Errrr, people don't get angry when they're cheated on because they're afraid their significant other will leave them. They get angry because that implicit trust has been broken in the first place.
Cheating on your SO
- Thread starter Kem0sabe
- Start date
- Status
Errrr, people don't get angry when they're cheated on because they're afraid their significant other will leave them. They get angry because that implicit trust has been broken in the first place.
This is what bothers me. For some reason, the burden of trust is put upon your partner. "Shouldn't they be able to be happy if I'm happy, and that implies me having sex? They can still trust me" - why can't you sacrifice that silly thing of pursuing another girl and sleeping with her for the sake of your love for your partner?
Many also play this card, and their partners go "well, yeah, ok." because they're guilt'ed into believing they can't be sole supplier of sex in the relationship and that it's somehow "putting an unnatural constraint on my dick/vagina". The whole "the rule is old fashioned" and talking down about the way we feel when we're cheated on, like it's an ugly human trait - wtf? If my girlfriend is hurt and jealous by my unableness to not look at other girls, I would be an asshat if I said "don't be jealous. That's ugly", and if I first was like that, I probably could guilt her into an open relationship. It happens, but of course there are also happily open relationships out there, but you're not helping anyone's case if you're talking about being hurt like it's your partner that's weak.
There's a cultural difference that makes open relationships more common-practice in the US than in, my case, Norway. You can't write it off as old-fashioned, because a lot of it comes from entitlement and I'm sure someone could find a correlation between how people can stuff their faces and turn fat when they know it's bad for them, as why they can have sex with others when they know it hurts their partners. And some people are trying to make an excuse for it, like it's "old fashioned" and "unnatural" and they're placating fantastic people into relationships and persuading them that it's only natural if they fuck around. Take me, for an example. I don't want to have sex with other girls. My girl's even vocal about wanting to have a threesome, while I'm more reluctant about the idea. We talk about it, we figure each other out. I genuinely have no desire to sleep around. I still love being a wingman and moral support and tips guy for my friends when we're out, and it's not like the first thing I have to say someone I meet is that I'm in a relationship. I think it's fun meeting new people, and it's fun walking over with a friend to a random table of girls to help him talk to them. But there's no fiber in my body that says "you want to make out with this girl. You want to bang this girl". The best part about a night out with the guys is coming home to my girl, who beats any of the girls I've encountered during the night. I guess that makes me old-fashioned and weak?
EDIT: So many talk about open relationships like it's "the natural way", and never view it in the light of "maybe something's wrong if I'm unable to have some self-control and just have sex with one person".
soul creator
Member
I guess the main difference is that I see it as observation about why cheating is so "popular", not as a "defense" for cheating. Sure, there's gonna be someone out there that also uses it to justify their dishonest behavior, but that doesn't change the core point being raised. We shouldn't shy away from something that's likely to be true, simply because someone out there might possibly use it as a defense for bad behavior.
Just like if someone says "absentee parents and poverty are more likely to create violent people", that doesn't mean that the violent criminal who says "I shot that guy because I was poor as a kid and my dad left me!" should no longer go to jail.
It does mean that if we are actually interested in creating less violent criminals, we should address the problem of parenting and poverty directly, rather than just saying "criminals are bad, they should go to jail!", pretending he exists in a vacuum, and ignoring everything else.
Hell, teen pregnancy is probably a better example. Over and over, it's shown that places that have more well-rounded, accurate, reality-based sex education, have lower rates of teen pregnancy. Places that basically say "just don't have sex!" and leave it at that, have higher rates. The latter may feel good to say, and feels more morally righteous and direct, but it doesn't actually solve the problem they claim to be concerned about.
megashock5
Member
It's certainly not a bad thing to question big decisions, so kudos.
I think people obviously have different feelings about marriage. Some people are turned off by the idea, think it's restrictive, unromantic, whatever. For whatever reason, I've always liked the idea and find it terribly romantic. I can't explain why, it's just how I've always been, as long as I can remember.
Some of the things you mention definitely come into play. I think security factors into it a bit, and I don't doubt that convention plays a role, but I don't think any of those things are reason enough by themselves. I know this will sound cheesy and trite, but I can say with total honesty that my wife is my best friend. She's the first person I want to tell everything to, the person I wanted to raise a family with, the person I want to just sit with at the end of the day and unwind.
The funny thing is, I'm someone who questions nearly every decision I make. I have trouble making even the smallest of decisions and I second guess almost everything I do. And yet, the decision to propose to this particular person is the one thing I've never once thought "should I have done that?"
Like I said earlier, this decision seemed so right and natural that I was completely at peace with it. It's hard to explain, really, since it's more of a feeling than a rational thought. It felt right, and made all the sense in the world to me - and in nearly 16 years, not a day has gone by that I wasn't completely confident that it was the right thing for me/us.
I don't know if that helps or not, that's all I have.
soul creator
Member
One could easily say "why can't you sacrifice your silly thing of feeling jealous simply because I had sex with someone for the sake of loving your partner?"
Why is "enjoys sex with others" automatically a crass, base, and greedy desire for someone to have, and should obviously be given up out of love, but jealousy should always be completely pandered to, and treated as 100% valid?
