| Love is built upon trust and respect, is the common belief. But what exactly are we trusting the other person with? Years of relationship collapses for one night of misfortune or only because your partner found emotional connection with someone else. Is love a kind of ownership or entitlement? You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. Maybe it's love that is in the wrong and not cheating... |
TiaDee said: The fact that you weren't man/woman enough to come to me and tell me there's a problem and instead chose to jump the first stranger you saw -.- It's called a relationship because communication and trust. Why must lust be a problem? It's a fact that we don't stop finding attractive people attractive nor do we stop fantasying about other people. And none of that has any bearing on 'trust' or communication. The reason why partners don't communicate this is because of the stigma. A partner knows that if he conveys so much as 'I find that girl attractive' he's in deep trouble. So why would he?? |
| It's a reproduction issue : Unlike women, men can't be sure the child is their own .. So social rules were created for men to be sure of this. In our today societies, this principle goes to both persons because equality bitch ! Well, in most societies, that is. |
 |
| If you honestly have to ask yourself that question I hope to god you're not in a relationship with anyone ever. |
 |
| in an exclusive relationship you typically want to be enough to satisfy your partner, if they feel the need to get that satisfaction from someone else it's implying that you are not enough for them maybe you aren't, it happens, not everyone is meant to be with each other forever - but to go behind the person's back for that satisfaction is scummy then we have all of the more in-depth things to consider such as possible children, joint assets & finances, etc. that this person is willing to put at risk for this you also aren't expected to stop finding people attractive, you're just expected to not act on it if you agreed to an exclusive relationship instead of simply doing it anyways there are open relationships if it bothers you that much |
Nyarlathothep said: It's a reproduction issue : Unlike women, men can't be sure the child is their own .. So social rules were created for men to be sure of this. In our today societies, this principle goes to both persons because equality bitch ! Well, in most societies, that is. Birth control exists now. I don't think there's any more need of this stigma as long as side flicks don't lead to reproduction. TiaDee said: Trance said: Why must lust be a problem? It's a fact that we don't stop finding attractive people attractive nor do we stop fantasying about other people. And none of that has any bearing on 'trust' or communication. The reason why partners don't communicate this is because of the stigma. A partner knows that if he conveys so much as 'I find that girl attractive' he's in deep trouble. So why would he?? Lust isn't, being dishonest is. Come on now! Imo, if you don't communicate with your partner and then complain that 'the sparkle is gone' it's pretty much your fault and you're a coward. Because you're in a relationship with that person, not society. This isn't even dishonesty. If you know your parents are going to thrash you for your results, you simply hide it away. That's what this is like. That 'sparkle' going away is an inevitable fact. Why would it even be registered as a complaint? People don't look for affairs only because their 'sparkle' worn off. If that were the reason, then love exists only for the first 2-3 years and after that it's imprisonment. |
amathy said: in an exclusive relationship you typically want to be enough to satisfy your partner, if they feel the need to get that satisfaction from someone else it's implying that you are not enough for them maybe you aren't, it happens, not everyone is meant to be with each other forever - but to go behind the person's back for that satisfaction is scummy then we have all of the more in-depth things to consider such as possible children, joint assets & finances, etc. that this person is willing to put at risk for this you also aren't expected to stop finding people attractive, you're just expected to not act on it if you agreed to an exclusive relationship instead of simply doing it anyways there are open relationships if it bothers you that much Just because there are better countries doesn't mean I should stop criticizing the bad ones. My problem is obviously with exclusive relationships. It begins with the erroneous assumption that one can be enough for someone else. And then it builds an entire system upon it (=marriage) haughtily. How can you even tolerate this nonsense? Joint assets and finances matter in exclusive relationships only and that's exactly what I'm debunking here. Zazie122 said: If you honestly have to ask yourself that question I hope to god you're not in a relationship with anyone ever. Plot twists happen and I end up in a relationship with you. How about that, eh? |
TiaDee said: This ain't your parents, it's not the same, you're not on equal groups with your parents (nor should you be), but are supposed to be with your partner. Also, writes 'not dishonesty' and then 'hide', gg Trance. Look man, it's obvious you've got your mind set on the cheating stuff and don't actually wish to debate this topic so I'm out of here (remember what I told you that I'm too old for pissing contests? Still stands true) and tbh I couldn't care less about your love life or how you treat your partners, you do you. I'm off to watch some Chinese cartoons. Hiding =/= Dishonesty. Dunno where you get that. And please, in the current setup of relationships, both partners assume authority over one another (in some aspects) which makes the parents analogy valid. I'm disappointed in you. Apparently, you're too old to even think. |
