Feeling like he cheated on me

Me and my husband are pretty new to SLS. However, I have always wanted to get intimate with another female. Bi-curious I guess you would say. My husband has always wanted to see me with another woman, and I get off by watching him fuck other women. So, we did it a couple of times and it was wonderful...it brought us so much closer together. Like, after we would have sex with the other female, we would have sex alone and it was phenomenal!!! And since we started, we have been constantly looking for another woman/women.

About 2 months ago, another female and I took pics of ourselves while we were alone (my husband is a truck driver) and I was going to send them to him. He has always said if I and another woman want to get intimate it is ok, just send pics or call and let him know. So, I sent the pics, then I started feeling dirty/weird about him not being there. So, I went on-line to his phone service to delete the photos before he got them.

While I was deleting the pics (I can see all pics and text messages we send or receive with our phones on-line), I found several pics of this girl. No nudie pics. A couple of just her, one with a friend, and a couple of her and her little son.

I didn't know this girl and it freaked me out at first. So I saw a text from her saying how happy she was, and then one from him to her on how happy he was that he had met her.

I wrote down her phone # and called info to see where the number was from. Portland, Oregon. Where my husband had been running a lot in the truck. I was scared shitless! I didn't know what to do.

He called me on the phone, so I just asked him who she was? He told me her name and told me she was a lesbian and someone he had met on a dating service for him and I, that it was nothing sexual. I asked why he didn't tell me? All he could say was I don't know. He said he wouldn't talk to her anymore if that was what I wanted.

A couple of weeks went by and on father's day while we were out eating with our children she texted him to tell him Happy Father's Day! I got mad and checked on-line again to see if he has been calling and texting her still, and I found pics of him masturbating that he had sent to her! And she had sent him pics of her tits (with a bra on).

First of all, if she was a lesbian would this really turn her on? So, I confronted him again and he said that he never had called it off with her. I told him he had to right then in front of me. We fought and fought. He felt I had betrayed his trust by snooping around. But I totally trusted him before I found the first photos by accident.

He said he didn't know if we should try to work things out or not. So he left in his truck and said we shouldn't talk for at least 2 weeks to cool down. We eventually talked and I told him that I didn't care if he talked to someone on the phone (text and stuff) but there has to be absolutely no sexual stuff unless I am around or know about it. So basically, i don't care if he talks to her, but just as a friend.

He keeps saying he has never met her face to face, there are no feelings for her, but, I don't know if I can believe him now. One night while we were out together, he sent her a pic of a superman symbol behind my back, and from then on, her texts read from superman's girlfriend. I can't stand this.

He says I should believe him and trust him. But, I know how some women can be, trying to latch on to something.

She knows he is married and I once asked him what she thought of me and he said, "she says well, don't she have any guy friends she talks too?" I don't like her judging me at all. I do have guy friends I talk to, but I do not send them pics of me masturbating.

I don't know what to do. Now, we are at a point where on the outside we look happy and in love. But, he is still texting her. He turns his phone off anytime he is home. I know he is happy. But, I don't like feeling like there is another girl. I hate her.

What do I do?

print out the post you made here and give it to him...evidently he doesn't know how you feel about what he is doing. I don't even know you and I have a pretty good idea...so say to him what you said to us.

he gets mad at me if i even bring her up. i have tried. he says there is nothing there between him and her and that i am his life. so, i shouldn't have any problem. he just gets mad at me for not trusting him

The whole situation reeks of things that are not okay. He may not be having a sexual affair with her (although the jerking off pics may say differently), but I'd say he's definately progressed to an emotional affair.

Let me tell you the story of my mom and dad. He met a girl (and I say girl because I think when they met she was 23 and he was 43). For a year my mom let herself believe that they were just friends. I would hang out with dad and Jen and always kind of supervise, but I could feel the tension. It was the only time in my life my dad made me feel like I was 2nd important to him. Jen and Dad talked on the phone and hung out and what not. One night mom heard him say "I love you" on the phone. She took the phone away from him. He got pissed that she was meddling and hit her. This was a week before Christmas. Dad never came home. He missed Christmas. A couple months later they were divorced. Dad dated Jen for about 4 years, then she dumped him for someone else. Granted, Jen may have found out that he was cheating on her...because he was.

I don't believe that any man who flirts to that extent with other women has friendship on his mind. Flirting...okay...saying another woman is attractive...okay. Exchanging naked pics and lying to you about what's going on...NOT okay.

This is just my opinion. I am young and have yet to be cheated on (atleast that I know of). Perhaps if it happens to me I'd have better advice.

he gets mad at me if i even bring her up. i have tried. he says there is nothing there between him and her and that i am his life. so, i shouldn't have any problem. he just gets mad at me for not trusting him

This isn't about trust, Nina. That a whole 'nother bowl of wax. You're not mad just because you (obviously) can't trust him. You're mad because he doesn't give a shit that you're unhappy with the situation. He just wants what he wants. Maybe he's right, and maybe there's nothing going on sexually. But the thing is, that doesn't matter. You have stated your boundaries, and he has exceeded them. Period. You have told him that this kind of behaviour makes you extremely uncomfortable, and constantly disrespecting your comfort zones is NOT going to make you "get used to it". It's just going to make things worse.

Trust is not something that he automatically gets. It's something that is earned, and by doing things that are suspicious (and if I were in your position, I would certainly be questioning his conduct) he is not earning your trust. Why is he being so defensive and evasive about all this? That's a red flag right there. It's a hallmark of cheating. If he were truly innocent, he'd be doing everything he could to put your mind at ease, reassuring you that you mean more to him than anyone else, and going out of his way to prove his innocence. He's not doing any of these things. He's angry because you invaded his privacy - and worse yet, found something that he was not comfortable with you knowing about. Now it's one thing to be constantly mistrusted by an insanely jealous spouse, and have your privacy invaded over and over again in an attempt to control him or her, but it's quite another to get angry at someone because they found you out. And you found him out. He couldn't satisfactorily answer why he never told you about this supposed "lesbian" who keeps sending him nudie pics. Who enjoys seeing your husband masturbating to her pictures. Who texts him "Happy Father's Day" (as though that's any business of hers. :rollseyes ). This woman who he shares private jokes with (Superman's girlfriend?). This woman whom you hate, yet whose opinion he obviously values above your own. This woman who seems to lose no sleep over the act of wedging herself between a husband and a wife. This woman who has the audacity to judge YOU! Just who does she think she is?