Of course, as a practical matter, I'm not saying it's necessarily "wrong" to have jealous feelings, and of course two specific partners should communicate their feelings as much as possible with each other, so that they're on the same page. And though it feels odd that I need to point this out, I'm not saying that bringing up the fact that "hey, I enjoy sex with others" 3 years into a relationship is ok or whatever. But as a general point, I'm just curious why one emotion gets a free pass, but the other doesn't. Is it because people still subconsciously see sex as only meaningful and valid when it's in a specific context, and dirty, nasty, and shameful in others?
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, it depends on the nature of the relationship. For most serious partnerships, if not discussed explicitly, the implied rules are that you're supposed to be faithful. Now, if it's established beforehand that hooking up with other people is allowed, then I agree that it's not fair to be jealous of the activity.
But basically, the point is that you don't get to retroactively change the rules of the game after you've been caught. It's very disingenuous to do so. People generally feel betrayed when their partners sleep with someone else under the generally practiced rules of a committed relationship, and that's understood. Whether or not you agree or not, one can't just decide after cheating that, wait, you know what? I'm not the problem! You're the problem!
That's not to say that it's not worth considering whether or not it really is that bad of a thing going forward. I'm generally careful not to be overly judgmental about these kinds of trespasses. I mean, I think cheating is wrong. However, I don't necessarily know if doing so makes the person an awful human being, or even an awful partner. That's for their partner to decide.
Well, primarily, one's an action, the other's a reaction. You can never control your emotional reactions to something, and trying to is a mentally dangerous thing to do. You can only change the circumstances and indirectly alter the action into something that won't trigger that reaction.
There's nothing inherently wrong with enjoying sex with others, and I won't ever try to say that it is. There's nothing inherently wrong about weighing 400 pounds either. We can all indulge in everything we want, but normally we have certain restraints because we realize the implications. If we could somehow empty our stomachs after we've stuffed ourselves, and not gain weight from crap we ate, it still would be a decadent and just giving into our indulgences without second though. I am of the thought that two people agreeing upon having sex with others can soon be indulging without care and restriction. And restriction is something everyone should contemplate, in all matters of life.
Now, this is not me saying open relationships are morally degrading or indefendable, so I'm not trying to be on the other end of the scale. I'm debating the implications of it, much to combat such ideas that "monogamy is flawed" or "old-fashioned" or something. Most people out there have insecurities. Some need someone to rely on, someone they know won't fuck around. Others need to fuck around because they need validation. Insecurities manifest in many ways, and I'm no fan of it, no matter if it manifests as a neediness or as a sleeping-around...-y...ness. These are all things we should work on with ourselves, so we can't just say "you can't sleep around" if someone needs to, nor "you can't be jealous" if they react to it like that. All these things are matters of our own psyche that should be explored. Instead many of us wants to just close their ears and continue indulging themselves, whatever way they do. That's not cool. And in this case, it's a special type of minefield if your indulgence is sleeping with others, because you can be hurting your partner, even if they agree, if you're not careful, so being somewhat cautious shouldn't be asking too much. Statements like "jealousy is an ugly part of human nature" and it somehow correlating to the fact that I should be able to sleep around, is turning causation upside down, much like the proposed "why can't you sacrifice your silly thing of feeling jealous simply because I had sex with someone".
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Because you can't get an STD by not wanting your partner to cheat? Because unless you stated that you will only consider it an open relationship you're violating their trust? No one said you can't if bother parties are ok with it but unless you said from the beginning that it will always be an open relationship then how can you say that the person cheating is in the right? You both agreed to be monogamous, if you go and start having sex without telling the other person you cause problems with possible illnesses and by betraying their trust. If the person knew it was always considered an open relationship and then get upset when they have sex with others then they have no one to blame but themselves. The reason the instances you're talking about are called cheating and not an open relationship is because you're betraying the other person who trusted you and potentially hurting them in other ways.
This is not only a great point, but implicitly provides some insight into the kind of damage that a rigid notion of monogamous love creates. By making it taboo to talk openly about non-monogamous behaviour for most of society, these issues aren't clearly and adequately communicated early on in the relationship. I imagine most even suppress it, or try to reinforce a notion of self that just isn't true - and ends up as some torrid secret shame.
If society was ok and at peace with the fact that monogamy isn't the only natural state of relationships; that indeed, some degree of promiscuity is natural to most, then it would be much more possible, much more regular for people to become life partners, while still having the freedom and communication to safely without emotional hangups and damage, explore a greater variety of love and sex beyond just the one that provides a nice, albeit a necessarily limited range of those critical things in life.
In essence, because of the fairy tale and unrealistic view we have on relationships, we end up in more situations where we 'cheat'... rather than more relationships that have established strong and open lines of communication that is able to accomodate for the realities of our human nature.
soul creator
Member
Agreed. In response to the bold, that was the reason for the extra disclaimer in my post
Of course, in my ideal society (obviously won't happen overnight or anything) there wouldn't be any "implicit" assumptions of monogamy. People would just always talk about that stuff early on, just like any other conversation topic. Actually, it might even be better that the "implicit" assumption would be that safe sex with others is totally cool, and monogamy is the one that would have to be explicitly talked about, haha.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Except it isn't. Don't be a coward and pretend you're living up to the standard you set when you started the relationship. Talk about it with them and reach an agreement, whether it's to stay together or things won't work out. There's nothing good about being ball-less and going behind someone's back to cheat because you're too afraid to talk to them about it. People have open relationships, whether it's socially acceptable in your mind or not is a completely different topic than someone cheating on their SO after agreeing to a monogamous relationship.
