Is It Wrong?

[Willie Boy]

Nobody wants to blame the "other" alone in a cheating situation, or at least that's not what I'm trying to get across. What I'm saying is that the "other" is far from completely innocent, as they're helping the cheating spouse commit something that will hurt someone. It all comes down to this: you are helping someone cause pain to someone else, because you benefit from the situation.

That is the heart of the issue. A person can not hide from this simply by refusing to believe this. The point is even though the guy "wants" to cheat, he wouldn't be able to if he didn't find someone to cheat with. You can claim "well, he would have found someone else even if I said no", and maybe he would have. But then that other one would be jointly responsible instead of you. Or if everyone was willing to see the truth, maybe cheating could be eliminated. I know, it sounds impossible and it is. But only because there are assholes who enable other to cheat by willingly participating in their act, refusing to accept any responsibility for proliferating the act of cheating, they have to find a way to keep their little pleasure somehow, its not like there are enough single people out there to satisfy them.

 

[Lefty]

Since passing judgment rather than sharing points of view is where this
thread went, let us go hypothetical.

A & B............A is not interested in sex but loves hearth and home. B loves
hearth and home and sex. B has had a vasectomy.

C & D...........C is a woman with drives, loves hearth and home too. D is
unable to perform conjugal relations anymore.

A & C have been friends for years and years, did the best girlfriends thing,
did the best girlfriends with kids and still are like sisters.

B & D get along good and the 4 dine, party, vacation, do a lot together.
A & D are happy and all for the B & C thing but hearth and home does and
will be what holds all four together.

What is wrong? Is anything wrong?

 

[yummylongsword]

Since passing judgment rather than sharing points of view is where this
thread went, let us go hypothetical.

A & B............A is not interested in sex but loves hearth and home. B loves
hearth and home and sex. B has had a vasectomy.

C & D...........C is a woman with drives, loves hearth and home too. D is
unable to perform conjugal relations anymore.

A & C have been friends for years and years, did the best girlfriends thing,
did the best girlfriends with kids and still are like sisters.

B & D get along good and the 4 dine, party, vacation, do a lot together.
A & D are happy and all for the B & C thing but hearth and home does and
will be what holds all four together.

What is wrong? Is anything wrong?

Open relationships and mutual agreements are something completely different than cheating on someone. No, there's nothing wrong with that arrangement, because all parties are aware of what is going on and they have all agreed to it... but that has nothing to do with what we've been debating.

 

[easyroad]

Since passing judgment rather than sharing points of view is where this
thread went, let us go hypothetical.

A & B............A is not interested in sex but loves hearth and home. B loves
hearth and home and sex. B has had a vasectomy.

C & D...........C is a woman with drives, loves hearth and home too. D is
unable to perform conjugal relations anymore.

A & C have been friends for years and years, did the best girlfriends thing,
did the best girlfriends with kids and still are like sisters.

B & D get along good and the 4 dine, party, vacation, do a lot together.
A & D are happy and all for the B & C thing but hearth and home does and
will be what holds all four together.

What is wrong? Is anything wrong?

Why are you derailing the discussion? Instead of being passive-aggressive and going off on a tangent, why don't you elaborate on what's bothering you?

 

[Willie Boy]

Why are you derailing the discussion? Instead of being passive-aggressive and going on a tangent, why don't you elaborate on what's bothering you?

Because he's a foolish troll that enjoys attempting to derail threads. He's best "left" on one's ignore list.

 

[Lefty]

I'll be damned Easy,

I thought mine was an attempt to get the thread back on track. But if you

feel that way and willy boy is trolling again, I guess the issue is moot and I

will just ignore it and him. Cheaters never prosper.

