Cheating: A different POV

[RaysWays]

Everyone has a take on it, I guess.

No shortage of condemnation of cheaters, but it is interesting that no one condemns the spouse who chooses to stop supplying sex. In even the most vanilla marriage, the agreement and expectation are that sex is available. The spouse who unilaterally withholds by choice (I would guess that 90%+ of the time it is the woman) is the one violating the marriage agreement. Why is the other person then bound by expectation of fidelity? Anyone who knows even a little law can tell you that a broken contract is no longer binding - as, would you honor your obligation to pay the refuse company if they stopped picking up your trash?

Also it is interesting that some here would engage with a cheating solo bi-f, even if they held cheating to be wrong, because bi-f's are in short supply. The reverse argument, that married men are less guilty for cheating because f's willing to engage with them are hard to find, is laughable. One of the ten commandments proscribes adultery (more male than female, nature's programming), but there is nothing comparable that tells women to 'supply'.

If you consider the situation a male faces when his spouse 'turns off' it is pretty bleak. Basically he can abstain, masturbate secretly (keep that damn porn hidden, mister), cheat or leave - 'beat, cheat or the street'. Ok - who endorses male sexual shutdown because of the woman's withdrawal? What percent of shut-down women would have fits about porn (guess: high)? For a man, leaving his family (when he may well not want to) will almost certainly wreak financial havoc and create emotional devastation on a huge scale, especially to children - and to fathers (that is - males).

The underlying reasons for this stuff are not pretty. Reality is that women basically control sex (the powerless female), not men. So overwhelming is the power imbalance that even when the results are absurd, they seem normal, invisible, part of the woodwork. For example, consider a woman who deceives a trusting man to get pregnant (and so ensure a continuing relationship, even... marriage?). The male has no control at all over the fetus (half his) - can't even require adoption. The woman's deceit is endorsed by the system - she is awarded absolute power to decide whether to hand the man an 18-year sentence. If he at any point agrees to provide for the child, he cannot get out even when it is revealed that he is not the father! But the woman has committed no crime; a lot of women would even hold she has done nothing wrong.

So, folks, where does the tilted playing field (dead-ass vertical) leave the male when his partner just opts out of sex? Empowered? Consider what even a short walk in his moccasins is like before you turn him away and castigate him.

[funcpl4life]

Originally Posted by RaysWays

No shortage of condemnation of cheaters, but it is interesting that no one condemns the spouse who chooses to stop supplying sex. In even the most vanilla marriage, the agreement and expectation are that sex is available. The spouse who unilaterally withholds by choice (I would guess that 90%+ of the time it is the woman) is the one violating the marriage agreement.

I think if you read sex-starved marriage sites or no more mr. nice guy sites, you will find that women aren't the only ones who shut down sexually. Sex starved marriages are horrible and usually involve some deep emotional hurts on both sides. It is NOT ok to withhold sex in a marriage. Fixing it is hard. Cheating is not a solution. Fix it, live with it or walk away.

Originally Posted by RaysWays

What percent of shut-down women would have fits about porn (guess: high)?

Yeah, I'd agree with you here. Way too high a percentage. Get over it.

Originally Posted by RaysWays

The underlying reasons for this stuff are not pretty. Reality is that women basically control sex (the powerless female), not men. So overwhelming is the power imbalance that even when the results are absurd, they seem normal, invisible, part of the woodwork.

In order to fix a sexless marriage, there must be communication. Sometimes this is too much work.

Mr. FC4L

[bbarnsworth]

Originally Posted by RaysWays

So, folks, where does the tilted playing field (dead-ass vertical) leave the male when his partner just opts out of sex? Empowered? Consider what even a short walk in his moccasins is like before you turn him away and castigate him.

For us, we reject cheating males. Not because we castigate them. We do so primarily because we do not want to hurt someone else, and also because it is a situation that has a much higher chance of drama.

We swing to have fun. My wife having sex with another man becomes considerably less fun for her if he were cheating on his wife, regardless of the circumstances. There's plenty enough men out there that she doesn't need to be playing with the cheating male fire. For me, the thought path is the same except we don't play with single females anyways, so it's a non-issue.