Trance said: Just because there are better countries doesn't mean I should stop criticizing the bad ones. My problem is obviously with exclusive relationships. It begins with the erroneous assumption that one can be enough for someone else. And then it builds an entire system upon it (=marriage) haughtily. How can you even tolerate this nonsense? Joint assets and finances matter in exclusive relationships only and that's exactly what I'm debunking here. why do you say it's an erroneous assumption? because people are capable of being satisfied living with a single partner. it's actually not even debatable, it's observably true. unless you want to claim that every old couple that has been married for 60+ years doesn't exist or that they've never been satisfied with their choice which is nonsensical. you're not debunking anything lol, you're asking why it's not acceptable to agree to something and then break that agreement. you don't have to like exclusive relationships, you're not being forced to engage in them unless you're in a country with arranged marriages but at that point you should be arguing against arranged marriages. |
amathy said: Trance said: Just because there are better countries doesn't mean I should stop criticizing the bad ones. My problem is obviously with exclusive relationships. It begins with the erroneous assumption that one can be enough for someone else. And then it builds an entire system upon it (=marriage) haughtily. How can you even tolerate this nonsense? Joint assets and finances matter in exclusive relationships only and that's exactly what I'm debunking here. why do you say it's an erroneous assumption? because people are capable of being satisfied living with a single partner. it's actually not even debatable, it's observably true. unless you want to claim that every old couple that has been married for 60+ years doesn't exist or that they've never been satisfied with their choice which is nonsensical. you're not debunking anything lol, you're asking why it's not acceptable to agree to something and then break that agreement. you don't have to like exclusive relationships, you're not being forced to engage in them unless you're in a country with arranged marriages but at that point you should be arguing against arranged marriages. People learn to be satisfied with themselves instead of with their partners. That's how long relationships last. It's biologically impossible that you forever find your partner as sexually charming as on your first day (and remember, that first charm is our basis of deciding whether we should begin a relationship or not). Way to misconstrue. I'm targeting the very basis of the idea of 'exclusive relationships'. The idea which makes love itself a sort of imprisonment. I'm asking 'why the hell do we even agree to something like this?'. Refer back to OP: You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. If this is the agreement I'm going to break, I'd do so gladly. |
Trance said: You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. Maybe it's love that is in the wrong and not cheating... Assuming an affectionate relationship is "prison" as your definition suggests, the thing that would make cheating wrong in this case is the fact that the other person would still be committed to you due to their ignorance to your new found desires and change in decision. You can't run from a situation you had created yourself and expect others to be okay with it , the world doesn't work that way. OT: It's wrong because of commitment imo. Letting your partner know the new shift in your decision regarding the relationship failure is the least you can do in exchange of having your new desired partner, regardless of the result, be it stigma or a law case. |
VenomousAug 28, 2016 4:10 AM
 |
Trance said: People learn to be satisfied with themselves instead of with their partners. That's how long relationships last. It's biologically impossible that you forever find your partner as sexually charming as on your first day (and remember, that first charm is our basis of deciding whether we should begin a relationship or not). Way to misconstrue. I'm targeting the very basis of the idea of 'exclusive relationships'. The idea which makes love itself a sort of imprisonment. I'm asking 'why the hell do we even agree to something like this?'. Refer back to OP: You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. If this is the agreement I'm going to break, I'd do so gladly. if the only reason you're in that relationship is because of how physically attractive you find your partner you should not be in that relationship if you feel like your relationship is imprisonment you should not be in that relationship this is really coming off as someone that's trying to justify why they've never been in a relationship |
