Support NeoGAF

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

You missed the point. If she was monogamous, the other males would know that its not their kid so they wouldn't worry about either helping it or killing it.

I guess, I can also see the male just consider him a bastard and abandon him...

 

[Good Job Bob]

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

One question: What is an alpha male or an alpha female?

 

[Subprime]

I guess, I can also see the male just consider him a bastard and abandon him...

The mother is doing the majority of the caretaking anyway, it probably wouldnt make much of a difference. The point is that he isn't going to harm him. Especially in bonobos, where it extremely promiscuous (even if they have a primary mating partner), I doubt there is a concept of bastard children in cultures (yes chimps/bonobos have culture, see: tool use).

 

[Deleted member 81567]

I wish I had boobs bouncing on my face right now.

 

[Subprime]

What makes an alpha male or an alpha female?

It depends on the ape/monkey. In babboons/gorillas, atleast, you become the alpha by asserting dominance over other males. In bonobo society(or whatever the correct term should be) the rank of a male is determined by his female relations, which are probably dictated by some combination of age fertility and utility.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

The mother is doing the majority of the caretaking anyway, it probably wouldnt make much of a difference. The point is that he isn't going to harm him. Especially in bonobos, where it extremely promiscuous (even if they have a primary mating partner), I doubt there is a concept of bastard children in cultures (yes chimps/bonobos have culture, see: tool use).

Yes but if their culture is different than ours it's sort of irrelevant.

 

[Good Job Bob]

It depends on the ape/monkey. In babboons/gorillas, atleast, you become the alpha by asserting dominance over other males. In bonobo society(or whatever the correct term should be) the rank of a male is determined by his female relations, which are probably dictated by some combination of age fertility and utility.

I'm referring to humans, what makes a human male/female "alpha"?

 

[Devolution]

I'm referring to humans, what makes a human male/female "alpha"?

Other than people trying to place other animal structures onto humans, nothing.

 

[Subprime]

Yes but if their culture is different than ours it's sort of irrelevant.

My original point was about the amazonian tribe that practice this. Not because the men will kill the children, but they believe that the child isn't born until all the semen from all the men forms the fetus (or something to that effect). they don't view it as a bastard child because they view it as actually their collective child.

This is seperate from polyandry where a woman marries a group of brothers, which seems to happen largely when land is fairly limited. From what I understand this is because the land is so limited that if you only gave it to one brother or split it up evenly you would probably run into some fratricide.

 

[Glorified G]

i don't cheat. i just don't commit.

i do have two married chicks in my rotation right now though (and have had girls with serious boyfriends in the lineup previously). something so exciting about going to town on a married chick. i know it's not right, but just thinking about how their hubbies/bf's don't know where they're at and what they're doing while their boobs bounce in my face just really puts me over the edge, you know what i mean? sorry hubbies and bf's

If thinking about other men gets you off while being intimate with a woman suggests you got some suppressed issues that you need to deal with.

 

[José Mourinho]

I wish I had boobs bouncing on my face right now.

Amen brother.

 

[Subprime]

If thinking about other men gets you off while being intimate with a woman suggests you got some suppressed issues that you need to deal with.

Or that he just likes being a cuckold.

 

[Laughing Banana]

I need to prepare my notebook. It seems like reasons people using to justify cheating has grown again while I'm not looking.

 

[Subprime]

Who is justifying cheating? People who cheat are asses. Theres nothing wrong with understanding why such a huge proportion of humanity is inclinded to cheat though.

 

[SMT]

According to my history/psychology professors, women are leaving their houses more often than when they did in the early to mid 1900s, and this offers them more opportunity to succumb to temptation with lust, or cheating, or rape.

The professors are women themselves, and they didn't even make the discussion awkward, I was surrounded by girls, and all of them went silent.

But if you truly love someone, I doubt you would cheat on them. There's a difference between lust and love.

I don't believe in the poppycock nonsense of love disappearing, you have to work in a relationship, just like all other aspects in life.

In a feminist class, there's the argument that if your girlfriend starts gaining weight, she will look more and more unappealing with each passing day, inclining you to cheat. The opposite situation is also true. Notice how they put the blame on the male, if he does not try to maintain his appeal. I don't agree with the latter method of justification, but that's what they profess.

Tell me if there had been any changes he can remember which could have been symptoms.