Honey, I'd be pissed right off. You shouldn't have to babysit any man like this. He's mad that you don't trust him?? Well what in the HELL has he done to show that he can be trusted to not rip your heart out, when he doesn't even seem to care what you think? Excuse the hell outta you for not laying your neck on the chopping block!

Now I've only heard one side of this story, but if what you say is true, it smells to me like the beginnings of an emotional affair. He's being drawn away from you by the manipulations of this other woman. She is gaining a foothold in importance in his life. He agrees with her, and argues with you. She tells him how unreasonable you are, and how misunderstood he is. And he laps it up. She has become his confidante, and that is a wife's place, NOT a playmate's, nor even a good friend's. YOU are supposed to be his first stop when he has something he wants to get off his chest. And if it's a problem with you that he feels he needs to get off his chest that he's uncomfortable talking to you about, the he absolutely MUST come to you first about it. There should be nothing said about a husband/wife problem to a stranger that the husband AND wife BOTH don't know already.

Nina, your feelings are not unreasonable. Don't let him tell you otherwise! If he can't respect your feelings, then the relationship needs some serious review.

it is so nice just to get this stuff off of my chest. because you can't just tell anyone because of the sls tie-in. i will update as i know things..

ps...should i call her?

he gets mad at me if i even bring her up. i have tried. he says there is nothing there between him and her and that i am his life. so, i shouldn't have any problem. he just gets mad at me for not trusting him

If it were me, I'm afraid to say I would kick him to the curb. Partly for the cheating, but mostly for making you feel wrong for being hurt by it. That IMO is the worst offense of all. Then I'd hang him to dry in court. But that's just me. I'm a might vindictive that way. flamethrow

ps...should i call her?

And what? appeal to her conscience? Don't bother. The problem is between you and Mr. simplynina. If it weren't, none of us would be having this discussion. He'd already KNOW that she was up to no good, and would be telling her to piss off...all on his own...without anyone needing to tell him to. And he would've told you all about it, saying things like, "Can you believe the nerve of that woman?"

Don't call her, as tempting as it may be to call her out. I wouldn't give her the satisfaction of even thinking she matters to your relationship. She really shouldn't, you know.

I gotta agree, there is no more conversation, no more excuses. Of course she isn't a lesbian and it IS sexual after all the guy sent pics of himself masturbating, what normal lesbian is looking at that?????

He is cheating, he has been caught and he isn't even man enough to admit it...typical. He just wants to see how long he can keep you hanging with this while he continues his little games with the other woman.

This isn't about you anymore it is about him and what he is all about. Even if he did stop this affair how would you know he wouldn't do it again....

Obviously swinging is not enough for him, he likes the thrill of being secretive and cheating...you will never win with this one.... Surrender

simplynina, as I was reading your post, the bright orange neon light that says "cheating" was flashing in my mind. Now, I am not saying he has had sex with her. There are many tactics a cheater uses to turn the attention away from what he is doing. They use these tactics because they know what they are doing is wrong. Do not fall for these tricks. Stick to your guns.

Put your foot down with your husband. Him speaking to her needs to stop and stop immediately. Even if your husband were telling the truth about them just being friends and her being a lesbian yada yada, it makes you uncomfortable and that should be enough for him to end it. Tell him under no circumstances is he to have any contact with her. IMHO allowing him to be friends with her now, is going to be a case of shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted. You will always wonder. So all contact should be stopped.

If he has a problem with it, and he does not want to stop contacting her, you could point out once more how uncomfortable you are with it, remind him that YOU are his wife, so YOUR feelings should matter more than hers, and that depending on his actions, you will weigh your importance on his life and react accordingly. I would also reccomend not being drawn into a battle over her. However, be prepared to back up your statement with actions.

Good Luck simplynina, I do hope it works out for you.

I am not sure if any other men answered this post but I am. What he is doing is wrong. My wife and I are kinda in the same sittuation as you when it comes to playing. She really loves watching me. In our hunt for women not all ar bi as a matter of fact alot of them are straight. So when talking to them I save every measage and pic and what not sent back and forth for my wife to read over. I have been asked many many times to meet someone with out my wife. I am here to tell you that will never happen. That is always the end of discussion with them and no further contact. So I would say from a mans point of view that I would kick him out. First question you need to ask yourself is. If it is really not that important to him then why will he not just quit talking to her. Question number 2. If he is not spawning a relationship with her than why try so hard to hide it and lie about it. And the big number 3. Why does it not bother him that it bothers you and he continues to do it.

everything everyone is saying i know already to be true. i just didn't want to face up to it. This scares the shit out of me and i feel like it is all my fault, because we started the swinging thing and i asked him to look for other women. but for us, never for him alone. we made that clear. i thought. i brought this subject up again last night. and he got really pissed off, saying he knows he made a stupid mistake, and why can't i just let sleeping dogs lie. that i keep throwing it up in his face like rubbing a dog's nose in doo. but, i can't help to think that i wouldn't bring it up if he would just quit talking to her. i don't know? i love him and he says he loves me and it would kill him if he ever would lose me, but i can't help to just keep thinking about it over and over and over head bang .........................thank you to everyone for listening

i love him and he says he loves me and it would kill him if he ever would lose me, but i can't help to just keep thinking about it over and over and over head bang .........................thank you to everyone for listening

I think that is the point that needs to be made to him, if this doesn't stop he will lose you. Time to tell him to make his choice, what is more important to him. And then give up on the idea of swinging, I don't think it is going to work for you as a couple right now.

he gets mad at me if i even bring her up. i have tried. he says there is nothing there between him and her and that i am his life. so, i shouldn't have any problem. he just gets mad at me for not trusting him

Now, this is just my personal opinion. I am not a trained counselor, so take this with a grain of salt. BUT, if you ARE his life like he has said, and he loves you as much as I am sure he says he does, then he should give up this relationship since it upsets you so much!!!!!!!!

If I am talking with a guy, and jay is upset about it, I am going to stop doing it. Its not a matter of trust, if you don't like the woman you have that right. In my opinion he needs to give up that friendship...and if he can't do that then you need to find out why, what is the bond that has them together? Maybe talk with her and find out the story.