I feel sorry for the men in the situation you describe. He is being cheated by his wife; having sex denied him. I fully agree with you that the law is severely tilted against men. It's very unfair. It is tough for a single male in the lifestyle when that single male is cheating, regardless of the circumstances as the oversupply of single males means people can afford to be picky. But however unjust this is or not, it won't change.

[Speed & Trixie]

Yep, I condem the cheater.

I don't care WHY s/he is cheating. Of course, it's not right to "choose to stop supplying sex" to your partner. Let's not get into the "contractual obligations" of marriage, but I will say that if a (business) contract isn't being adhered to, the contract is terminated!

Being in a sexless marriage probably sucks. The nice thing is that you (the spouse) have options available. A person may not LIKE those particular options, but many exist. Staying with a "shut-down woman" (or man) and trying to work things out within the marriage is a choice, so is staying and cheating. Personally, I don't give a shit about someone's reasons for cheating. It's lying, it's deceitful, and it's wrong. Just because you (the cheater) are in a shitty marriage of YOUR choice doesn't mean I'm ok with you lying to your spouse.

Whatever the cheater's spouse has or has not done is none of my business. Just because someone is being cold/uncaring/whatever doesn't give the other person the right to act selfishly and deceitfully. It's not healthy, and I don't want anyone who would act like that in my bed. Again, how could I demand respect and honesty from someone who makes these kinds of choices?

If that makes me judgemental, meh. So be it. I don't deal with liars and that's MY choice.

Trixie

PS Though this post references other people's posts, it is NOT meant to be taken personally. I'm talking about my own feelings here, not trying to bash any individual/s.

[IvoryTowers]

Originally Posted by RaysWays

Everyone has a take on it, I guess.

No shortage of condemnation of cheaters, but it is interesting that no one condemns the spouse who chooses to stop supplying sex. In even the most vanilla marriage, the agreement and expectation are that sex is available. The spouse who unilaterally withholds by choice (I would guess that 90%+ of the time it is the woman) is the one violating the marriage agreement. Why is the other person then bound by expectation of fidelity?

First of all, no part of the marriage contract includes sex. Culturally, we may all believe that sex is part of marriage, but it is not part of the marriage contract the way paying for your trash pick up is. You seem to be thinking of prostitution: the exchange of money for sex.

Second, your sexism in 2009 is astonishing. No doubt you believe you are arguing based on facts, but as others have pointed out, you might be deeply surprised (if you step outside your limited base) to find that many men also withhold and deny sex. I have a friend who had a child 4 years ago. Since then, her husband has had sex with her 5 times, always after her begging and pleading. Apparently, he sees her as "mom" now and sleeping with a mom just disgusts him. So don't assume.

Third, just how do you know every cheating man has a)tried to solve the problems with his wife b)told that he can't even masturbate c)even been denied sex! You can't seriously believe that every man who cheats or wants to cheat has a wife who completely refuses to have sex with him and won't begin to deal with the issue, but refuses to allow him any relief in other ways. Can you? Really?

But most important--that's not my call. Male or female, a cheater is someone who decided that lying to and deceiving their spouse is the best (easiest) way to deal with a problem or that lying to/deceiving their spouse is not a big deal (those people who figure "what he doesn't know won't hurt him.")

Why on earth would I want to have sex with such a person? What else is he lying about--STIs? His ability to deal with swinging? Don't tell me "I have to stay married for the children" or "He's a horrible person and deserves to be cheated on" or "I don't want to hurt her, I still love her and getting sex elsewhere allows me to keep the relationship going." I do not need, want, or allow your drama and unresolved issues to muck up my life. I don't see that as "castigation" but as practical (I protect myself from fallout) and ethical (I don't help people lie and cheat).

[screaminggood]

Regardless of what we individually think, I must say "bravo" to RaysWays for his bravery in bringing up the other side of coin that most of us never consider.

[robel12550]

Originally Posted by RaysWays

If you consider the situation a male faces when his spouse 'turns off' it is pretty bleak. Basically he can abstain, masturbate secretly (keep that damn porn hidden, mister), cheat or leave - 'beat, cheat or the street'. Ok - who endorses male sexual shutdown because of the woman's withdrawal? What percent of shut-down women would have fits about porn (guess: high)? For a man, leaving his family (when he may well not want to) will almost certainly wreak financial havoc and create emotional devastation on a huge scale, especially to children - and to fathers (that is - males).