Agreed. In response to the bold, that was the reason for the extra disclaimer in my post
Of course, in my ideal society (obviously won't happen overnight or anything) there wouldn't be any "implicit" assumptions of monogamy. People would just always talk about that stuff early on, just like any other conversation topic. Actually, it might even be better that the "implicit" assumption would be that safe sex with others is totally cool, and monogamy is the one that would have to be explicitly talked about, haha.
Then be the one to talk about it? The other thing is, yes it should be implicit when the vast majority believe in monogamous relationships. The vast majority believe in that so that is expected, I don't see how it's wrong going under the assumption especially if you don't agree with that and feel it's not noteworthy to mention. If you want to go that route than just as much burden is on you that you were incapable of mentioning something that you know if important for you in a relationship. I don't know why people keep trying to throw people who believe in monogamous relationships under the bus and they should just "deal" with people cheating on them.
Yes. Shame is a huge reason for depression in today's society. It's fucked up. But we're mixing causation and defendable actions. So, we've found a reason why people cheat, but people are still responsible for communicating with their partner, or at the very least themselves. It shouldn't have to come that far. It does, and that's the way it is, but it's still fucked up.
And we're back to the natural state defense. It's not applicable. It's natural to rape. We have to approach this one from a different angle than "it used to happen".
All in all, this discussion makes it seem to me that we're quick to take points to our defense, instead of taking one step further back and looking at what gets us there in the first place, or where it will take is in the last place. Just because our dicks can point in the direction of a girl doesn't mean we have to fuck her.
Except it isn't what?
That we're more ok with jealousy then we are with promiscuity, despite both been inherently damaging in some way?
If we were ok with both, we'd be able to state our terms clearly up front, without feeling like we were monstrous cretins for thinking about it.
Like all those memes and tropes where one partner is like jokingly (but also kinda seriously) saying stuff like: "And if you ever cheat on me, I'll cut your balls off" *kiss*?
Could you imagine them saying a line like, "Oh by the way, you won't be the only pussy I get." *kiss*... and having that play off as a funny but insightful little line?
I used the term promiscuity rather than cheating, because I meant more in the sense of having multiple sexual partners, rather than betraying the trust of your partner (because it's implicit that you're exclusive).
When you think about it from another point of view, that's the most natural statement in the world. It is normal for people to have multiple sexual partners... over the course of their lives.
But, because of the idea that we have ingrained, that we need to be exclusive in a monogamous relationship, we create these unhealthy issues about betrayal, jealousy and trust or lack thereof when talking about what is otherwise extremely natural, in the context of a relationship.
It's such a disorder that we view been a perpetual single person that just has one night stands and short term relationships as more ok. As a state that's preferable to been in a relationship, while still going outside of that occasionally. Removing the largely culturally constructed notion of jealousy and betrayal and the pain that necessarily follows those things, is it really better to be without a person to share your life with, so that you can pursue your wanton sexual urges?
To put it another way... why can't my life partner just be someone that I like a lot and want to spend the rest of my life with, without necessarily having to involve the sexual component in that?
I mean I'm sure that we can sex each other up all our lives, but does that component... the passion and sexual lust need to be automatically chained to companionship and shared experiences?
If you're really super jealous as a person and you can't help it, that's fine. But wouldn't society be better if both parties entering into any relationship would discuss those issues upfront before it gets serious, rather than not saying shit about it because one side is made to feel morally justified and superior, while the other side, as natural as the other party, is made to feel like it's shameful secret that must be denied, because not doing so makes them terrible people?
soul creator
Member
Who said I ever disagreed with making an agreement at the beginning? You seem to be reading way more into things than what's actually there.
Again, someone using an observation about non-monogamy vs. monogamy to defend their lying does not change whether that observation is true or not.
I am! And if you want more people to be able to talk about it, creating a society that's more accepting of non-monogamy is the way to go about it, not just raging at cheaters. That's valid to do as well, and can provide a relief, but it doesn't actually solve the problem we're both supposedly interested in solving.
And the vast majority believe heterosexuality is the only right way of doing things. Doesn't mean that that mindset shouldn't be debated/challenged sometimes.
Again, this doesn't mean "oh no, cheaters will have free reign now to justify their behavior!" anymore than challenging heteronormativity means "oh no, our children will all be gay now!"
Again, I'm not speaking in support of "cheating and rationalizing after the fact". I even added that disclaimer in the post you were responding to!
Who's "throwing monogamous people under the bus"? Sure, we may be challenging your dominant positions a bit, but that's not the same as "throwing monogamous people under the bus". To rephrase a point made earlier: mentioning that gay people exist alongside straight people, and that straight people aren't the only valid sexual orientation is not the same thing as "throwing straight people under the bus"
Again, I am not defending lying to your partner(s). All I'm saying is that stating "CHEATING IS BAD GRRR", doesn't actually solve the issue of sexual infidelity. Just like "DON'T HAVE SEX UNTIL YOU'RE MARRIED GRRR", doesn't actually solve the issue of teen pregnancy. We've been saying "CHEATING IS BAD GRRR" for the longest time, and people still do it. There are religious commandments against it, and people still do it. Some countries have had death penalties for it...and people still do it. So maybe, there's something else behind it that should be discussed?
If we're actually interested in people being more open and honest with each other when it comes to this topic, that should involve a more realistic assessment of human sexuality ASAP.