 

[akira28]

I dont know alot about her personal issues. All I know is during an argument she mentioned that she was molested as a kid. I didnt try to pry more. Is there still love? I dont know if there is love on her part. I think she is oblivious to my feelings. We really arent affectionate to each other. Besides a kiss goodbye or hello, theres nothing really there. Our lease is up at the end of June and I cant think of living with her anymore. Besides our who relationship issues, shes also a slob, bathes an average of once a week, pays virtually no bills, and frankly doesnt give a shit about anyone outside herself. We were looking for a new apartment to move to and she had the audacity to ask me how much more I was more willing to pay. She doesnt believe in saving either, so she never has any money. She quit a great job to take a 2 dollar/hour pay cut because she didnt want to talk to people on the phone.

Well...if you could do this for me. When you break up...be gentle. :/ It sounds like she's caught in a feedback loop where she has shut herself off from the world. She should definitely get therapy, and if she is, then she needs to get some more and tell her dude or chick what is going on w/ her.

But yeah you definitely need to go your own way. She needs to work on herself. She sounds depressed like hell. I guessed that she had a history. Shit is telltale. Just keep in mind she's not a bad person, no matter what. And try to let her down easy.

 

[Ashhong]

If you feel the need to worry, something is already wrong.

Do you have suspicions?

Don't really want to get into my own personal life here, but that's not what I meant. I just mean in general, or down the line. After reading all these cheating threads and divorce articles and whatnot, its hard not to be pessimistic about the future.

 

[intheinbetween]

Don't really want to get into my own personal life here, but that's not what I meant. I just mean in general, or down the line. After reading all these cheating threads and divorce articles and whatnot, its hard not to be pessimistic about the future.

don't worry dude, it's just life. shit happens, love happens, happiness happens... everything could happen, so just enjoy your life and do your best to get, keep and avoid what you want

 

[Herpes Reasons]

i don't cheat. i just don't commit.

i do have two married chicks in my rotation right now though (and have had girls with serious boyfriends in the lineup previously). something so exciting about going to town on a married chick. i know it's not right, but just thinking about how their hubbies/bf's don't know where they're at and what they're doing while their boobs bounce in my face just really puts me over the edge, you know what i mean? sorry hubbies and bf's

Hopefully karma returns the favor if you are ever married.

 

[Zaptruder]

So, given what we know so far about human sexuality, what are the odds that all humans are "naturally" polyamorous? (or, for that matter, all "naturally" monogamous?) The observed pattern would suggest that the odds are low; it is more likely that some of us are genetically predisposed to polyamory, while others are predisposed to monogamy, while still others are predisposed to some form of "serial monogamy" which falls somewhere in between the two extremes. Just as there is a wide spectrum of genetic predispositions in other areas of human sexuality, I assume there is a similarly wide spectrum of preferences in these regards.

My personal feeling is that there is as significant a social/cutural component as there is a genetic component to these feelings.

That is to say, the current dominant cultural paradigm of monogamy means that polyandry although a relatively natural, even beneficial state of affairs, is automatically, implicitly discarded.

Like it's like been a social cultural situation where homosexuality isn't even something that's on the radar of people. That the behaviour of homosexuality might still exist - but homosexual relationships occur are far lower rates then would be otherwise natural.

To put it another way... it would be nice if the social-cultural environment could allow and accomodate for the propensity for natural genetics to allow for divergent behaviour, allowing all people to be happy and comfortable in their skins, and not just those lucky enough to align to the dominant cultural paradigm.

An understanding of what is likely, what is natural allows us to better consider their harms and benefits, and allow us to design other behaviours and moral codes that allow us to more effectively curtail the harm of the behaviour, while maximizing its benefits.

 

[Kem0sabe]

That is to say, the current dominant cultural paradigm of monogamy means that polyandry although a relatively natural, even beneficial state of affairs, is automatically, implicitly discarded.

If we look at the primate order, to which humans belong, we see extreme variety in terms of mating style. Titi monkeys mate for life. Bonobos are rather promiscuous for life. They use sex as a social currency, as well as for group cohesion. Bonobos form matriarchal societies, and sex with anyone goes—including sex with the same gender and even sex with children (with some exceptions). So there’s quite a range in our primate relatives. And monogamy seems to be the minority.

But when considering animal studies, we need to be mindful of the role ecology and culture play. My “Animal Cognition” professor from college repeated several times over the course of the term that the more a species depends on extended child-care and thus learning, the more that experience will shape each individual—and the more that individual differences will abound.

Humans are a unique primate because of culture and individual differences

Humans are especially dependent upon extended child-care, learning, and culture. And we are especially diverse. So it doesn’t make sense to apply animal mating studies to humans—without taking into full account the role that culture and individual experience play.

This is why we don’t know whether monogamy or polyamory are more natural for humans. And why I argue that neither is. What a person is drawn to will be based upon their individual life experience and how they were raised. It doesn’t have to do with what’s right, moral, or even more loving.