... i feel like it is all my fault, because we started the swinging thing and i asked him to look for other women

Unfortunately though, for some men, it's not only about enjoying sexual variety, it's also about the thrill of being "bad" - by doing something behind the other's back - and the ego boost of having two women competing for their love - which is not part of the equation in a swinging situation.

Here's a suggestion which might be off the wall, but just might work, because in my experience the path you're going down is VERY LIKELY going to end with the end of your relationship ... If what he's doing is about being bad and having two women fighting over him, WHAT IF YOU TURNED OFF THE FUEL FOR THE FIRE BY SAYING "GO AHEAD HAVE YOUR FUN WITH HER"? Give him "permission" to have his affair! Stop fighting about it - join him in being "bad"!! - tell him that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" and you now consider yourself free to have whatever outside relationships you want and you don't consider it his right to agree to it or even be told the truth about it.

At the worst, you'll split up, but I think he'll realize how BIG the risk to his relationship with you is in doing the "ok, so we can both cheat" thing, and it'll open his mind to coming to a mutually acceptable set of rules.

This scares the shit out of me and i feel like it is all my fault, because we started the swinging thing and i asked him to look for other women. but for us, never for him alone. we made that clear. i thought.

Nina, you agreed to go on an adventure together with him. You agreed to explore the boundaries of your relationship with him. And guess what? You found one. You NEVER agreed to him crossing those boundaries! This is something he did all on his own, and it is not your fault. Do you blame the rape victim when her boyfriend forces himself on her, even if she initially agreed to it? No! She agreed to a loving expression of their relationship. When she realized that that's not what it was, she said no, and her wishes were not respected. His will was forced on her.

i brought this subject up again last night. and he got really pissed off, saying he knows he made a stupid mistake, and why can't i just let sleeping dogs lie. that i keep throwing it up in his face like rubbing a dog's nose in doo. but, i can't help to think that i wouldn't bring it up if he would just quit talking to her.

Yeah. Exactly. What he's not getting right now is that it wasn't the sexual nature of this relationship with this other woman; it was the way he chose to go about it, the way he chose himself over you, and the way he valued this other woman's opinion more than yours. It's about what his actions say about his feelings for you! He doesn't GET that! He doesn't understand - maybe doesn't want to understand - that his actions and choices bring consequences, and NO! you are NOT going to let sleeping dogs lie. That dog is wide awake and barking its ass off. Saying you're sorry and feeling a bit guilty is not the same as actually BEING sorry for what you did. If he were truly remorseful, he'd take accountability for his actions. He'd fully realize that he hurt you, and that is a very VERY bad thing!! He hurt you. Doesn't he care? If his attitude is that you'll get over it, it says that he'll do it again...because you'll get over it again, right? What he doesn't realize is that these choices he is making are forcing you to make some tough decisions about your entire relationship. Do you really want to be in a relationship with someone who cares more about themselves than they do about you?

So let him get pissed off. You'll find it's not the end of the world. It may be the end of the relationship if he allows it to be, but you're right there wanting to work things out. He's not co-operating by respecting your needs as a person. You need to respect yourself enough to draw that line in the sand and enforce the consequences when he crosses it.

i don't know? i love him and he says he loves me and it would kill him if he ever would lose me, but i can't help to just keep thinking about it over and over and over head bang .........................thank you to everyone for listening

If you love him, you cannot allow him to continue doing this. It damages him as much as it damages you. Just like lack of discipline produces spoiled kids who don't hold themselves accountable for their actions, so does a lack of discipline in a marriage. No, we're not children anymore. But you have not set a firm boundary, and he will walk right on through it again and again if you don't SHOW him that this boundary is non-negotiable. Self-respect is NOT negotiable within a relationship. Explain to him that if you "let sleeping dogs lie", and you don't resolve this issue, if you just let this go without him fully realizing what he has done to you, that he is asking you to surrender a portion of your self-respect. That is absolutely unacceptable. Good relationships allow you to be the best you that you can be. Good relationships never degrade either person.

Him telling you that it would kill him to lose you is emotional manipulation. Do NOT allow him to put the responsibility of this on YOU. It's all him, baby. You have no choice but to stick to your guns and retain your self-respect. You must. When he chooses to ask you to just suck it up, to let your self-respect take a hit like this...he is making himself into a person that it is bad to be around. And you care enough about yourself, and respect yourself enough, to not subject yourself to other people's abuses. He has not shown you that he has changed at all. Making a sad face, saying he's really, really sorry, and not talking about it anymore doesn't change the fact that he still hasn't given up what he wanted; he's just backed off a little and is going more slowly down the same damn road! He can't just be friends with this woman. Doesn't he get that? There's too much history there! And to be honest, why would he want to be friends with her in the first place? This is a woman who has NO respect for your relationship, and for Mr. intuition and I, people like that get dropped like a hot rock.

It's your call, Nina. The end of a relationship is not the end of the world.

I may be the 2nd man to reply to this....but my wife and I just recently went through a similar situation. She had just had our 4th child, we had her Grandmother living with us, I was busy working, and apparently not realizing was feeling neglected. I started talking to this girl.

Well, in this whole process I never once thought that it was getting emotional or intimate. Nothing physical happened. But I began to "co-exist" with my wife. This was a bad place to be in!!

She knew that I was talking to her and she wanted it to end...and it did for a short period of time. Then we talked again a couple times nothing serious ( cuz I didn't see the problem with talking to a single female and nothing serious in my mind....then one day I just happen to be talking to her at home and my wife heard the words come out of my mouth wihle I was on the phone "I just wanted to hear your voice"

She freaked and I did too....didn't realize the magnitude of what I had said until later. Seeing through her eyes opened mine.

She is since out of the picture, met some guy on the internet and moved to TX.

I can't speak for him with all the pics and masterbation...but that is the thing...he needs to see it through your eyes....