What about the situation where the woman doesn't want a separation/divorce so he can't leave? Guess most people are on the side of castration in those cases. Will the government pay for that?

[robel12550]

Originally Posted by screaminggood

Regardless of what we individually think, I must say "bravo" to RaysWays for his bravery in bringing up the other side of coin that most of us never consider.

Ditto! To every story there are THREE sides! Most people believe there are only two.

[CXXC]

I don’t have the numbers or the research totals handy, but I can pretty much bet the main % of individuals who are cheating are NOT in sexless marriages. Yes, I will agree that there are three sides to every story. However, it is my firm belief (ignorant, possibly) that these individuals have not exhausted all avenues to rectify their situations.

I actually speak from personal experience regarding the sexless (Virtually) marriage. My ex used sex as a tool to obtain her desires. She would lord it over me as a way of getting things she wanted or to force me to do things I did not care to do. (Nothing kinky here! Get your minds out of the gutter!!)

What were my options? Well, we all know the end actually. I left home, hearth and my only child, not to find sex, but to live! A person who would withhold sex has several issues. Perhaps they felt insecure. Maybe they had such a low self image, they could not see themselves as worthy of the act. I could have been such a terrible lover that she could not stand being with me. The reasons can only be discovered through communication. No one can discover the REAL reason for holding back sex without COMMUNICATION!

Do these individuals exhaust every possible avenue to resolve the matter? I can honestly say, I do not believe so. 4 hours of begging for sex and demanding to know why is not communication.

the options left to the dissatisfied individual are there. Leave, cheat, stay and be unsatisfied or COMMUNICATE correctly to resolve the matter. I had no other option but to leave. Yes, it broke my heart to do so. However, the other options were not available to me as I could not bring shame to my house by cheating. I could not stay in the marriage knowing that I would be a puppet upon her marionette’s strings. She refused to communicate with me in open dialogue with or without a mediator.

Cheating is a selfish act. Had I fallen into that activity, how could I expect to have the respect of anyone? I would be a liar. I would be false in my purpose. i would fall victim to lesser, more base desires. All of which would cloud my very judgment and self esteem.

Leaving as I did, I was able to keep my head high and today, both my Daughter and my Ex respect me. Mrs. CXXC finds my resolve and commitment to OUR relationship strengthened by my past. Had I wavered or fell in my resolve, I do not believe I would be who I am nor have what I have today!

[vanillaknot]

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

First of all, no part of the marriage contract includes sex.

I mean no disrespect, but you are completely factually incorrect. The legal system identifies deprivation of sex as loss of consortion. Twenty-two years ago, I served on a civil jury in which exactly that complaint was made. Sex (along with children -- I can cite resource upon resource in which infertility [on either part] is grounds for annulment) is indeed at the heart of the expectation of marriage.

Third, just how do you know every cheating man has a)tried to solve the problems with his wife b)told that he can't even masturbate c)even been denied sex! You can't seriously believe that every man who cheats or wants to cheat has a wife who completely refuses to have sex with him ...

Where exactly did the OP make a categorical, universal claim of "every man," as you cite twice in just this paragraph?

I've got no interest in cheaters of either sex myself. But any critique offered has to be kept in context of the scenario offered.

[RaysWays]

Surprised at the level of interest! When I've discussed this topic (and related ones), the trend seems to be that the men agree, the older women disagree and the younger women disagree violently. The point of my post wasn't to lay out an examination of sexually dysfunctional marriages - it was to point out that cheaters (esp. males) may be responding to impossible situations. While (as always) it is a matter of personal choice to play with them, some insight into their situations could well show you that being supportive is appropriate and condemnation is not.