To see how choosing one relationship style over another is one of choice, rather than one of love, let’s explore the major argument in favor of each style—and why it doesn’t hold weight in the name of “love.”

Argument for monogamy:

• Romantic love is intended to be between only two people, because when you love someone, you love only them and you devote yourself only to them as an expression of that love. Therefore, when a person is in love with someone whom they are romantically involved with, it is their moral obligation not to fall in love with or become involved with anyone else.

Major flaws in this argument:

• Love is not a moral obligation—love is a continual choice to respect and accept another person unconditionally. You love because you choose to, not because you have to. Love is a verb—whenever it becomes a feeling or a state of being, such as “in love,” it easily masks the true motivation of infatuation and codependency. Furthermore, when you really love someone, you never stop loving them, even if you are no longer in a relationship; that total respect, appreciation, and acceptance will live on.
  
• The love a person has for one person does not diminish or detract from the love they have for another; a person can love different people differently. However, it’s the way that a person expresses their love for one person that can detract from how they express their love for another (or if they even do). Love is infinite, but the physical ways in which we express love are bound by laws of nature. Thus, it is healthier for two people in a relationship to be honest about their feelings for others, if they arise, in order to strengthen the honesty and integrity of the relationship—rather than suppress their feelings from fear.
  
• Love is not a binding contract. Again, it is a choice. It healthy for two people in a relationship to negotiate their relationship needs and come to agreements about how they want to express and honor their commitment to each other. This open honesty builds trust, motivates each person to stay in the relationship because they choose to—not because they feel they have to—and it also decreases the chance that each person is staying in the relationship for codependent, rather than interdependent reasons.

Argument for polyamory:

• A person needs sexual variety to be satisfied in life. Additionally, a person needs the freedom to grow personally and spiritually—which often occurs most intensely in intimate relationships. Therefore, a person needs to be free to be emotionally and physically intimate with whoever they so please, so that they may exercise their freedom to get the most satisfaction and growth out of life.

Major flaws in this argument:

• Sexual variety is an abstract concept; it is possible for a monogamous couple to experience sexual variety to a greater extent than a polyamorous couple. In turn, a person by nature embodies variety, because they are inherently multi-dimensional with perhaps unlimited potential to explore different aspects of their self. So then, what is actually meant is that “a person needs to have sex with multiple partners, perhaps simultaneously, in order to experience sexual variety”—which is not a logical assessment.
  
• Intimate relationships are intense opportunities for personal and spiritual growth, but they are not necessary. A person can grow from virtually any experience or relationship, depending on their own commitment to growth. Growth is a personal choice that comes from within; it is not created by an external event or another person. Furthermore, intimacy with more than one partner does not ensure “greater” or “deeper” intimacy, and may be used as a codependent excuse to avoid intimacy with a primary partner.
  
• A person is free to make their own choice about how many partners they want to be involved with. But respecting your partner’s choice to pursue other relationships is a separate issue from respecting your own core needs and choices—which may be monogamous. You can respect a partner’s needs without disrespecting your own needs in the process.

This was a very good read about both sides of the issue.

 

[Subprime]

My personal feeling is that there is as significant a social/cutural component as there is a genetic component to these feelings.

That is to say, the current dominant cultural paradigm of monogamy means that polyandry although a relatively natural, even beneficial state of affairs, is automatically, implicitly discarded.

Like it's like been a social cultural situation where homosexuality isn't even something that's on the radar of people. That the behaviour of homosexuality might still exist - but homosexual relationships occur are far lower rates then would be otherwise natural.

To put it another way... it would be nice if the social-cultural environment could allow and accomodate for the propensity for natural genetics to allow for divergent behaviour, allowing all people to be happy and comfortable in their skins, and not just those lucky enough to align to the dominant cultural paradigm.

An understanding of what is likely, what is natural allows us to better consider their harms and benefits, and allow us to design other behaviours and moral codes that allow us to more effectively curtail the harm of the behaviour, while maximizing its benefits.

The thing for me, is that non monogamy (better term than polyandr/polygamy for this) has a much, much higher incidence than homosexuality. People still act on these impulses, despite being in "committed" relationships.

 

[apana]

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

The alpha male ideas have some validity no doubt but at this point it feels like people are just making shit up to fit with their own world views. The idea that alpha whatevers had less jealousy and insecurity seems pretty nuts when you go back throughout history and look at the actual types of people and specific individuals who had harems and large numbers of women.

 

[Subprime]

also: the double standard comes from harem mentalities. You see that in gorillas where the silverback has sexual exclusivity with the females in his group. Other males either have to fight him or find another group or form their own group.