amathy said: Trance said: People learn to be satisfied with themselves instead of with their partners. That's how long relationships last. It's biologically impossible that you forever find your partner as sexually charming as on your first day (and remember, that first charm is our basis of deciding whether we should begin a relationship or not). Way to misconstrue. I'm targeting the very basis of the idea of 'exclusive relationships'. The idea which makes love itself a sort of imprisonment. I'm asking 'why the hell do we even agree to something like this?'. Refer back to OP: You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. If this is the agreement I'm going to break, I'd do so gladly. if the only reason you're in that relationship is because of how physically attractive you find your partner you should not be in that relationship if you feel like your relationship is imprisonment you should not be in that relationship this is really coming off as someone that's trying to justify why they've never been in a relationship If you missed the point: I was targeting your idea of 'finding someone who is enough for you'. The word 'enough' simply doesn't belong here. You find someone who doesn't hinder your self-development, that's the way to a healthy life. Relationships, by present standards, are imprisonment by default. Don't make me repeat myself here. Venomous said: Trance said: You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. Maybe it's love that is in the wrong and not cheating... Assuming an affectionate relationship is "prison" as your definition suggests, the thing that would make cheating wrong in this case is the fact that the other person would still be committed to you due to their ignorance to your new found desires and change in decision. You can't run from a situation you had created yourself and expect others to be okay with it , the world doesn't work that way. OT: It's wrong because of commitment imo. Letting your partner know the new shift in your decision regarding the relationship failure is the least you can do in exchange of having your new desired partner, regardless of the result, be it stigma or a law case. The problem is that why should I expect a breakup just because I felt attracted to someone else for a few days? Love is a friendship isn't it? On what basis are we breaking this friendship? that I shared my body with someone else? Well, I could come home tonight and share it with you again. What's the matter? |
| Because they are based on religion. And like it or not, believe in religion or not, humanity's sense of morality is based on them. To question why adultery is bad is the same as to question why theft, and disrepecting your parents are as well. It has been ingrained in our society to believe in their wrongness. |
| I don't feel like I even know myself anymore, nor have coherent views on this; though I agree with a lot of the op (especially love being a kind of friendship). If my partner would come back to me explaining a time of passion that she took and what thrilling feelings it gave her, but for reasons she comes back, wants to make me feel good then I'd happily communicate that with her. Seeing the passion and thrill it gave her I feel like I'd love to see the improvement it gives to her knowing I'm happy with it. Almost like the next morning we'd understand each other and she'd be "glowing" around the house making me breakfast and what not haha. I see it the same way as me just randomly going sky diving after work then coming home and her being interested and happy at what thrilling thing I'd just indulged in. |
Trance said: I'm a guy and I can imagine buttfucking another guy. I don't find the thought repulsive, and I can even imagine kissing another man. |
Trance said: Years of relationship collapses for one night of misfortune or only because your partner found emotional connection with someone else. Is love a kind of ownership or entitlement? Well I mean if we presume it's a monogamous relationship, it's hardly a surprise, right? Such relationships are built on a mutual understanding; an agreement that both parties are faithful. This is how functioning societies work. I think what you're trying to say is that our biological drive to stick our dick in literally anything in sight is "superior" to this agreement. Which is your prerogative. You could reach into the void and throw every classic argument against the wall against it and I doubt you'd come out ahead. It's like monkeys slinging shit at each other. I have no patience for cheaters, though. |
Trance said: amathy said: if the only reason you're in that relationship is because of how physically attractive you find your partner you should not be in that relationship if you feel like your relationship is imprisonment you should not be in that relationship this is really coming off as someone that's trying to justify why they've never been in a relationship If you missed the point: I was targeting your idea of 'finding someone who is enough for you'. The word 'enough' simply doesn't belong here. You find someone who doesn't hinder your self-development, that's the way to a healthy life. Relationships, by present standards, are imprisonment by default. Don't make me repeat myself here. Venomous said: Assuming an affectionate relationship is "prison" as your definition suggests, the thing that would make cheating wrong in this case is the fact that the other person would still be committed to you due to their ignorance to your new found desires and change in decision. You can't run from a situation you had created yourself and expect others to be okay with it , the world doesn't work that way. OT: It's wrong because of commitment imo. Letting your partner know the new shift in your decision regarding the relationship failure is the least you can do in exchange of having your new desired partner, regardless of the result, be it stigma or a law case. The problem is that why should I expect a breakup just because I felt attracted to someone else for a few days? Love is a friendship isn't it? On what basis are we