothers who cannot do it all on their own (and such claims that they can is complete bunk and propaganda to accomplish this) and need a helping hand. But since the male is out of the picture because society is broken to the point where all male rights have been robbed, they can only ever turn to the state. This new generation is then indoctrinated to see the state as the provider, which they then must keep in power so as to remain taken care of.

The atomization of the society down to the smallest possible unit, the individual, is something that had to happen sooner or later. At the start, we had tribes. Then we had clans and big families. Then came the nuclear family, and now the individual. I'd argue that even the nuclear family is too small since our brains seem to be wired to work in small, but not too small, groups. In a big family members can support each other with vital issues such as raising children. Why start from scratch if you can tap into the experience and knowledge of those that already did raise children, such as your grandparents and parents? Yet this is exactly what happens. Young, unexperienced parents think that they know best what's best for their children, without knowing anything about the topic at all. With any other facet of life, like working, nobody would hold such a stance because it's ridiculous to the core. You learn your trade from those that are much more experienced than you. That doesn't mean they do your work for you, but they're there to guide you until you can stand on your own feet and carry on the torch to the next generation.

 

I think individuals are easier to pander to and control, however. Divide and conquer, as they say. Who'd rent all these run down apartments if it weren't for young people looking to become independent?

[wokking56]

On 12/24/2018 at 8:48 PM, GrimReaper said:

The atomization of the society down to the smallest possible unit, the individual, is something that had to happen sooner or later. At the start, we had tribes. Then we had clans and big families. Then came the nuclear family, and now the individual. I'd argue that even the nuclear family is too small since our brains seem to be wired to work in small, but not too small, groups.

This point I am on the fence about, since I personally have always enjoyed my solitude yet we as a whole still exhibit a tribal mentality. We seem to need to be part of a group whether we want to or not, for instance you see a movie and like it but everyone you know says it sucks. Soon you decide that your original thoughts on said movie were mistaken and now you dislike it as well. (I know a lame analogy) The point being that we still want to be part of the "tribe".

On 12/24/2018 at 8:48 PM, GrimReaper said:

Young, unexperienced parents think that they know best what's best for their children, without knowing anything about the topic at all. With any other facet of life, like working, nobody would hold such a stance because it's ridiculous to the core. You learn your trade from those that are much more experienced than you. That doesn't mean they do your work for you, but they're there to guide you until you can stand on your own feet and carry on the torch to the next generation.

These are two points that irk me to no end. In the case of child rearing the inexperienced parents seem to lean toward the polar opposite ends of the spectrum. Either giving nearly all the care over to a parent/grandparent or completely ignoring any advice given. A thing that ticked me off when my son was still quite young however was a younger single friend with no children telling me the best way to raise my boy. (Like I would take financial advice from some broke ass unemployed bum)

 

The same seems to be true for workers for the most part. Sure there are those that get it but the vast majority are totally lost, you show them the ropes and explain the order of operations. First do A then B then move on to C whenever you have a few free minutes check on X. Yet after several months you still have to tell them "okay if you are done with A now start on B". Or the complete opposite where after only a week or two they start telling you how you are doing it wrong.

 

This is not me crapping on "the younger generation" either, I have watched this go on for as long as I have been in the work force.

This is why I fear for our society with each generation only about 40% get it while the rest just somehow manage to BS their way through. So the next generations 40% is learning from many that have no clue as to what is really going on.

[Guest]

There's really no excuse for it. It's 2018. Polyamory is a thing. Open relationships are a thing. There are so many ways you can be ethically non-monogamous with the consent of all parties involved. If having only one partner bores you, then find people who feel the same. I have a friend who is in an open relationship built on communication and trust and everyone is happy. It's totally possible. But if you go into a relationship where the expectation is that you commit to be monogamous, then commit. Cheating is betraying your partner and it's not okay.

[Guest]

Never.