Good luck

First of all I TOTALLY 100% agree with everything Intuition said. Let me tell you why. I had been married for 2 years, my husband would have to go away for weeks at a time every few months. One of these times, he talked about this woman who was helping him with his career/education (in the military). Every other time he'd call he'd mention her. When he came home, everyone seemed to know but me. I found out by her husband calling me and reading me their letters. We worked through it and things seemed to be going pretty well, until about 2 years later we had this huge argument. He went out with the guys and met a woman. She was around for 9 months and nothing that I did or said would make him stop. We separated this time (somewhere around week 4 of their relationship). Someone said to me "why do you want to be with someone who obviously doesn't care how you feel or shows no signs that he wants to be with you". WOW! I was pregnant, young, no skills, job, or self esteem. We somehow decided to get back together, after all we already had one child and another to come. Well, 10 years later..... I gained alot of self esteem, a job and a whole new perspective on life and sex. I met someone and he and I decided it would be fun to try and bring her into our sex life. (we had had an encounter before and we had alot of fun with it) We had alot of fun for a few months, and it really seemed to get us talking more and we were closer than ever. Then he had to go away again, and there of course was another woman. It had been 10 years and never any reason since that last one to worry or think anything. Until one night at 2am, a text message came through.... "Missing you already"....... and I too got the "we only talk, there's nothing going on story". Maybe that was true, but if there was no connection then why wouldn't he stop talking to her. The text messages came all the time, and he too got one on Father's Day. (we also had this rule about not bringing anyone or anything into our home because of the kids, we would go elsewhere) If indeed "I and the kids were the most important thing in his life" why would he jepordize that? One day I heard him talking to one of his friends about "trading up", he insisted that is wasn't about her. He saw what it was doing to me, he knew I was having serious flashbacks, I went through a phase where I wouldn't do anything, I lost 20lbs, I lost my job because I was so distracted. (a better one came along shortly after) Then one day, while I was at work, he stopped by the house to pick up something, guess who was in the car. And after a 20 year friendship and 14 years of marriage, I realized this. I DESERVE to be #1 and so do my kids. And if he thought more about how a woman he's only known a few weeks, felt than he did I... I don't want to be with someone like that. I had been through too much with him. He actually made the comment that "it's okay to have another woman in bed when we're together, but he can't do it alone? What kind of crap is that?" As it had been said earlier, we made the decision together, you deal with the consequences together. I know it wasn't my fault, he's an adult he could have said no. I am now divorced and I have all my kids. He however, is supposedly no longer with her and at least once a week asks if we should try it again. I always say no, 10 years down the road, I don't want to go through it again.

Intoit, thank you for your post. I don't believe that the rule "once a cheater, always a cheater" is absolute. I do believe that people can and do change. But as your story demonstrates, the rule stands for as long as they refuse to accept the responsibility for their actions.

I am sorry that you have had to go through that in your life, but I am always happy to see people using a stumbling block as their stepping stone. Congratulations on your success.

I've been on both sides of the same situation. As a man I was for a time doing the cheating. Later I found out that my (ex)wife was doing her own cheating. We were both hiding what we were doing from each other. It eventually led to us both meeting up with and having sex with others, without each others knowledge. Once we got into the habit of hiding things from each other, it became easier and easier. Near the end, I pointed out to her that we were spending $300/month on phone calls to Florida, and I didn't know anyone in Florida. She just looked at me and shrugged. I can't complain much, I had at least a dozen affairs all over the country. It's not hard to do if you're a truck driver who spends lots of time away from home.

After the divorce, I had a girlfriend that had her own private things going on behind my back. I found out when I was at her house one day. She was at work and her e-mail program popped up a new message and the subject pretty much told me there was something going on. I investigated, found out the truth, and confronted her. She denied everything. It was nothing, etc. So I confirmed my earlier findings, tricked one of her partners into spilling the beans and confronted her again. Obviously, that relationship was doomed.

Now I've finally found someone that communicates with me and is up front about everything. We had an issue a few months back. Going through a major stressful period, and she was wondering if it was worthwhile to stick it out with me, or should she cut her losses and run. She ended up talking with an old boyfriend, met him for dinner, traded several e-mails back and forth and discussed my shortcomings with him. I can't remember why I had gone into her e-mail, but there was some reason. I saw something in a subject line, snooped and got very upset. Things were rather precarious for about a week. Whether or not something actually occurred between them I don't know and it doesn't matter now. She reassured me and has effectively cut off communication with him. They still talk (very briefly) from time to time, but it is typically because of something where his knowledge is of use.

However, if she had told me conflicting stories about him, and obvious lies then we would have never been able to work things out. If you don't make a firm move, you could very well get a phone call telling you he's not coming back. Take it from a man (and a trucker) who has been down that very road. He's heading towards a breakup with you to be with her. The crazy thing is, chances are, things won't work out with her and he'll be wanting to come back to you.

just to update everyone

my husband called me today and said it was over with her!!! She called him up and he told her to lose his phone number, that it was causing too much problems with me and that it just wasn't worth it. I am so happy. He was home this past weekend and I was down and just really didn't talk much. He said he would show me his phone bill at the end of the month, just so i could see there would be no more phone calls, texts, or pics from her or to her. No more secrets. A big sigh of relief. i am on cloud nine. thanks to all who have listened to me and cared enough to reply. thank you

...Great

But now the work starts. I would recommend you two get into counseling as soon as possible. It sounds like it's a ripe time to identify the underlying problems and work through them. Your relationship can be stronger in the end. But if you don't figure it out, it will happen again. JMHO.

Good luck!

Great news, but please keep an eye on his e-mail and also any odd amounts of money that come up missing or can't be accounted for. I went through so much with my husband; multiple affairs that he said 'meant nothing' including one 'friendship' where he also claimed the woman was a full lesbian and I was just jealous of him having friends. When I found out about the many affairs; some physical, some emotional & some that started through internet chats; he put on this big production that he was a changed man and he 'gave them all up' because of his love for me. :rollseyes It was a few more months before I found out he'd just traded calling on his cell phone for buying calling cards to keep in contact with his honeys. I found the e-mail where he told his longest lover(8yrs) that they'd have to be extra careful; that I was still suspicious but he thought I was convinced that it was over. Do you know how painful and humiliating that was; I'd never want anyone to go through those feelings.

I'm not saying your hubby will do that but I know how it feels to be way down on the ladder of importance and made a fool of-I just don't want you to blindly allow yourself to be decieved also.