So ok, one can hold that cheating is wrong no matter what, but I don't find this view to be very logical in a situation where the correspondent isn't operating ethically. Example: You come home and observe that thug has broken in and is threatening your spouse. You sneak in, jam a pen against his spine, tell him you have a gun and will use it. This is, obviously, lying. Does that make it wrong? Another ex. - when questioning a suspect, police will often use ruses, lies or tricks to fool a culpable suspect into believing they know his story is false (the US Supreme Court has upheld this practice). Are the police morally wrong for using deceit? Personally I would say no -- a situation's morality is not derived from the actions of the wrongdoer. So the breach of marital conduct (by the sex withholder) invalidates the existing standards as a measure of marital behavior. So I guess one's level of comfort with a cheater (assuming everyone is truthful and forthcoming) depends on one's view of the validity of a set of standards that have been breached. I'll bet the gender divide on that issue is quite large.


Some responses to comments:

Shutting down sexually - overall I'd guess it is much more common among women, but I've never seen any stats. 'How often do you want sex' -type studies usually seem to have the men wanting somewhat more than the woman, if that is any indicator. Of COURSE this situation isn't behind most cheating!

So Mr. CXCC, for you the standards were still valid and you adhered to them; more power to you. But I don't see that this would be true for everyone subjected to spousal withholding (does anal sex, um, rectify the situation?).

This I know: when a baby arrives (esp. the first one) things conspire against sex: exhaustion, too little sleep, new chores. I don't think it's at all uncommon for the man to get pushed aside for a couple of months because the woman is so focused on the baby. This seems to pass in 6 mos to a year, but for some women it is a new status quo.

Mr. CXCC, it takes TWO to communicate. Hmm... does that mean you learned this fact because of the preverbal 2x4?. (sorry, bad puns are one of my spices).

[CXXC]

Originally Posted by RaysWays

Mr. CXCC, it takes TWO to communicate. Hmm... does that mean you learned this fact because of the preverbal 2x4?. (sorry, bad puns are one of my spices).

I would never commit a man/woman for the use of a good pun! In most times, they bring a smile to a stiff situation.

You do offer a good counter to the arguments place before you. However, each reason for cheating is as individual as the person committing this "Moral" offense.

I highlight "Moral" as it is just that. Our disdain for the cheater is a reaction to our moral up bringing and learned reaction. It is wrong! It hurts others.

Some may argue that the lifestyle is morally wrong. It is very possible that someone may be hurt by becoming involved in the lifestyle.

The truth of the matter is, not everyone can stave of a desire to be with another. It matters not if they are within or without the lifestyle. Their reasoning may be quite valid or so full of holes it would look more like a sponge. The end result is, they are cheating.

Should we judge someone who would have sex with a cheater? I don’t think we should encourage the activity. I think we should respect the desires of both individuals and keep to our own. It is, after all, a decision that they make and have to live with. We are only as guilty as we feel in our knowledge and acceptance of the act. WE cannot be judge, jury or executioner.

The cheater will eventually have to come to term with their activity. Those who enable or engage will receive a tainted reputation in time. The rest of the parties involved may or may not be hurt. A divorce or the continuation of the marriage may or may not happen. But those who avoid or abstain from engaging with the cheater may wake up tomorrow feeling happy and not one shade less bright.

Neither Mrs. CXXC nor I will ever fish in another’s pond without permission!

[RaysWays]

OK, IvoryTowers, it's the weekend and I've got some time to respond. Candidly, your outrage and lack of reasoning are what is most visible in your reply.
AH! Ivory tower, Philly and sloppy thinking. U of Penn?? B'gaw, fits perfectly what we thought of Penn when I was at Harvard and sis was at Penn. ;~).

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

You seem to be thinking of prostitution: the exchange of money for sex.

Not hardly. Of course 'available sex' is the default in marriage! Only prior or mutual agreement would override that. Withholding and refusal are wrong - at minimum a breach of implied covenants. Example (actual client of a therapist frirnd) - a couple had gone through a conventional courtship, etc, including sexual activity. Then, as soon as they were married, the woman simply would not have sex any more. Nothing had changed but marital status. Who would you say was in the wrong?
(FYI She turned out to be a total narcissist, saw sex only as a way to get a husband. Divorced in less than six mos.)

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

Second, your sexism in 2009 is astonishing. No doubt you believe you are arguing based on facts,

Actually it was clearly labeled a guess. Read before responding.

As to sexism, swinging is the most sexist activity that I can even think of - "No Single Males" & "Single Women Free Admission". We've already seen the gender divide in playing with cheating women vs. cheating men.