 

[yummylongsword]

I would feel obligated to help (or try) based on the threat of harm and loss of possession and then on the basis that i am a bystander, i'm there, even if the person is a stranger, they shouldn't be ignored (in that circumstance)

Your analogy fails, i'm sorry. Clearly if i'm the 'crowbar' in this analogy then i am not merely complicit in the act that is taking place, i am absolutely equal in it, i.e. i would obviously have no reason whatsoever to feel any need to protect the victim. To be anything else could be portrayed as follows:- me and my mates decide to rob a bank, i am the gettaway driver, whilst my mates are in the bank, i phone the police.

There is no logic in that, i would have no incentive to do such a thing. As the crowbar, my responsibility would be entirely to the mugger and none at all for the victim, which ironically means my view makes perfect sense.

You are using the view that i 'should' feel responsibility and then using an analogy where i obviously have no responsibility (except to the mugger) to argue why the view that i take is wrong when actually that analogy proves MY point. I have no responsibility to those who are strangers, neither does anyone else. Sometimes i can help a stranger to no benefit whatsoever as in the case of a mugging victim and in some cases my own enjoyment of life can cause pain to others. I wouldn't be intending that pain, that pain stems from the breach in trust between the cheated and the cheat.

Okay... you obviously have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, and your response makes no sense. You are not the crowbar in this analogy, you're the one GIVING him the crowbar. What are you going on about your "responsibility to the mugger?" And you contradict yourself in the same paragraph...

I have no responsibility to those who are strangers, neither does anyone else. Sometimes i can help a stranger to no benefit whatsoever as in the case of a mugging victim

You have no responsibility to strangers, except when you have the responsibility to help a stranger when they're being mugged. What??

Its not immoral not to try and stop pain from happening, i don't argue that those things which i would do based on whatever reason means that anyone elses differing action is therefore immoral. That was an assumption based on how you obviously view things.

Well that is not my experience, and i have the experience.
When i was the 'other', i met a guy a few years older than me, i liked him, i fell for him, i was seduced by him, i lost my virginity to him and i fell in love with him.
I met his partner and felt guilty, up until the point where he tried to have a go too, i wasn't interested and my guilt dissappeared.
Now, i don't know how much the cheated man loved the cheat, but what i did know was that a) the hurt was going to come one way or another because the cheat clearly didn't love him equally, otherwise he wouldn't be cheating, and b) my love for the cheat was great. I bring you back to the gun weilding mugger analogy i mentioned, the pain to me by ending the relationship to protect the cheated partner was a risk outweighing the pain of the cheated partner losing out on a guy who clearly didn't feel the same.

In the end, it was me that got hurt anyway, the cheat called things off because i fell in love and it turns out he was just looking for sex, a lesson i have learnt about the risks of getting involved to begin with and it hasn't helped in opening up to trust other guys easily.
Shortly afterwards he split with his partner, he said he would, and then came back into my life. At this point however, i declined to get involved again, i hadn't picked myself up from the damage that the pain i suffered caused.

At the beginning, you were not in love with him. You went into it knowing the pain that it could cause (although probably unaware that you would be the one experiencing pain, too). Your pain is ENTIRELY your fault, and the pain of the person that you helped this guy cheat in is caused by both of you. I have no sympathy. You did something stupid and immoral and you got hurt in the end, but it still hasn't taught you that you probably shouldn't have done it in the first place and you continue to defend yourself. You'd do better to admit your mistake rather than trying to justify it wrongly.

You may say it serves myself right, but i wasn't exactly a great example of the callous attitude in a 3rd party which your quote depicts, makes me (or any other 'other') worthy of blame. I was just living my life taking care of my responsibilities, and my responsibilities do not extend to protecting strangers from heartache that is inevitable from a person who doesn't love and respect them.
I'd never cheat, so clearly i have good morals, just not as good in the minds who take the opposing viewpoint to me in regards to the 3rd party involvement.

No, you clearly don't have good morals. Morals are rarely clear. It comes down to this, and I'll make this clear for the last time.

You choose to help someone hurt someone else so that you would benefit, and the cost of NOT doing that would have been negligible to zero at the beginning.