Best of Luck and I really do hope he saw what a treasure you were and gave her up.

just to update everyone

 

my husband called me today and said it was over with her!!! She called him up and he told her to lose his phone number, that it was causing too much problems with me and that it just wasn't worth it. I am so happy. He was home this past weekend and I was down and just really didn't talk much. He said he would show me his phone bill at the end of the month, just so i could see there would be no more phone calls, texts, or pics from her or to her. No more secrets. A big sigh of relief. i am on cloud nine. thanks to all who have listened to me and cared enough to reply. thank you

When I found out about the many affairs; some physical, some emotional & some that started through internet chats; he put on this big production that he was a changed man and he 'gave them all up' because of his love for me. :rollseyes It was a few more months before I found out he'd just traded calling on his cell phone for buying calling cards to keep in contact with his honeys. I found the e-mail where he told his longest lover(8yrs) that they'd have to be extra careful; that I was still suspicious but he thought I was convinced that it was over.

Uh-huh. Damage control. No interest in fixing anything; he just wanted to not feel bad about it. A bit like taking a painkiller while tying the severed limb back onto the stump with some duct tape and chewing gum. There. All better now, see? :rollseyes *sigh*

I'm just wondering...Did you print out the email and sit waiting at the kitchen table? Did you hand it to him without saying a word? Did you demand that he read it to you with his own lying mouth? Did you watch him squirm, or maybe become enraged that he'd been found out (maybe that you "went snooping")? Did you make him read it to you, or maybe stand in his way as he tried to make his escape, reading his words back to him?

I think I would've threatened to take out a 1/4 page ad in the local newspaper and have them print his email, word for filthy word, if he didn't read it to you with his own mouth. Slander? Oh no. Those are his own words. He's only slandering himself. You're just making it known. If you're that ashamed of them, maybe you shouldn't have been saying them in the first damn place. Okay, maybe that wouldn't have held up in a court of law, but it sure makes a tasty thought.

Uh-huh. Damage control. No interest in fixing anything; he just wanted to not feel bad about it. A bit like taking a painkiller while tying the severed limb back onto the stump with some duct tape and chewing gum. There. All better now, see? :rollseyes *sigh*

 

I'm just wondering...Did you print out the email and sit waiting at the kitchen table? Did you hand it to him without saying a word? Did you demand that he read it to you with his own lying mouth? Did you watch him squirm, or maybe become enraged that he'd been found out (maybe that you "went snooping")? Did you make him read it to you, or maybe stand in his way as he tried to make his escape, reading his words back to him?

 

I think I would've threatened to take out a 1/4 page ad in the local newspaper and have them print his email, word for filthy word, if he didn't read it to you with his own mouth. Slander? Oh no. Those are his own words. He's only slandering himself. You're just making it known. If you're that ashamed of them, maybe you shouldn't have been saying them in the first damn place. Okay, maybe that wouldn't have held up in a court of law, but it sure makes a tasty thought.

Remind me to never piss you off. Surrender

I forwarded the whole file of cheating e-mails that I'd collected to everyone in his work and personal contact list. I know that action probably seems like overkill but you see we'd been married for 30 yrs when this came out and I'd stayed faithful the whole damn time. Plus he appropriated over $20k of communal funds :rollseyes & ran up debts without my knowledge. head bang Revenge was the one area of my life that I still felt I had under my control!

I may pay with some extra Karma but damn it felt good to hurt him just a little. Surrender

Uh-huh. Damage control. No interest in fixing anything; he just wanted to not feel bad about it. A bit like taking a painkiller while tying the severed limb back onto the stump with some duct tape and chewing gum. There. All better now, see? :rollseyes *sigh*

 

I'm just wondering...Did you print out the email and sit waiting at the kitchen table? Did you hand it to him without saying a word? Did you demand that he read it to you with his own lying mouth? Did you watch him squirm, or maybe become enraged that he'd been found out (maybe that you "went snooping")? Did you make him read it to you, or maybe stand in his way as he tried to make his escape, reading his words back to him?

 

I think I would've threatened to take out a 1/4 page ad in the local newspaper and have them print his email, word for filthy word, if he didn't read it to you with his own mouth. Slander? Oh no. Those are his own words. He's only slandering himself. You're just making it known. If you're that ashamed of them, maybe you shouldn't have been saying them in the first damn place. Okay, maybe that wouldn't have held up in a court of law, but it sure makes a tasty thought.

I forwarded the whole file of cheating e-mails that I'd collected to everyone in his work and personal contact list. I know that action probably seems like overkill but you see we'd been married for 30 yrs when this came out and I'd stayed faithful the whole damn time. Plus he appropriated over $20k of communal funds :rollseyes & ran up debts without my knowledge. head bang Revenge was the one area of my life that I still felt I had under my control!

I may pay with some extra Karma but damn it felt good to hurt him just a little. Surrender

DAYamn! And I thought I was mean.

Well Inviz, you know what they say about karma coming back around...sounds a little more like righteous anger on your part and if anyone was due for a karmic ass-munching, it was your ex-husband. I'd say that makes you and he about even.

This is my first reply, i am a newbie, i'm a male. baby girl, go to a club, pick out the most handsome man you can find, bring him home, introduce him to your husband and say to your husband "we will talk about this in two weeks", don't wait up, he's gay! IF A MAN CAN'T LOOK AT HIMSELF IN THE MIRROR, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO BRING THE MIRROR TO THE MAN.

VINCE

funny you should say all that. i am so seriously thinking of divorce. i don't even know why i was even trying to make it work. and he still isn't talking to her, i checked his phone bill, but i actually met someone else and he and i have been talking for about 2 weeks now and he has already made me feel more special than my husband ever has. i know i should get a divorce before i start meeting other people. but, i am a little afraid of my husband and i don't know how to tell him. but it feels a little good too, to do to him what he done to me. and the new guy knows that i'm married, so i am not lying to him.

funny you should say all that. i am so seriously thinking of divorce. i don't even know why i was even trying to make it work. and he still isn't talking to her, i checked his phone bill, but i actually met someone else and he and i have been talking for about 2 weeks now and he has already made me feel more special than my husband ever has. i know i should get a divorce before i start meeting other people. but, i am a little afraid of my husband and i don't know how to tell him. but it feels a little good too, to do to him what he done to me. and the new guy knows that i'm married, so i am not lying to him.