breaking this friendship? that I shared my body with someone else? Well, I could come home tonight and share it with you again. What's the matter? Never that. Your partner should be mature enough to know that there has to be someone who is physically more attractive to you than them, the problem is when you use that as an excuse to do something without informing them with honesty Not quite, or at least not imo. Love is whatever you make it to be, if you think the bound between your parter and yourself is "friendship" then your partner has to share this interpretation of what is between you both in order for you to apply this logic. If they dont share it(which is probably the case) then that simply makes your relationship a fat piece of misunderstanding, and this misunderstanding is what causes the problem. your prespective isn't the only one that matters, theirs is just as relevant to your decisions (or at least relationship wise) thus it's always better to talk and make your view point clear, and whether your "lover" has accepted it or kot, you have done your part of the equation. |
|
Latent said: Trance said: Years of relationship collapses for one night of misfortune or only because your partner found emotional connection with someone else. Is love a kind of ownership or entitlement? Well I mean if we presume it's a monogamous relationship, it's hardly a surprise, right? Such relationships are built on a mutual understanding; an agreement that both parties are faithful. This is how functioning societies work. I think what you're trying to say is that our biological drive to stick our dick in literally anything in sight is "superior" to this agreement. Which is your prerogative. You could reach into the void and throw every classic argument against the wall against it and I doubt you'd come out ahead. It's like monkeys slinging shit at each other. I have no patience for cheaters, though. If you, like many others, missed the very obvious point then here let me reiterate: The target here is monogamy or rather the idea upon which it is based. Good luck with re-reading. Venomous said: Never that. Your partner should be mature enough to know that there has to be someone who is physically more attractive to you than them, the problem is when you use that as an excuse to do something without informing them with honesty Not quite, or at least not imo. Love is whatever you make it to be, if you think the bound between your parter and yourself is "friendship" then your partner has to share this interpretation of what is between you both in order for you to apply this logic. If they dont share it(which is probably the case) then that simply makes your relationship a fat piece of misunderstanding, and this misunderstanding is what causes the problem. your prespective isn't the only one that matters, theirs is just as relevant to your decisions (or at least relationship wise) thus it's always better to talk and make your view point clear, and whether your "lover" has accepted it or kot, you have done your part of the equation. That of course is the case in reality. But the differing notions of love are being targeted here. If my partner believes that our friendship fades just because of one mischievous night, then her belief is utterly wrong. |
Trance said: If you missed the point: I was targeting your idea of 'finding someone who is enough for you'. The word 'enough' simply doesn't belong here. You find someone who doesn't hinder your self-development, that's the way to a healthy life. Relationships, by present standards, are imprisonment by default. Don't make me repeat myself here. except the word 'enough' does belong here. you do not require multiple partners at once for the sake of personal development. you might need to date multiple people before you realize what you want in a partner and what you want out of your relationships, but it's not a requirement and you do not need it all at once. monogamous relationships and personal development are not mutually exclusive concepts. you can repeat yourself all you want but that doesn't make what you're saying correct. it's a mutually beneficial agreement with someone that, ideally, will be your biggest supporter in life and will want you to be happy with them as well as yourself. if you think a relationship is comparable to imprisonment you don't fully understand what either of these things actually are. |
Trance said: If you, like many others, missed the very obvious point then here let me reiterate: The target here is monogamy or rather the idea upon which it is based. Good luck with re-reading. I'm rereading the OP and I just don't understand what you're trying to say. That love is "wrong?" that monogamy is "wrong?" What do you mean? Of course it's your prerogative to forge an emotional connection with any human being you choose whenever you like, but that doesn't not make you a shitty person in the eyes of others. I think we're on the same side, here. |
amathy said: you do not require multiple partners at once for the sake of personal development How does one go from 'Find one who DOES NOT hinder X' to 'find someone solely for assisting X'?? monogamous relationships and personal development are not mutually exclusive concepts. Then that even further discredits monogamous relationships. Latent said: Trance said: If you, like many others, missed the very obvious point then here let me reiterate: The target here is monogamy or rather the idea upon which it is based. Good luck with re-reading. I'm rereading the OP and I just don't understand what you're trying to say. That love is "wrong?" that monogamy is "wrong?" What do you mean? Of course it's your prerogative to forge an emotional connection with any human being you choose whenever you like, but that doesn't not make you a shitty person in the eyes of others. I think we're on the same side, here. Our idea of love is wrong and hence monogamy is wrong, is what I'm saying. |