 

[Solideliquid]

i don't cheat. i just don't commit.

i do have two married chicks in my rotation right now though (and have had girls with serious boyfriends in the lineup previously). something so exciting about going to town on a married chick. i know it's not right, but just thinking about how their hubbies/bf's don't know where they're at and what they're doing while their boobs bounce in my face just really puts me over the edge, you know what i mean? sorry hubbies and bf's

NeoGAF

Spoiler

DONT

Believe

 

[BrettHD]

My wife loves me, is a good cook, does laundry, watches hockey and football, makes my lunches
and coffee for my morning commute and gives incredible head at least once a week.
No fucking way I'd cheat on her.

 

[ThisWreckage]

i don't cheat. i just don't commit.

i do have two married chicks in my rotation right now though (and have had girls with serious boyfriends in the lineup previously). something so exciting about going to town on a married chick. i know it's not right, but just thinking about how their hubbies/bf's don't know where they're at and what they're doing while their boobs bounce in my face just really puts me over the edge, you know what i mean? sorry hubbies and bf's

A fool's errand, no doubt. It doesn't take much to go from tits in your face to a gun in your face given the situation you love to place yourself in.

 

[intheinbetween]

this is so scary

I swear I have better luck though I use to be really pessimistic.

I love my fiancee but last time I got dumped by my ex by phone so I'm still scared. After years I found this girl who I always liked and we started dating. A year later we started to live together, and now after two years since then I finally proposed. She was asking me to do the proposal for at least a year and I couldn't agree anymore. We are gonna get married next year and now I'm starting to fear she could dump me as it happened to me before. I know this is a different woman and we love each other but I can't help but to feel scared about what would I do if it happened again..


Well I guess reading this thread isn't helpful at all to me

 

[apana]

I don't know you and obviously everyone is going to look at this sort of thing differently, and honestly I don't know anything about anything, but this is the point where I'd be looking for the emergency exit. I'd say this to anyone, whether they were a man or a woman who had this happen to them. What happened to you just seems too casual and cruel. Besides you look young and have a whole life ahead of you to find other people.

 

[diddles]

i think a lot of you take this stuff a little too seriously. expecting this strict loyalty is setting yourselves up, realistically, for a big fall. i understand the idealist fantasy of wanting a person all to yourself. i had it when i was younger. i was so ridiculous that i would get mad about my gf's boyfriend that she had years before we even met. but building this up in your head just leads to more heartache when, in many cases, it won't work out that way.

i'd rather acknowledge the fact that people are often attracted to more than one single person. while i prefer my woman to be mostly about me, and honest about things, something like a bj before we were even engaged isn't going to ruin my life. this guy's fiance admitted her mistake, promised she won't do it again, and i think they'll both be stronger if they move forward.

 

[Stet]

i think a lot of you take this stuff a little too seriously. expecting this strict loyalty is setting yourselves up, realistically, for a big fall. i understand the idealist fantasy of wanting a person all to yourself. i had it when i was younger. i was so ridiculous that i would get mad about my gf's boyfriend that she had years before we even met. but building this up in your head just leads to more heartache when, in many cases, it won't work out that way.

i'd rather acknowledge the fact that people are often attracted to more than one single person. while i prefer my woman to be mostly about me, and honest about things, something like a bj before we were even engaged isn't going to ruin my life. this guy's fiance admitted her mistake, promised she won't do it again, and i think they'll both be stronger if they move forward.

Before you take any advice from this clown, recall that he enjoys fucking over other guys. No reason to think he wouldn't be trying to fuck you over either.

 

[ThisWreckage]

Once you have forgiven a cheater you have given them carte blanche to do the deed again and again. You have established that your self esteem is non existent.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

i think a lot of you take this stuff a little too seriously. expecting this strict loyalty is setting yourselves up, realistically, for a big fall. i understand the idealist fantasy of wanting a person all to yourself. i had it when i was younger. i was so ridiculous that i would get mad about my gf's boyfriend that she had years before we even met. but building this up in your head just leads to more heartache when, in many cases, it won't work out that way.

i'd rather acknowledge the fact that people are often attracted to more than one single person. while i prefer my woman to be mostly about me, and honest about things, something like a bj before we were even engaged isn't going to ruin my life. this guy's fiance admitted her mistake, promised she won't do it again, and i think they'll both be stronger if they move forward.