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

but as others have pointed out, you might be deeply surprised (if you step outside your limited base)

...which you in fact have no knowledge of

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

to find that many men also withhold and deny sex. I have a friend who had a child 4 years ago. Since then, her husband has had sex with her 5 times, always after her begging and pleading. Apparently, he sees her as "mom" now and sleeping with a mom just disgusts him. So don't assume.

I said I GUESSED 90% women. Clearly the remaining 10% meant men. And for your own example - a single anecdote does not establish a social pattern. At least I KNEW I was guessing - still a higher standard than anecdote. Gaw!
(Your friend's husband apparently has real problems... did she go the 'blimped out mommy' route or otherwise lose attractiveness?)

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

Third, just how do you know every cheating man has a)tried to solve the problems with his wife b)told that he can't even masturbate c)even been denied sex! You can't seriously believe that every man who cheats or wants to cheat has a wife who completely refuses to have sex with him and won't begin to deal with the issue, but refuses to allow him any relief in other ways. Can you? Really?

I didn't say anything like that. Pass.

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

But most important--that's not my call.

So what made it mine?

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

Male or female, a cheater is someone who decided that lying to and deceiving their spouse is the best (easiest) way to deal with a problem or that lying to/deceiving their spouse is not a big deal (those people who figure "what he doesn't know won't hurt him.")

This is quite a generalization and you present no evidence for it. For the sake of argument, say it's true. It may indeed be the easiest or the best way (why is that bad?) - that's not the issue. The issue is whether the cheating, a response to withheld sex, is wrong or not. It's like lying to an attacker that 'a pen is a gun' (see my previous response). So is it then immoral to pretend a pen is a gun to stop a crime?

The core issue here is not what morality says but how to apply morality to the situation correctly. I would argue that morality has to be rooted in what in the situation is right, not what is wrong. To judge the cheater's actions out of the context of deprivation is to establish a false frame of reference where moral principles become servants of an existing wrong. Any resulting 'moral' judgment lacks foundation and therefore validity.

Originally Posted by IvoryTowers

Why on earth would I want to have sex with such a person?

That's up to you. But there is still more confusion.

Why have sex with him? Because of something that appeals? Because (for example) he is charming, funny, sexy and a hot f-ck who knows his way around a woman's body? Because it will be just plain fun?
How about because you can see he is a sweet guy caught in a place with no room, hurting and longing for intimacy and fun? Let him eat cake?

Why NOT is a better question. Perhaps because in your eyes it is all about what YOU (the female) want (because you can)? Your reaction to the cheater reflects the immensity of the sexual power disparity - with no personal knowledge you haughtily condemn and reject all cheaters as beneath your consideration.

Since his character seems to be your focus, ponder this: The real measure of character is how we act when we will not suffer consequences for our own misbehavior toward another. Example - a boss who is a sexual harasser is displaying poor character.
Good character is demonstrated when someone with significant power over others refuses to indulge it and treats them with consideration, kindness and respect.
What character would one infer from your venom, contempt and use of stereotypng?

Chill a lot and think a little.

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

I.T., it isn't personal (really). Yes this is response doesn't mince words, but remember that in here we are two avatars arguing for entertainment and enlightenment, not real people. If it matters, what I actually believe is that you are probably a perfectly good person and not like what I was describing - after all, you are open-minded enough to be in the lifestyle. So maybe you haven't really had a reason to think about these issues in depth.

[CXXC]

Ray
I do want to ask one question based upon the following quote from your post:

That's up to you. But there is still more confusion.

Why have sex with him? Because of something that appeals? Because (for example) he is charming, funny, sexy and a hot f-ck who knows his way around a woman's body? Because it will be just plain fun?
How about because you can see he is a sweet guy caught in a place with no room, hurting and longing for intimacy and fun? Let him eat cake?

Why NOT is a better question. Perhaps because in your eyes it is all about what YOU (the female) want (because you can)? Your reaction to the cheater reflects the immensity of the sexual power disparity - with no personal knowledge you haughtily condemn and reject all cheaters as beneath your consideration.


Are you making a point or attempting justify playing with a cheating spouse based upon the above quote?

Just wondering!

[RaysWays]

No, I'm not in the situation of playing with a cheater, nor have I been.