Trance said: How does one go from 'Find one who DOES NOT hinder X' to 'find someone solely for assisting X'?? you are speaking as if the only form of relationship capable of not hindering personal development is an open relationship, i am saying that isn't the case idk wasn't really that complicated Then that even further discredits monogamous relationships. first monogamous relationships hinder personal development = bad now monogamous relationships don't hinder personal development = bad i guess i'm the idiot for biting |
| It's considered bad because your partner trusts you not to do it Unless you're in an open relationship, you're gonna end up hurting someone Honestly, relationships are about ownership. Like you said, you stay in my prison and I stay in yours But the thing is, both people in the relationship are happy to be each other's, When you're in a closed relationship, that's basically what you're telling your partner You pick them and them only At least that's the attitude towards relationships in today's world |
 |
| You're getting some pretty serious life lessons here ... |
 |
Trance said: Love is built upon trust and respect, is the common belief. But what exactly are we trusting the other person with? Years of relationship collapses for one night of misfortune or only because your partner found emotional connection with someone else. Is love a kind of ownership or entitlement? You give me your body and I give you mine. You stay in my prison and I stay in yours. Maybe it's love that is in the wrong and not cheating... Well, Christian Marriage ( as I cannot say secular marriage is the same any more), is exactly that, a voluntary prison, a giving of oneself to the other person as property. The two become one flesh. They leave their parents family, cleave to each other and create a new family. To the exclusion of all others. So cheating is much more than having a feelz bad day. Cheating is an abandonment of the family. It is to profane a holy union. A christian marriage is a sacrament, the same as becoming a monk or priest. Cheating is sacralige, profanity. |
| idk about you but the closer a girl gets to looking like ronald mcdonald, the more aroused i become. CAV where can we cast our eyes to @PoruMairu who thinks of himself a member of the true church. Helion. |
| @SnugglyWhuggly I think he means you're imprisoned if you would be deeply hurt by cheating, or if you're imprisoning your partner by having him automatically assume he can't act out in lust if he experiences that. (vice versa with the female too ofc). If the person cheating doesn't want to return to a normal life with you however then I would say end the relationship. But if you can forgive and allow your partner to want to act in the moment then none of you are imprisoned. You'll both return to your normal and passionate life, feeling more fullfilled, perhaps even "getting it out of your system" for a while. |
Trance said: I'm a guy and I can imagine buttfucking another guy. I don't find the thought repulsive, and I can even imagine kissing another man. |
Trance said: Nyarlathothep said: It's a reproduction issue : Unlike women, men can't be sure the child is their own .. So social rules were created for men to be sure of this. In our today societies, this principle goes to both persons because equality bitch ! Well, in most societies, that is. Birth control exists now. I don't think there's any more need of this stigma as long as side flicks don't lead to reproduction. In Antiquity (Greek or Latin), women were there only to make babies. As for men, they had more fun between them. They also had birth control back then, condoms already existed (Even if they weren't as efficient most likely). There are still some other societies that aren't exclusive, such as the matriarcal society in China where women don't stay with the father, don't care who the father is, the man taking care of the kid being the uncle. Aren't you Muslims allowed to marry up to 4 women? What I mean is that at first, cheating was most likely forbidden because the man couldn't be so sure his gene was passed to a next generation, so social rules were created to make sure of this. Now that we can check those things out, it remained as a social rule, a tradition. It should normally avoid making such threads https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1546963#msg47522429 Lol To be honest, cheating is not always seen as bad. Have you ever heard of Fin amor during middle ages? In France, there are piece of litterature showing a new form of love : Imagine a woman of high rank (Such as a queen), already married (To a king, then), but falling in love with another man, of lower rank (Such as a knight). Yes, imagine stories such as Guenièvre x Lancelot or Tristan x Iseult. They're stories showing such ideal of love : A couple wanting to be together despite not being allowed, etc |
|
| If it's consensual on both sides then cheating is fine as far as I'm concerned. The issue stems from lack of communication as someone already said. Cheating is often caused by problems in the relationship that don't get solved, so of course the people in it should work on fixing it before going and cheating |
 |