You know what they say about two wrongs...

Don't sink to his level, Nina. If you choose to start a relationship with someone else, unless you and your husband are into polyamory, you'll need to end the one you're in right now. He hasn't been fair to you, but that doesn't mean it's okay to do the same to him. Like we were talking about before, let karma do the dirty work for you.

If you're actually afraid of him, you may need help in leaving him. Might be a good idea to post an entirely new thread on this subject, as there are women on this board, I'm sure, that have experience in this area. You don't want to end up a statistic.

Please Nina don't start an affair.

It is harder then ending the relationship with your husband.

The sneeking around will kill you. Take it from someone who was there. I am not proud of myself, but I liked this guy. He said his marrige was over I believed him. It took awhile for him to leave his wife and in the mean time we were stressed out all the time.

Lots of tears, doubt, shame, and way too much stress.

If this guy is so great he will wait. If you are so sure you want a divorce don't wait.

You need to take care of you NOW.

I hope you make the decision that is right for you.

Your friend,

Prettylady

i know i should get a divorce before i start meeting other people. but, i am a little afraid of my husband and i don't know how to tell him.

Getting the divorce will be hard at first, but eventually you'll likely find yourself feeling as free as a bird. Cheating will be easy at first, but eventually you'll wind up feeling trapped. Delay that gratification, girl. You'll thank yourself for it.

Here's a suggestion which might be off the wall, but just might work, because in my experience the path you're going down is VERY LIKELY going to end with the end of your relationship ... If what he's doing is about being bad and having two women fighting over him, WHAT IF YOU TURNED OFF THE FUEL FOR THE FIRE BY SAYING "GO AHEAD HAVE YOUR FUN WITH HER"? Give him "permission" to have his affair! Stop fighting about it - join him in being "bad"!! - tell him that "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" and you now consider yourself free to have whatever outside relationships you want and you don't consider it his right to agree to it or even be told the truth about it.

 

At the worst, you'll split up, but I think he'll realize how BIG the risk to his relationship with you is in doing the "ok, so we can both cheat" thing, and it'll open his mind to coming to a mutually acceptable set of rules.

Totally in agreeance here. During conversations with some of the guys I used to work with, and the vast majority of them were married, basically their thoughts were I would leave my wife if she even thought about doing half of the stuff I have done to her.

Most men are NOT equal opportunists when it comes to having an "open" relationship. The two of you had guidelines set forth that were acceptable to both of you, now he is obviously WAYYYYY out of bounds.

Sorry I don't really have anything new to add to what the other posters are saying. However I do agree, if it's good for him then make him aware that you will also be finding other male "friends" to associate with. Maybe that will snap him out of the state of denial he seems so firmly planted in.

Good luck,

Maria

***edit: sorry I'm an idiot and jumped in on this thread a little too late****

OK, I guess I'll be devil's advocate. Understand I'm not taking a position, just making some counterpoint for discussion.

First, let's state the obvious - there is more going on than his friendship with this woman. There is stuff buried in the marriage, likely more stuff between her and him that you (Nina) know about.

But what is there between the two of you that you haven't mentioned, or are perhaps even unconscious of? What would he say privately to a close male friend about what is wrong? A very common issue here, mb yours mb not, is for women to be using sex to manipulate men (OMG!!!). Sex is a right of marriage, not bait for the woman to use to make the man obedient. Note culture, religion: Commandment against adultery is tougher on men, who are not monogamous by nature. It is very common for women to hold out or to play control games with sex inside of marriage. And outside, come to think of it... Where is the corresponding commandment Thou Shalt Not Hold Out? So men sometimes feel like 'outside' sex is the only way to have it without having being played.

The chorus of condemnation that descends on a male cheater rather comes from the attitude that male sexuality is trash and that men are horny cheating rats. Endorse male sexuality as natural, understand that men are not monogamous by nature -- and you'll see how vulnerable men are sexually. The CEO of Boeing recently lost his job over an office affair. This is not an idiot male who can't control himself - he would never be where he was without being very smart, competitive and disciplined. He is VULNERABLE, as are all men. So now look at any wandering male and see it as he very often does -- he may well feel that the only way to keep his family (esp when there are kids involved) are: abstain; have a difficult, unsatisfactory sex life in your marriage that opens you to manipulation (vulnerability!), or find a FB or lover for that part of your life. And to the woman's hurt over intimacy breached -- well, in the scenario above, she is the one who chose power over intimacy in sexual matters.

So, Nina, I don't presume at all that these are your issues, though they are very common. BUT... do look carefully and honestly (OUCH!!) at your own marriage and ask how you contribute(d) to what is happening.

Food for thought. Broccoli maybe, but food.

funny you should say all that. i am so seriously thinking of divorce. i don't even know why i was even trying to make it work. and he still isn't talking to her, i checked his phone bill, but i actually met someone else and he and i have been talking for about 2 weeks now and he has already made me feel more special than my husband ever has. i know i should get a divorce before i start meeting other people. but, i am a little afraid of my husband and i don't know how to tell him. but it feels a little good too, to do to him what he done to me. and the new guy knows that i'm married, so i am not lying to him.

Hey girl, I hope things turn out for you. I know that this new guy makes you feel like a woman again. He gives you attention, and makes you feel alive and sexual again. Hey, he may very well be the one. BUT you are still a married woman, and that is a plain fact. If you fear your husband that alone tells me personally that there is a problem. You should never feel fear of your husband, even with something like this. Do you have family that can help you? Now is the time to find your support group. NOW, I am not a counselor, and I am not telling you what you should do. You have to make that decision, and only you. BUT if you decide that divorce is what you need for yourself than you need to do it. Don't sit there for years stagnant wanting to do something. I can only give you my opinion, for what it is worth, because I am not a trained psychologist or counselor. But if he is still talking to this woman I can tell you that he really doesn't give a shit if you leave or not. I mean, you have expressly told him you don't like it. Then he calls on his phone, and he has to know you are going to check the bills! So, he is at the point where he doesn't care if you know or not. He flaunts her in your face as to say "what are you going to do about it"....if he is doing this with her it makes me wonder who else he is doing it with. Its a horrible situation, and I feel bad for you. But women do survive this sort of thing, and when they come through they are stronger for it. As far as the other guy goes........you have to be extremely cautious during this time girl. You are very, very vulnerable emotionally right now. And there are men out there who can tell women who are vulnerable. You need to proceed with extreme caution. My advice to my friend when she divorced was this: do NOT enter into a relationship right off of the bat, because emotionally you are looking for anyone to shelter you from the storm. You need to spend some time by yourself, and find yourself. You need to learn who you are and what you want, and then can proceed into a relationship from there.