Whether you're driving the getaway van for a mugger and then splitting the cash that has been taken from the victim, or driving it into some guy's ass and then splitting the love that has been taken from their spouse, you're HELPING SOMEONE DO SOMETHING BAD TO SOMEONE ELSE. I don't understand how this can be any less clear. When you made the decision to enter the affair, you were not in love with him and there were literally millions of other people you could have chosen to have sex with. But you chose him, and that was selfish and immoral.

I'm sorry, I'm not usually this judgmental... it's just that this is a rare case of ethics in which the "right" choice is obviously clear, and it would appear that even you realize that what you did was wrong, but you just won't admit it.

 

[yummylongsword]

P.S. I understand the desire someone has to cheat, or be with someone who's cheating. It's not like I consider them scourge of the Earth, I just hope the don't trick themselves into thinking they weren't in the wrong for doing what they did. They're probably basically good people when it comes down to it.

 

[eddiefromnc]

Is it wrong? I am sure everyone on this thread will say it is. We need to examine the reasons a guy would cheat on his significant other whether it be a male or female. Sometimes we feel rejected by our mate and feel we have to look outside our mate for companionship. Sometime the magnetic attraction for man on man sex can no longer be denied. Either way we look outside the marraige for that physical relationship we all need and deserve. Is it any more wrong to reamain in a sexless and loveless situation than it is to stray? In a perfect world it would be easy to just say "you stay right where you are and everything will be fine." This, however, is not the case in most situations. I will admit I have strayed but this does not mean I am particularly proud of it nor does it mean that I no longer love her. I did have some beautiful and awesome man on man sex however. For me it was the strong attracion of men as well as the fact I lost a lot of physical attraction to my wife. I was never to the point that I wanted to leave her, however. I had a lot of guilt after each episode and it took some time for me to justify my straying. I would like to hear form other guys that strayed and compare thier situations with mne.

 

[stevexxx]

let me ask you all this question then if you say it's perfectly fine to fool around with a married dude. Would you tell your best friend that his or her significant other is cheating on him or her.

 

[easyroad]

I promised myself I not to get back to this thread, but there are things I can't let go...

The analogy is an emotive one, certainly encourages thinking, but its not a fair analogy.
It fails by likening an affair to an actual crime, one that portrays (intended or not) the 3rd party to be an immoral and malicious persona.

But it comes back to what I said about respect to the concept of marriage. To those who do respect it, an affair is a breach of contract, therefore a "crime". And those who commit a crime are immoral. So it's only wrong according to your morals which, as this thread shows, are not shared by most of us.

You are arguing that a 3rd party is helping a cheat to do so, and therefore that i am responsible for the hurt that comes of the act.

I could argue in counter that, a 3rd party is not 'intending' to help a cheat cause someone pain, its an unfortunate consequence of a failed/ing relationship and that the pain is likely to happen inevitably anyway, affair or none.

I'm sorry but this is bullshit.

First of all, from the moment you know* this person is in a relationship with someone else, you can't be oblivious to the fact that the other person would get hurt - unless you're incredibly self-centered.

Second of all, every relationship can be repaired at any time with effort from both sides. If there's a will there's a way. However, as (again) shown by this thread, cheating is a point of no return for most people. If you sleep with this person knowing he's in a relationship, you're breaking it beyond repair (sure there are ~exceptions~ but I'm not talking about those).

Also: who are you to say that it's a "failed/ing relationship"? Who are you to say that "the pain is going to happen inevitably anyway"? And yet you don't want to be interpreted as malicious?

***

*(Worth noting: if you didn't know he was in a relationship before sleeping with him, you have no blame at all. The cheater, however, is the scum of the Earth)

 

[JNewYork]

Yes, it's absolutely wrong.

I don' t know how guys who marry women deal with the duplicity and the guilt. (I'm guessing with them there is no or little guilt.)

On the other hand--and I'm not giving them a free pass--when a man is bisexual, or if he's gotten into marrying a woman to "do the right thing" and tried to be straight, his real sexuality is eventually going to pull him to men.