This is not the same thing as saying "here's your get out of jail free card, cheaters! Just say monogamy isn't natural and boom! Fuck as many people behind their back as you want!"
edit: I guess part of the miscommunication here is that some seem to look at "cheating" as a bunch of isolated cases in a vacuum, while I tend to look at it more from a societal standpoint. Sure, if I happen to be talking to a specific couple dealing with the issue, I won't go into a big generalized non-monogamy vs. monogamy discussion. Just like if I was talking to some murder victim's family, I won't go into a big sociological discussion of poverty, mental illness, and lack of parenting (even though those are obviously relevant factors when it comes to crime)
But if I'm posting on GAF for a general audience, in response to a general and open-ended "why do people cheat? How could we prevent this?" discussion, then I'm going to get more general with the points I raise.
I'm not putting down the person being cheated on at all. I'm talking in general terms about all human beings. We all experience jealousy, even at times when it isn't warranted. We all experience possessiveness like "This is mine and you can't have it." And those are ugly characteristics of human behavior in general. Ideally, we should all want to share things that are amazing, not keep them to ourselves.
I'm not putting anyone down. I'm just saying that the idea of another person being your property is old fashioned. There's an expression, "If you love someone, set them free. If they love you, they'll come back to you." Or something along those lines.
I didn't compare cheating to having a snack either. I used a late snack as an example for rules in a relationship. If you'd like me to use a more appropriate example, some people consider texting or dancing with a person outside of their marriage to be taboo. If, within a relationship, this rule is setup and one of the parties ignores it and winds up dancing with someone else, they can be considered "cheating."
I think that we can all agree that if you feel that your relationship has gone into the shitter, you should break up with your SO to get with someone else. Why stick around when it's in the shitter and make your SO feel worthless?
You may argue that they deserved it.. but then why are you still there with them?
You may argue that they deserved it.. but then why are you still there with them?
I don't think cheating is inherently bad or wrong. It's very possible to get sexual satisfaction away from your partner, and still love your partner. And it is very possible to get sexual satisfaction without developing feelings for a relationship. The odds of you remaining sexually attracted as they gain years are also low, not just because of physical changes but mental as well. Younger more lively competition will always abvailable, along with older more experienced competition if that's what you prefer
I also think this difficult. People are prone to develop emotional attachments, and sex often is the source of those attachments. Both parties (cheater and cheatee) need to be in full agreement, and not become needy or create demands for one another that conflict with the significant other. While this main seem easy to do, I think the odds of one party failing and wanting more from the other is the majority case.
Regardless, if you are in a relationship, and you know your SO does not want you to cheat, doing so is akin to slapping them in the face. You are being hurtful, and cheating should be avoided in these circumstances. Breaking up would be a better course of action.
The social taboo of cheating makes things difficult, however. I have no hard stats but I'd guess the majority of the society does not condone cheating. It will be very difficult to find this open relationship from the person you'd like to marry. Even if you do, youd have to be insensitive to other peoples views on the subject that know of this. Obvious solution is not to get married or have one official SO, but people also want children, a companion for elder years. People aren't willing to sacrifice the latter so they often persue monogamy anyway. But then they also cheat.
I also think this difficult. People are prone to develop emotional attachments, and sex often is the source of those attachments. Both parties (cheater and cheatee) need to be in full agreement, and not become needy or create demands for one another that conflict with the significant other. While this main seem easy to do, I think the odds of one party failing and wanting more from the other is the majority case.
Regardless, if you are in a relationship, and you know your SO does not want you to cheat, doing so is akin to slapping them in the face. You are being hurtful, and cheating should be avoided in these circumstances. Breaking up would be a better course of action.
The social taboo of cheating makes things difficult, however. I have no hard stats but I'd guess the majority of the society does not condone cheating. It will be very difficult to find this open relationship from the person you'd like to marry. Even if you do, youd have to be insensitive to other peoples views on the subject that know of this. Obvious solution is not to get married or have one official SO, but people also want children, a companion for elder years. People aren't willing to sacrifice the latter so they often persue monogamy anyway. But then they also cheat.
Real scumbag move. Nice one.
If you don't love someone, how about.. you know.. you break up with them? The cheating supporters here are pathetic.
I'm of the opinion that if you're inclined to cheat on your SO, you should end the relationship first and then have sex with other people. I don't understand why this is so difficult for people...
When you get into a serious relationship with someone, generally you should like and respect the person enough to consider their feelings. It hurts way more for someone to be cheated on and then break up than to just be dumped. If you want to sleep around with people, just stay single, have fun, and live your life.
I just look at it in terms of treating others the way you would like to be treated. I'd prefer to get dumped and spared the heart ache of being cheated on and so because of that I'll never cheat first and then dump my GF. Being a good person to the very people that you're supposed to care about (if you're in a relationship with someone you don't care about... Why the fuck are you with them?) has nothing to do with religion or anything like that, btw.
I've been with a few girls and I've never cheated on them. I actually dumped my first girlfriend because I was tired of just being with her and the relationship was getting stale and later found out that she had cheated on me lol. Fortunately I found out almost a year after I dumped her so I didn't really care at that point.
When you get into a serious relationship with someone, generally you should like and respect the person enough to consider their feelings. It hurts way more for someone to be cheated on and then break up than to just be dumped. If you want to sleep around with people, just stay single, have fun, and live your life.