Well girl, sorry that this is so long. Best of luck to you.

Sorry Raysways but I don't buy into any of that.

I know LOTS of men who are happily married, feel no need to cheat and treat their wives with love and respect. The whole idea that men find it harder to be monogamous by nature is utter crap and to me a cop out. There are lots of cheating women out there, what's their excuse? I don't think it is a flaw of their nature, I think it is a flaw of their personality. If they don't feel they can commit to a realtionship such as marriage then they should never get married.

This goes the same with women as well, if a poster came to the board with a story in reverse of this one then the advice would be the same. This is not man bashing fest here, it is the condemming of a CHEATER ..male or female. I don't care how vulnerable the man is, there are very very few situations where I honestly feel sorry for him (or her the case may be). If you are that unhappy that you have to find that intimacy or sex outside the marriage, then leave the marriage. If you have children then staying for them is not helping either. Kids are very intuitive when it comes to their parents and their relationships, they are going to know when their parents are not happy together. (but that is a whole other subject)

Sure there are women who use sex as a tool for manipulation and ultimately I think they do suffer for it, as does their marriage.

I can appreciate what you are doing, throwing out some other scenario's or points of view here, so I am not doing this as a flame to you, just debating your points.

In this case we are dealing with a man who is cheating on and lying to his wife. Personally I feel there is no reason for her to continue in this relationship, she can't trust or respect him anymore, he doesn't love her (if he did there would be no cheating). Why continue?

Sure divorce is hard and painful, but continuing on like this would be worse.

do look carefully and honestly (OUCH!!) at your own marriage and ask how you contribute(d) to what is happening.

I can agree with this, but only to a point. Of course, in every marriage there are 2 people. I admit it, I'm not an easy person to live with alot of the time, and Jay should be given a medal (don't tell him I said that though lol). BUT, I don't think that when the husband (or wife) is cheating on their spouse people should say that somehow perhaps she (or he) contributed to it in some way! Come on, that is ridiculous. Now, we are all supposed to be adults. And adults should be able to take responsibility for their own actions, and not push blame onto someone else. Her husband is cheating. He may not physically be screwing this woman, although I think if he isn't they are building up to that point. NOW, I'm not leaving that other woman out of the blame either. Nothing bothers me more than when a single person barges into a marriage and just disregards everything but their own wants and cares. Man, what happened to respect? Now, I'm not talking about swingers, because swingers are not cheating....everything is consentual and in the open. I'm talking about this situation. In my personal opinion the marriage is in deep, deep trouble. I don't know them, so I won't say any more about it. But I hate nothing more than to hear "if she were taking care of her man right maybe he wouldn't have to cheat"....I went OFF on my best friend when she said that to me. I think its a cop out, and crap. He is cheating, and Nina, you don't take the blame girl....and he and she will probably try and push it off on you. Make you feel like you somehow caused them to do this. Bologna.

funny you should say all that. i am so seriously thinking of divorce. i don't even know why i was even trying to make it work. and he still isn't talking to her, i checked his phone bill, but i actually met someone else and he and i have been talking for about 2 weeks now and he has already made me feel more special than my husband ever has. i know i should get a divorce before i start meeting other people. but, i am a little afraid of my husband and i don't know how to tell him. but it feels a little good too, to do to him what he done to me. and the new guy knows that i'm married, so i am not lying to him.

You're putting out the fire with gasoline Nina. If a divorce is the solution, deal with that first. Of course this new man has already made you feel more special than you husband ever has. Chances are that's his only goal. Well, technically his only goal is to get laid. He can say and do all those wonderful things because he doesn't have to pay the piper. Sure there's a chance he's Mr. Perfect that showed up just when you're in need. The knight in shining armor rescuing you from your husband the dragon. And a 3-legged mule may win the Kentucky Derby next year. The world is full of men looking for that woman in distress, because she's emotionally vulnerable (I spent a few years as one of those men). They can't understand how any man could think of cheating on someone like you. They can't believe any man wouldn't do anything in his power to make you happy. They just wish their (wife, girlfriend, ex, whatever) had been half the woman that you are. They are incredibly romantic and aren't really that interested in sex. They'd give it all up just to hold you close and make you feel loved. Does any of this sound familiar? Did you "meet" this man over the internet? If so, how many other women has he made feel more special? Once he's achieved his goal (gotten laid and destroyed your marriage) how much longer will he stick around? Another point to consider, if this new man is so fantastic why isn't he completely swamped with women? The "A good man is hard to find" saying has a lot of truth to it. Women tend to be very good shoppers. Somebody would have him under lock and key by now.

Sadly, I'll be shocked if you believe all of the above. I'll be even more surprised if you take this advice: Deal with your marriage problems first. If the proper solution is divorce, then get a divorce. Not with hate and screaming, but as two adults, understanding your lives will both be better spent going different directions. Give yourself time to be comfortably single. Believe that positive attention from a man is his way of saying "Will you fuck me?", and have sex with the ones you want. Not based on their bullshit, but purely on the physical attraction. Learn that you can get sex anytime, anywhere from almost anyone. Then you are ready to start looking for your true Mr. Right. The man who makes you feel special because to him you are special, completely uninfluenced by sex. The man who meets all your needs because you are his world. The way you are heading you're going to spend a lot of time just meeting other men's needs and you'll never find the true happiness I think we all deserve.

Damn, I sound like an ad for E-Hominy

Of course this new man has already made you feel more special than you husband ever has. Chances are that's his only goal. Well, technically his only goal is to get laid. He can say and do all those wonderful things because he doesn't have to pay the piper.

Excellent point.

Hmmm.. I was wondering what responses this would bring. Is there interest in a new thread on male v. female - how they view relationships differently?