And to expect him to go his life without that getting off is unrealistic.

I suppose, though, in that case, the thing to do is talk to his wife about his needs and if it means divorce then so be it.

I don't envy guys and their wives or girlfriends in that position. It sucks for everybody.

The truth will set you free.

 

[bulge]

It is totally abnormal, immoral and unnatural to limit a guy to one sex. It is downright castration. So, it could NEVER WHATSOEVER be wrong to have a wife and to go DL for the rest. Besides, that's what men have done all history long.

 

[easyroad]

It is totally abnormal, immoral and unnatural to limit a guy to one sex. It is downright castration. So, it could NEVER WHATSOEVER be wrong to have a wife and to go DL for the rest. Besides, that's what men have done all history long.

This thought is what gives bisexuals a bad name.

Also, if you have to go "down low" and not tell the truth to your wife, you're not only immoral but a coward as well. Don't want to stick to one sex? Don't get married!

 

[JNewYork]

It is totally abnormal, immoral and unnatural to limit a guy to one sex. It is downright castration. So, it could NEVER WHATSOEVER be wrong to have a wife and to go DL for the rest. Besides, that's what men have done all history long.

Can you find a wife to agree with it being "right"?

And the whole "DL" thing or "Down Low" is just a macho way of saying "being a sneak" or "being unfaithful."

 

[Atzesp]

I think we all are missing a point here... I've read everything till now and it seemed to me that most of the time the people's intention was to blame the third part as the guilty one, instead of the cheater... Nothing more on this issue, it was only a commentary.

But going back to the point: I have a friend of mine, married, who happens to "date" a guy, also married. Both of them told me that the marriage was not that good, that their wives had become uninterested on them - one right after the second child was born, another one after the 2 first years of marriage came to terms. I once asked them - BOTH of them - the question that many of you have made here: "Why don't you divorce to be with each other?".

And the answer was: "We have our kids. We can't stand being far from them, despite the fact that their lifestyle would have a massive change. We don't want that for them."

What about this point? Hasn't anybody here considered the possibility that a man, sometimes, DO IS unhappy in his marriage, but doesn't have the guts to divorce in order to keep close to his children and provide them the best?

 

[Female]

Tell her you want to cheat with a guy, see what she thinks she could be open-minded. If you anticipate she'd be upset over that type of thing, tell her still. She might b able to make a compromise with you.

If I was your wife I would only ask that you video it and let me watch later or at least verbalize what you did with him in bed with me later...

 

[easyroad]

I think we all are missing a point here... I've read everything till now and it seemed to me that most of the time the people's intention was to blame the third part as the guilty one, instead of the cheater... Nothing more on this issue, it was only a commentary.

False.

But going back to the point: I have a friend of mine, married, who happens to "date" a guy, also married. Both of them told me that the marriage was not that good, that their wives had become uninterested on them - one right after the second child was born, another one after the 2 first years of marriage came to terms. I once asked them - BOTH of them - the question that many of you have made here: "Why don't you divorce to be with each other?".

And the answer was: "We have our kids. We can't stand being far from them, despite the fact that their lifestyle would have a massive change. We don't want that for them."

What about this point? Hasn't anybody here considered the possibility that a man, sometimes, DO IS unhappy in his marriage, but doesn't have the guts to divorce in order to keep close to his children and provide them the best?

So what?

They are lying to their wives and they don't have the guts to tell the truth. Having children doesn't make it right.

 

[planetfun]

As someone who has cheated with both women and men it is not OK to cheat. If you want to come out and feel you are the swinging type then you need to let the person who you are involved with know your feelings. It is the only decent thing to do.

 

[bulge]

Can you find a wife to agree with it being "right"?

And the whole "DL" thing or "Down Low" is just a macho way of saying "being a sneak" or "being unfaithful."

The wife is a too easy alibi to castrate guys.