I just look at it in terms of treating others the way you would like to be treated. I'd prefer to get dumped and spared the heart ache of being cheated on and so because of that I'll never cheat first and then dump my GF. Being a good person to the very people that you're supposed to care about (if you're in a relationship with someone you don't care about... Why the fuck are you with them?) has nothing to do with religion or anything like that, btw.
I've been with a few girls and I've never cheated on them. I actually dumped my first girlfriend because I was tired of just being with her and the relationship was getting stale and later found out that she had cheated on me lol. Fortunately I found out almost a year after I dumped her so I didn't really care at that point.
I think you've pointed out precisely why this is difficult for some people. Basically you just stated, if you're inclined to want to have sex with others you should end every single thing that is good and working with that relationship in order to fulfill that one thing. You're throwing the baby out with the bath water. This is precisely the reason why people bottle up these emotions and feelings until they escape and hurt someone. There's almost no conversation to be had in a society that views these things so black and white. Monogamy is the default. It's the thing everyone gets funneled into with very little exception. Again, as you said, if you're inclined, then you end things right there. How does that start a conversation? If my natural state at that particular point in my life is that I'm inclined to have some sex with someone else then in society now I have two options, because this is seen as a bad thing: End the relationship or cheat. Both of these bring hurt. The options should really start with talking and communicating with your SO about it.
And, like others defending open relationships in this thread I'm not saying this is an excuse to be thrown around after the fact. Breaking the trust of your SO is unacceptable and you really have no excuse for it. But society doesn't give people a lot of breathing room at all.
Nowhere in his post did he say anything about not loving his wife. In fact he said just the opposite.
Maybe inclined is a poor way of putting it. It's human nature to view other people sexually and have urges but it's the way you handle and control your urges that defines how you are in a relationship. I'm in a relationship right now and of course I see other girls and think they're pretty. It's almost impossible for a man to not think about sex or girls sexually. That doesn't mean you have to act upon it. When you get into a serious relationship you DO have to make sacrifices for that relationship if you really are serious about it working. If you can't do that then just date around and have fun. I did that for a good year before getting into the current relationship I'm in.
Ok, so you want to have sex with other women but also want to stay with your SO. You want the best of both worlds and realistically this just isn't possible if your SO has self respect/cares about you. So, you open up the conversation with your SO, "honey, I love you and I cherish you, however I want to sleep with other people. Can we work this out?". What does this accomplish? There's almost no way your SO is going to say "oh ok go sleep with people I don't care!". Their feelings will be hurt a lot and you just possibly ruined your relationship without actually doing anything wrong. If your love life with your SO is boring or stale, go about talking about it with them in a different way and work with them to make it more exciting.
It sucks for some but you just can't have the best of both worlds. Ultimately you have to make a tough decision and while that might not seem fair, that's just realistically the way it is.
soul creator
Member
Heh, this is another example of how the conversation is always framed in monogamous terms. You use "cheating" when you seem to actually mean "sex with other people", and those are not inherently the same thing
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Or be in a different kind of relationship than being strictly monogamous.
Kind of the point of the entire discussion that was going on, not all relationships need to be defined on the same terms.
My other point was to really boil down why people have the expectation of monogamy, or why they want it in the first place. Not simply "just because" but really WHY. They don't want their partner having sex with anyone else.. but.. why?
Simply for the sake of safety/STD's/pregnancy? Makes sense, but then again, that's monogamy because of logic, not emotion. I'm curious WHERE the actual emotions come from, and to some extent calling into question how healthy these emotions are.
"Plenty of people do this" isn't really an explanation, justification, or reasoning of why.
I believe huge portions of society practice things that are largely accepted that I find entirely unhealthy. So we really should say anything like "well plenty of people do this" for any reason other than to contradict someone else's absolute.
Plenty of people have monogamous relationships and don't cheat. That is a true statement. That doesn't mean we can't examine why, and question how healthy it is in general to live that way. I'm not going to state some absolute that "all people shouldn't be monogamous" either way, I'm simply desiring to explain WHY they are in the first place.
I think the basis of monogamy for the majority of people comes from fairly unhealthy emotions.. wanting ownership and control over someone, being jealous or insecure, etc.
The point of saying something is or isn't "natural" isn't to say "well that's how you should act then." I'm simply discussing the aspects of the issue here. If jealousy is natural, and so is being attracted to more than just one "partner", then we've identified conflicting natural "desires"... so then you examine why you choose one over the other at that point.
I personally think jealousy is LESS rooted in "nature" though.. or at the very least, it is a WEAK trait, not a STRONG one.
My opinion on this is that... it isn´t a sacrifice if you deeply love your SO and want to be in a relationship. I love my wife, that doesn´t stop me from looking at other women sexually, but i don´t find it a "sacrifice" to not try to pick them up.
That being said, everyone´s wired differently.
Yes that doesn't mean you have to act on it, obviously, but why does society feel you absolutely cannot act on it? Why are human relationships viewed so narrowly? You're proving the point me and others have said with every word you put type out. You're framing things in terms of monogamy. Why does not having sex with others have to be the sacrifice you make? Who said that it has to be? Society did, that's who. And why is society correct in every instance?
Why is this realistically not possible? I'm currently in an open marriage, and thus know it is possible. I've met others in open relationships and know it's possible. But according to you that means we have no self respect? What the fuck, man? This is exactly what everyone's talking about. If someone feels that naturally they work better in another way, then suddenly they're a bad person or they have no self respect or they're asking their partner to have no self respect and all that. It's crazy and it's absolutely not conducive to an actual conversation and communication between significant others.