| Cheating = the end of your relation. They can say they made a little mistake for one night, but I don't care. If you cheat, you break up, end of story. I don't even know why isn't my mother breaking up with my father, because you don't have to be a genius to see that he is just a stupid drunk who lies all the time when he comes home late from work. |
 |
Ulquiorra said: Cheating = the end of your relation. They can say they made a little mistake for one night, but I don't care. If you cheat, you break up, end of story. Yeah but the question he is asking is why? |
| Because a relationship is born by mutual respect, confidence and communication. If one of the partners cheated, then, it's because he/she can't follow those leadings or simply, isn't prepared for a serious relationship. Since there is no way to generate a relation with only one person, then, the pair ends. |
| I don't think this problem would exist if your partner is okay with it( you having sex with other people) . But if your partner thinks that you shouldn't and you have to lie about it and he or she finds out, then it denotes to being unfaithful. |
thegreatnathyboy said: If it's consensual on both sides then cheating is fine as far as I'm concerned. if your partner consents to you seeing other people then it's more just an open relationship rather than cheating tho cheating is defined by dishonesty not that i'm disagreeing with you or anything, it's just silly to see it being called consensual cheating |
amathy said: thegreatnathyboy said: If it's consensual on both sides then cheating is fine as far as I'm concerned. if your partner consents to you seeing other people then it's more just an open relationship rather than cheating tho cheating is defined by dishonesty not that i'm disagreeing with you or anything, it's just silly to see it being called consensual cheating pffffft, that was a minor problem :P |
| |
Zazie122 said: If you honestly have to ask yourself that question I hope to god you're not in a relationship with anyone ever. Can we all just read this comment and appreciate the validity behind it? +1 to you sir. If you really are in a "loving" relationship, you shouldn't be getting lust and envy towards other people. That means you're actually not in a loving relationship and more of a "hey, let's screw sometime and act like we actually have something decent here" kind of bond. |
 |
| All arrangements between people are imperfect and involve compromise. You're correct to point out that monogamous relationships are imperfect, but that's not grounds on which to reject them. You have to convince us that alternative arrangements are better, or allow yourself to be convinced that maybe you aren't giving monogamous relationships enough credit. |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
Trance said: Is love a kind of ownership or entitlement? Imo that's pretty much what love is, which is why I think cheating is terrible. You belong to the other person while the other person belongs to you. |
  |
amathy said: Trance said: How does one go from 'Find one who DOES NOT hinder X' to 'find someone solely for assisting X'?? you are speaking as if the only form of relationship capable of not hindering personal development is an open relationship, i am saying that isn't the case idk wasn't really that complicated I'm not even advocating open relationships on this basis lol. The entire point of my bringing up personal development was your idea of 'finding someone who is enough for you'. That idea was simply wrong. I merely gave the right idea. No more strawman now. SnugglyWhuggly said: "Wrong", in what sense? There's no objective "right" or "wrong" on this subject. If you want to believe monogamy is "wrong", go ahead, I doubt anyone is physically preventing you from entering polygamous relationships if you so choose (though, this would of course also depend on the law where you live). Wrong in the sense that it is entitlement, ownership and an infringement upon the other's rights. No one has any difficulty accepting the fact that love should turn mellow over the years. And even if the initial spark isn't there, the proof of love remains with the fact that you still cannot imagine 'living with someone else'. You may have affairs outside your relationship but you will not entertain the idea of living with someone else. Shouldn't that suffice? that you can do anything you want except for living with someone else? Love in the long term is always about getting used to the other person. If it is something else, kindly expound on it. |
| There's nothing wrong with having an open relationship, but if you and your partner decide to go down that path there's got to be communication. When you're cheating, that isn't there. Unless the conversation comes up, most people expect their partner to be monogamous. By going behind their back, the cheater is essentially signals to their partner that they don't care enough for them to let them know that things aren't working for them, and that fulfilling their momentary lust is more important than their partner's feelings. Feelings aside, if my boyfriend cheated but assured me he used protection, I don't think I'd be able to believe that. He'd already have gone behind my back once, and if I ever decided to forgive him, I probably would make him wait the time it takes for STDs to manifest and get tested. |
 |