• You can't equate your immature jealousy regarding your partners past sex life with an expectation of your girlfriend not to cheat on you
• Everyone is free to define the limits and boundaries of their relationship in any way they wish, what is and isn't okay when it comes to relationships with others than your partner. This fella clearly isn't okay with his girlfriend having sexual relations with anyone but him.
• "Before we were even engaged" suggests that relationships depend on their level of official commitment, which might be true in your case but isn't necessarily the case for others who don't base their relationships on such things.

 

[Onemic]

i don't cheat. i just don't commit.

i do have two married chicks in my rotation right now though (and have had girls with serious boyfriends in the lineup previously). something so exciting about going to town on a married chick. i know it's not right, but just thinking about how their hubbies/bf's don't know where they're at and what they're doing while their boobs bounce in my face just really puts me over the edge, you know what i mean? sorry hubbies and bf's

You are a piece of shit.

 

[Subprime]

You are a piece of shit.

Aren't the women who are cheating on their husbands being the pieces of shit in this situation? If it wasn't him it would be someone else. He's just filling the role of walking dildo for those nights.

 

[diddles]

Aren't the women who are cheating on their husbands being the pieces of shit in this situation? If it wasn't him it would be someone else. He's just filling the role of walking dildo for those nights.

exactly. it's possible that i'm providing a service to them even. there are couples that heal through these things.

 

[xxracerxx]

If all it takes is being alone with someone and getting horny then there are going to be problems for him.

It is like a porn setup.

 

[blackwatchplad]

Has happened to me twice.
First time was for 2 or 3 years with a best friend
ended up permanently losing that friend.
He freaked about almost getting caught, and drove off like an idiot and wrecked.

second time i just don't know.. ended up losing interest in me months before coming out with it.

I wouldn't say it would be past me to try to fix things.. maybe.. but I've never been given the chance.
I'm not sure on every reason to cheat, but a huge sense of entitlement and people just growing tired of me has screwed me over and over.

 

[BrettHD]

You are a piece of shit.

Absolutely correct. He is willingly helping to ruin other peoples
relationships.
It goes back to our "I'm not responsible for my actions" society we
live in now.

 

[Devolution]

Aren't the women who are cheating on their husbands being the pieces of shit in this situation? If it wasn't him it would be someone else. He's just filling the role of walking dildo for those nights.

He's not worse than the women but someone willing to screw people they know are married cannot claim any moral highground.

 

[Stet]

He's not worse than the women but someone willing to screw people they know are married cannot claim any moral highground.

And to go so far as to say that the fact that they're married is a BENEFIT. SMH.

 

[Devolution]

And to go so far as to say that the fact that they're married is a BENEFIT. SMH.

He doesn't have to worry about them clinging to him! They just go back to their naive husbands while he chuckles away.

 

[BrettHD]

lol

Thats how I got through my last marriage after she cheated on me before we married.
I thought she was sorry at one point but it was an act.
After that I just used her for what she was good for until the end.

 

[Good Job Bob]

Thats how I got through my last marriage after she cheated on me before we married.
I thought she was sorry at one point but it was an act.
After that I just used her for what she was good for until the end.

 

[mickcenary]

Cheating, hey? I understand the motives completely, but I abide by the doctrine that if you want to cheat/sleep around/see other people, be a fucking DECENT PERSON and tell your SO how you feel; be strong in your decisions and your convictions.

Breaking up isn't easy, but it's always the right thing to do if there's significant doubt. When it comes down to it, you have to respect someone for breaking up with you, even if it hurts like all hell.

 

[roodiculous]

The whole incident is pretty unforgivable. Hate to be in that situation.

 

[Ezalc]

Cheating wasn't "rampant" decades ago because women barely had any rights so if a man had another woman it was just a normal thing. Many men had mistresses or something along those lines and nobody said anything because it was expected of them. Since that has changed now you hear more about cheating and promiscuity, when in reality it was always happening just as much if not more than it is now.

Never been cheated on but the way I see it is that the person doing the cheating is either too selfish and wants too much or too much of a coward to end a relationship they aren't satisfied with. Of course there might be a lot of other circumstances but I think these two would be the most common reasons.

I have a question for GAF though, how do you feel if you're the person trying to get somebody to cheat? How would you justify that?

 

[Bay Maximus]

I have a question for GAF though, how do you feel if you're the person trying to get somebody to cheat? How would you justify that?

They are in the relationship therefore the onus of fidelity falls on them.

 

[Ezalc]

They are in the relationship therefore the onus of fidelity falls on them.

If you knew that the girl/guy you're hitting on is in a relationship would you still go for it if they're flirting back?

 

[Bay Maximus]

If you knew that the girl/guy you're hitting on is in a relationship would you still go for it if they're flirting back?

That depends on a multitude of things. In general? No. Would I ever? Sure.