You can and should be able to find what comes natural to you. People shouldn't be corralled into what society decides is best.
You know what, a while ago being gay meant keeping it a secret. It meant marrying to someone of the opposite sex and continuing on with a lie. Why did it mean that? It wasn't fair, but that was just realistically the way it was. Society said that was wrong, bad, and abnormal, and society said you have to go this way. You have to live up to what we say is the ideal. And now finally homosexuals can grow up and live how they feel, and that's great. But we as a society still have a long way to go when it comes to the extent of our sexuality and our ability to have relationships.
I think you should reread my first post. It doesn't have anything to do with society or religion, more so doing what would make your SO happy. Hey man, if your wife is cool with doing the open relationship thing then more power to you both. The gay thing again is a society issue which isn't my point.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
But why does it make her happy to have exclusive "sex rights" over you?
Why does it make you happy to have this same commitment from your significant other?
Like, can you actually explain it? What is the desire of defining a relationship that way?
Do I have to explain what feelings are? There a ton of reasons why someone cheating on you might "hurt your feelings". Some things don't have concrete explanation.
This is pretty strawman lol.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Right. Condescending defensive BS isn't really needed here. I asked you a pretty straightforward and simple question. No need to pretend anyone in this conversation needs to have the word "feeling" defined for them.
OK. So you can't explain why.
Huh? What straw man did I present? You claimed it makes your SO happy for you to be monogomous.. that isn't a straw man, it's an example you presented... I then asked you fairly simple questions based on the example you provided... that you apparently can't answer.
"Just because" I guess is your answer.
A lot of why those feelings are hurt is because cheating is essentially defying trust and going against an agreement that the two people have made. Of course it's going to hurt your feelings when your spouse does that. If my spouse lies to me on anything at all it's going to hurt my feelings. The thing is that most of us are questioning why that specific agreement exists in the first place as the de facto default option that everyone gets corralled into.
And I'm not positing that everyone's jealousy and hurt feelings solely comes from society and from defying trust. There are some people that are genuinely made for monogamy. Hell, I'm sure there are a ton of people. That's fine. The problem is that it is not everyone, yet we as a society seem to view it in that black and white way, that everyone should be funneled into monogamy.
Willingly funneled. Do you think that if the vast majority of people didn´t want monogamous relationship´s that we as a society would have evolved into something better?
Pedophiles weren´t frowned upon in many western med and arab societies in the classical age, but most of those societies evolved into frowning upon the act (rightfully so), in dependent of the motivating force of the societal shift in customs people accepted the change as a positive evolution.
Maybe in the future, people will look back at our monogamous ways and say we were retrogrades, but as things stand, most people accept monogamy as the standard and accept it with more or less success.
soul creator
Member
or that, "Hey, if you wanna sleep around, then that's totally fine, just get it out of your system before you get into a REAL relationship", which initially seems like a support for non-monogamy, but actually still frames things in a way that makes monogamy the standard and ideal way of doing things, and everything else as "non-serious" or "fake", or "immature".
Because apparently, sex has to either be this 100% non-emotional, series of crazy one night stands, or a total sexual commitment to a single person for the next 40 years. No in between!
And of course, the other fun part of this discussion is that hardly anyone is truly monogamous anyway (i.e. mating for life with the same person). Unless everyone out there is marrying their middle/high school sweetheart or something. The vast majority of people are serial monogamists, which ironically means they're already capable of being attracted to, loving, and having sex with more than one person. They're just not as good at multi-tasking!
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
I don't agree with this at all. I live in China and I've heard from many Chinese people in my city that most couples cheat, a lot. Especially since arranged marriages are still so common here. Not in the same way as India, but by 30, if they aren't married, they are considered "unsuitable". A lot of them rush into marriage at this stage just for security and financial backing. they get their love making on the side.
It's funny, I made a thread basically asking these same questions a few months back and basically got crucified for it. Instead of answering the questions, there were a lot of accusation thrown around, a lot of moral posturing, and a lot of claims that I was trolling.
Promiscuity is natural. people that shouldn't be in monogamous relationships are in them. It doesn't make them any less of an asshole for doing this shit though. When I'm in a relationship I make it clear that I have no issues with outside involvement. If your partner needs to get laid more or differently, why not let them.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Theory: Monogamy exists to protect the weaker (physically and sexually) of our species.
Without monogamy as a societal standard, the "alpha males" and "alpha females" would have far greater power than they already do.
Once power structures formed that stopped guaranteeing that the "leader" of any given group will have possessed great "breeding prowess", those in power were no longer necessarily the physical "alpha male" or "alpha female." They were quite often the opposite in fact, and chosen only due to their own birthrights not their own prowess at anything really. Beyond that the "intellectuals" who didn't necessarily curry natural favor from the opposite sex also came more to power.
They rather arbitrarily defined monogamy as some moral standard, and rather arbitrarily labeled promiscuity as amoral. Something the "alpha" of a species would never really do.
This rather arbitrary importance put on monogamy and lack of promiscuity placates the feelings of jealousy and insecurity the "non alphas" feel, because it effectively removes large swaths of the breeding population from the grasps of the "alphas." It also in turn feeds these feelings of jealousy and insecurity by teaching people from the time they are born just how important it is to give yourself to a single partner... and teaches many would-be "alphas" to ignore the potential power their genetics have bestowed upon them.