| It's bad because you are being dishonest, disrespectful and don't care enough to share what problems you have with your partner, much less prioritize him/her. When you are in love with someone, the relationship can be very intimate and make you happy. It's sort of like ownership, but being happy and consensually belonging to someone. Sharing a special bond with someone makes you want to be loyal. It's usually not society which imposes this on people. Of course there can be problems in any relationship and feelings may fade out, leading to lack of communication and ultimately to cheating. Of course if this isn't one's cup of tea he can just inform the other partner that he is interested in a polyamorous relationship. No harm, as long as you're honest. |
| So, if I'm understanding this correctly, this should sum up the point's you've made. 1) Monogamous relationships are bad because it's constraining people's sexual urges 2) Monogamous relationships are effectively imprisonment, both sides wanting to control the other 3) Occasional cheating shouldn't be looked down upon because it can improve the relationship rather than break it 4) Relationships are founded on sexual attraction and should be seen as such If there's something I missed, please point it out to me. For now, I'll argue these four points. 1) If you can't control your sexual urges for the sake of a monogamous relationship, don't be in one. If other people want to be in a monogamous relationship, who are you to tell them that their view is incorrect? 2) If a relationship is founded on a desire to control the other person's movements, something is wrong. However, part of being in a monogamous relationship is the spoken or unspoken agreement that you will control yourself for the sake of the other person. 3) HIV, AIDS, emotional attachment to other people, dishonesty, distrust... these things do damage relationships. If you think that sleeping with someone else for one night isn't going to make a difference in a relationship where the other person thinks you've agreed not to, you're sorely mistaken. If you're in an open relationship, it's not cheating. 4) As other people have said, a relationship founded on sexual desire is not a stable relationship. Of course you'll want to cheat if you're in that sort of relationship--if all it is to you is sex, why not have as much sex as you want? A relationship should be more than that. It should be based on trust built over time, intellectual compatibility, similar interests, etc. in addition to desiring the other person. Otherwise it's either a sexual relationship with nothing behind it or a platonic relationship. Nothing inherently wrong with those, but it's not going to satisfy the desire for an intimate romantic relationship either way. So, basically, do what you want, but don't be dishonest or lie to your partner. If they can't handle it after you've informed them of your intentions before committing the act, break up, because it's not worth the emotional suffering and stress you'll both feel. Dishonesty and lying are wrong according to most ethicalities and moralities. "Hiding" something is dishonest. It's not necessarily lying, which is telling an untruth, but it's also not honesty, which is telling the truth. If you know that the other person won't react well to something you've done, hiding it is not an acceptable way to go about it. Edited to add: You mentioned that you aren't talking about open relationships. What is it to you, then? You don't want to be in a monogamous relationship, but you don't want to be in an open relationship. Basically, what I'm getting from it is that you want to be with someone and live with that person for the emotional stability, but don't want to solely be in a sexual relationship with them. That is what an open relationship is. An open relationship is one where you live with one person, but you're allowed to go and "have fun" with other people. That's all there is to it. If you're arguing against monogamous relationships on that basis, it's just ridiculous. People can choose their own path in life, and your claim that it's wrong isn't going to convince them otherwise. It's not wrong. Open and monogamous relationships appeal to different people and have their own benefits, if you want to look at it that way. Neither is wrong. Cheating is viewed as wrong because it includes dishonesty or outright lying. Again, if you want an open relationship, be in an open relationship. Hiding your cheating is not going to work in the long run. You keep describing open relationships and saying that's not what you're talking about. |
VagueClarityAug 28, 2016 11:04 AM
 "Shocking truth!" ~Chaika Trabant"How unpleasant." ~Kuriyama Mirai "Whatever tomorrow brings, I'll be there." ~Rem "You don't die for your friends; you live for them." ~Misaka Mikoto "Now I believe. In my own strength... and in the one who gave me that strength." ~Roze "I'll be the guard dog of all your fever dreams." Signature and forum avatar courtesy of @SenpieX |
| Cheating (or open relationships as far as I'm concerned) is bad because I'm fucking jealous. I can keep people from getting in my pants if it means she does the same. |
 |
More topics from this board
» Have you ever given up on major passions in your life? ( 1 2 )RobertBobert - May 1 |
50 |
by Zedlin
»»
9 minutes ago |
|
» My computer auto turn off due to overheating when playing game, is there a way to reduce the overheating non-physically?aLotQuestion_ - May 1 |
10 |
by Jozuwa-_-
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» is blocking users a admitance of cowardice?vasipi4946 - 8 hours ago |
10 |
by Zedlin
»»
21 minutes ago |
|
» Have you ever been falsely accused of anything?Ejrodiew - May 1 |
21 |
by Zedlin
»»
22 minutes ago |
|
» Has anyone ever told you in real life that "You are enough"?LenRea - Apr 30 |
38 |
by Zedlin
»»
23 minutes ago |