Since men have largely held the most power, they've also put special onus on women not being promiscuous.. while doing their best to keep some sort of double-standard alive whereas men are admired for their promiscuity, and women are made to be ashamed of their promiscuity.. even to the point where they are put to death for not obeying the "rules" in place in some societies. Throughout history men with "power" have expected their own promiscuity to be ignored, expected, or simply put up with... while using their power and status to get as much sex as possible.. because that's what they are naturally wired to do in the first place. At the same time they continue to promote the idea that everyone else should be monogamous.. because hey.. why not promote the idea of the "rest of the guys" not being allowed to play the game like they do?
Catholics take it as far as basically worshiping one and only one woman.. who was born a virgin, and died a virgin.. the "perfect woman".. lacking the "sin" of having sex with someone she is attracted to.
What a mindfuck.
I believe this repression of natural sexuality has done little to actually further our society. I believe "monogamy as a standard" exists to placate the weak, and feeds on weak emotions like jealousy and insecurity.. it allows non-alpha men and women to have some sort of "control" over their mates, by giving them an arbitrary moral "rule" to chastise people with and discourage them from having said control.
Just a theory
Without monogamy as a societal standard, the "alpha males" and "alpha females" would have far greater power than they already do.
Once power structures formed that stopped guaranteeing that the "leader" of any given group will have possessed great "breeding prowess", those in power were no longer necessarily the physical "alpha male" or "alpha female." They were quite often the opposite in fact, and chosen only due to their own birthrights not their own prowess at anything really. Beyond that the "intellectuals" who didn't necessarily curry natural favor from the opposite sex also came more to power.
They rather arbitrarily defined monogamy as some moral standard, and rather arbitrarily labeled promiscuity as amoral. Something the "alpha" of a species would never really do.
This rather arbitrary importance put on monogamy and lack of promiscuity placates the feelings of jealousy and insecurity the "non alphas" feel, because it effectively removes large swaths of the breeding population from the grasps of the "alphas." It also in turn feeds these feelings of jealousy and insecurity by teaching people from the time they are born just how important it is to give yourself to a single partner... and teaches many would-be "alphas" to ignore the potential power their genetics have bestowed upon them.
Since men have largely held the most power, they've also put special onus on women not being promiscuous.. while doing their best to keep some sort of double-standard alive whereas men are admired for their promiscuity, and women are made to be ashamed of their promiscuity.. even to the point where they are put to death for not obeying the "rules" in place in some societies. Throughout history men with "power" have expected their own promiscuity to be ignored, expected, or simply put up with... while using their power and status to get as much sex as possible.. because that's what they are naturally wired to do in the first place. At the same time they continue to promote the idea that everyone else should be monogamous.. because hey.. why not promote the idea of the "rest of the guys" not being allowed to play the game like they do?
Catholics take it as far as basically worshiping one and only one woman.. who was born a virgin, and died a virgin.. the "perfect woman".. lacking the "sin" of having sex with someone she is attracted to.
What a mindfuck.
I believe this repression of natural sexuality has done little to actually further our society. I believe "monogamy as a standard" exists to placate the weak, and feeds on weak emotions like jealousy and insecurity.. it allows non-alpha men and women to have some sort of "control" over their mates, by giving them an arbitrary moral "rule" to chastise people with and discourage them from having said control.
Just a theory
Theory: Monogamy exists to protect the weaker (physically and sexually) of our species.
Without monogamy as a societal standard, the "alpha males" and "alpha females" would have far greater power than they already do.
Once power structures formed that stopped guaranteeing that the "leader" of any given group will have possessed great "breeding prowess", those in power were no longer necessarily the physical "alpha male" or "alpha female." They were quite often the opposite in fact, and chosen only due to their own birthrights not their own prowess at anything really. Beyond that the "intellectuals" who didn't necessarily curry natural favor from the opposite sex also came more to power.
They rather arbitrarily defined monogamy as some moral standard, and rather arbitrarily labeled promiscuity as amoral. Something the "alpha" of a species would never really do.
This rather arbitrary importance put on monogamy and lack of promiscuity placates the feelings of jealousy and insecurity the "non alphas" feel, because it effectively removes large swaths of the breeding population from the grasps of the "alphas." It also in turn feeds these feelings of jealousy and insecurity by teaching people from the time they are born just how important it is to give yourself to a single partner... and teaches many would-be "alphas" to ignore the potential power their genetics have bestowed upon them.
Since men have largely held the most power, they've also put special onus on women not being promiscuous.. while doing their best to keep some sort of double-standard alive whereas men are admired for their promiscuity, and women are made to be ashamed of their promiscuity.. even to the point where they are put to death for not obeying the "rules" in place in some societies. Throughout history men with "power" have expected their own promiscuity to be ignored, expected, or simply put up with... while using their power and status to get as much sex as possible.. because that's what they are naturally wired to do in the first place.
Catholics take it as far as basically worshiping one and only one woman.. who was born a virgin, and died a virgin.. the "perfect woman".. lacking the "sin" of having sex with someone she is attracted to.
What a mindfuck.
I believe this repression of natural sexuality has done little to actually further our society. I believe "monogamy as a standard" exists to placate the weak, and feeds on weak emotions like jealousy and insecurity.. it allows non-alpha men and women to have some sort of "control" over their mates, by giving them an arbitrary moral "rule" to chastise people with and discourage them from having said control.
Just a theory
I feel uncomfortable when people start bandying around terms like "weak", fucking social Darwinists... in a bit we will all be talking about the marvels of eugenics.
Poindexter
Member
Agreed. Trust can exist this way too.
Communication is key. I find expecting everyone to conform to the same rules all the time a lot like me wanting my wife to eat a burger with ketchup on it for the rest of her life just because I can't stand ketchup (disclaimer: i fucking love ketchup)
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
So jealousy and insecurity are strengths?
I see no problem with labeling them as feelings that stem from weakness, and thus are easily defined as "weak emotions."
I labeled people as "weak" because it's just the simple truth.. we are not all created and we don't all end up "equal." We have varying skill levels, strengths, and attractiveness to the opposite (or same for that matter) sex.
I don't see a lot of purpose to ignoring the basic fact that there are more and less "powerful" people on the planet.. unless your goal is to make the weak feel better about themselves. I don't see that as very practical; I don't think we should go out of our way to make them feel bad.. but I feel like modern society is moving towards people not grasping their own strengths and weaknesses, because they are brainwashed by the naive idea that all people are somehow equal, have equal opportunity, etc.
I don't think it makes society better, or the weak any more or less "happy" to play a pretend.. really all it does is raise people who are ignorant of their own lack of ability, and who will likely face greater hardship and disappointment.
And I could easily be saying all of this and believe I am one of the "weak" as well. I in fact, don't, but still..
Either way.. I have no desire to actually change society.. for more people to be less caught up in the idea of "monogamy" being a moral standard, etc. I'm fine living my life the way it is, amongst a society that sees some aspects of life quite differently than me. So don't start talking about eugenics to me.. my goal isn't to change people, it's to understand them.
Monogamy is just an extension of property rights. First agriculture happens and men start to own tracts of land, then they want to make sure that their land is passed on to their child, so they want to make sure their women are sexually exclusive to them, etc. Its an oversimplification but that seems to be one of the ways it happened. There are hunter gatherer tribes in the amazon where promiscuity is much more normal. All the sexual partners of a woman will be considered the father of her child (or something to that effect), so they all (or are expected to, atleast) help raise it.
Hmm, i went searching in my bookmark sections for a blog post i remembered from a while back, dealing with emotions.
http://danedgeofreason.blogspot.pt/2007/10/are-there-bad-emotions.html
It´s just an opinion and doesn´t directly apply to the overall theme of the thread, but as we seem to go on tangent´s throughout, i see no problem.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Because it's a preference? Why does it matter why they like it? What is inherently beneficial to having sex with multiple people over having one partner? You seem to be getting hung on the wrong thing. No one cares about people who have multiple partners, it's about people cheating on others. I'm not sure why people can't understand why cheating is a bad thing.
soul creator
Member
Yeah that's what sex at dawn proposes, which seems to be somewhat plausible. After all, sexual jealousy seems relatively useless if one is in a pre-agricultural and/or nomadic society. If there's less need to compete for resources, and paternity isn't as important (since everyone knows everyone else anyway, and the community as a whole raises children), the benefits of monogamy are lessened. Sure, jealousy may still exist, but it probably wouldn't end up forming the entire backbone of a society's family structure like it does nowadays.
Raptomex
Member
You nailed it. The real world sucks.
That might have some weight to it, but as a society we're nowhere near ready to accept widespread polygamous relationships. Suggesting otherwise is just an excuse for cheaters. There's no denying that some people can live with having an open relationship, but it definitely doesn't work for many people.
I had a bisexual GF that felt she deserved the right to have sex with chicks "on occasion" while she was dating me. I told her that I wasn't comfortable with that because I was giving all my attention to her, plus it made me feel like I wasn't satisfying her completely. Of course she denied that up and down, but she essentially wanted to have her cake and eat it too. It simply wasn't fair to me. So in my experience on this topic, I'm heartily in the group against cheating. It's a severe break in trust if it occurs and its unacceptable IMO. (In no way am I disrespecting bisexuals here. I know many, many bisexuals are in monogamous relationships. Just thought I'd share a personal story.)
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
Who said cheating wasn't a bad thing? I certainly haven't. Very few have.. in fact, I haven't seen a single person say that it isn't a bad thing.
What exactly am I "hung up on" again?
I'm having a side discussion because really a thread purely on "cheating" isn't that interesting. People talked about why people cheat.. people have also started discussing defining relationships in a way that makes "having sex with someone else" not "cheating." They are all related discussions, because they have to do with relationships, sex, sex drive, motivations for having sex, etc.
So that's 2 people who have the inability to actually explain why they desire to have exclusive "sex rights" to their partner, and instead get defensive and lash out at me.
I'd say it's surprising, but it isn't.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
And someone actually states one of the main goals of monogamy.
To feel better about yourself, by believing that you are somehow the only thing your partner "needs" or "wants"... all flying in the face of evidence that you aren't in fact all your partner needs or wants.
And her actions made it an obvious and blatant lie.
You weren't giving her everything she wanted or needed. She lied to protect your feelings of insecurity, which is only natural for most people.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Lashed out? Really? It seems you can't have a discussion without playing victim since you didn't even respond to what I said.
When did I say I desire to have exclusive "sex right"? Let me know if you actually respond to my post so there's something to discuss.
- Status