Believe what you will; I say men are not monogamous by nature. They may choose to be so for a particular relationship, and I'm neither excusing or endorsing cheating by men or by women. But monogamy is a choice - males are programmed to inseminate females, and the commonest male fantasy is access to multiple females.

As far as Nina's situation, realizing this, if it describes hub, may actually reduce the discomfort she feels a little. My suggestion was that she start with a realistic assessment of what is going on. WHY is this going on outside? Why did it/does it continue after you made it clear you were not ok with it? Do you play a part in it? What?

You can't control what your partner does. It is his/her choice to comply or not with your wants. And if 'not', as seems to be the case here, what you CAN control is your own part in it, whatever that is - so seeing it is empowering, even when it is unflattering. If your only contribution is being 'co-dependent' by letting it continue, then your choice is to decide to live with it or not (assuming he doesn't comply with your wishes). Deciding not to 'live with it' can mean leaving or it can mean working on the marriage together.

Or, if, for example, there is a power struggle of some kind (I'm not saying there is, just finding an example), where sex and intimacy are damaged, you can choose to work on ending that if you think it will reduce the other problems. Understand -- I'm not accusing. I'm just pointing out the things you CAN control rather than focusing on him, who you can't. So-- see your power and use it effectively (and fairly). Also be realistic - perfect marriages don't exist outside of fairy tales. They involve give and take, agreements and disagreements, tolerance, growth, and learning ten gazillion times that you and spouse will often see the same thing totally differently, and honest proactive communication is the only thing that will close that gap. Some gaps are simply too big (like the importance of the World Series), so expect it and figure it's a 'give' rather than a 'take'. In real life, the kind of absolutism that EvilMJ espouses isn't useful or realistic. With some years, scars and calluses, you learn that there is more to compromise than the ones you make with your spouse - real life will never live up to your ideals, and you have to compromise with yourself as well.

Bottom line: look at what you can change, and if you can't tolerate his behavior, change something. Don't sit and stew about how he 'should' behave - it gets YOU nowhere and wastes your emotional resources. And be realistic about whether the consequences are preferable to the problems.

Well, technically his only goal is to get laid. SO?

The world is full of men looking for that woman in distress, because she's emotionally vulnerable (I spent a few years as one of those men).

AND MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, THIS IS WHAT SOME LESS THAN HONEST MALES DO BECAUSE WOMEN HOLD OUT TO CONTROL MEN. BOTH HE AND SHE ARE BEING EXPLOITATIVE. ONLY ONE OF THEM GETS CONDEMNATION.

Once he's achieved his goal (gotten laid and destroyed your marriage) how much longer will he stick around?

NOT LONG IF THAT IS REALLY HIS GOAL... BUT IT ISN'T, USUALLY - IT IS SEX. WHEN HER EXPECTATIONS FROM THOSE 'PROMISES' START TO APPEAR - THAT IS WHEN HE MOVES ON.

Women tend to be very good shoppers. Somebody would have him under lock and key by now.

READ THE FOREGOING CAREFULLY AND SEE IF YOU CAN FIND THE CONTEMPT FOR MALES, EVEN FROM A MALE.

Believe that positive attention from a man is his way of saying "Will you fuck me?", and have sex with the ones you want.

Not based on their bullshit, but purely on the physical attraction. Learn that you can get sex anytime, anywhere from almost anyone.

SO MR CREEP HAS TO BREAK HEARTS TO GET ANY, BUT SHE CAN "PICK THE ONES SHE WANTS" - "ANYTIME, ANYWHERE FROM ALMOST ANYONE".

DOES ANYONE SEE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN HERE? SMALL, LIKE THE GRAND CANYON? BUT REMEMBER - EVILMJ, LIKE MOST WOMEN, 'SELDOM HAS ANY SYMPATHY FOR THE MAN'. YUP - POWER CORRUPTS, BABY.

are special, completely uninfluenced by sex.

OR YOU COULD BE 'SEX-POSITIVE' AND SEE HIS SEXUAL ATTENTION AS A VALIDATION OF YOUR OWN DESIRABILITY. ALSO SEE IT AS A POWERFUL WAY OF SHOWING LOVE -THAT YOU WILL ACCEPT AND SATISFY HIS WANTS. JEEZ... DO YOU REALLY WANT A GUY WITH NO LUST AIMED AT YOU? BOOORING...

OH, YEAH -- I AGREE WITH SHE N JAYBEE, MOSTLY, ABOUT WHAT YOU SHOULD DO. THE ABOVE IS FOR THOUGHT ABOUT A SECOND DOUBLE STANDARD AND ABOUT HOW SCREWY THE ATTITUDES ABOUT MALE SEXUALITY REALLY ARE.

SEPARATE THREAD, ANYONE???

Well, technically his only goal is to get laid. SO?

The world is full of men looking for that woman in distress, because she's emotionally vulnerable (I spent a few years as one of those men).

AND MAYBE, JUST MAYBE, THIS IS WHAT SOME LESS THAN HONEST MALES DO BECAUSE WOMEN HOLD OUT TO CONTROL MEN. BOTH HE AND SHE ARE BEING EXPLOITATIVE. ONLY ONE OF THEM GETS CONDEMNATION.

Once he's achieved his goal (gotten laid and destroyed your marriage) how much longer will he stick around?

NOT LONG IF THAT IS REALLY HIS GOAL... BUT IT ISN'T, USUALLY - IT IS SEX. WHEN HER EXPECTATIONS FROM THOSE 'PROMISES' START TO APPEAR - THAT IS WHEN HE MOVES ON.

 

Women tend to be very good shoppers. Somebody would have him under lock and key by now.

READ THE FOREGOING CAREFULLY AND SEE IF YOU CAN FIND THE CONTEMPT FOR MALES, EVEN FROM A MALE.

 

Believe that positive attention from a man is his way of saying "Will you fuck me?", and have sex with the ones you want.

Not based on their bullshit, but purely on the physical attraction. Learn that you can get sex anytime, anywhere from almost anyone.

 

SO MR CREEP HAS TO BREAK HEARTS TO GET ANY, BUT SHE CAN "PICK THE ONES SHE WANTS" - "ANYTIME, ANYWHERE FROM ALMOST ANYONE".

 

DOES ANYONE SEE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN HERE? SMALL, LIKE THE GRAND CANYON? BUT REMEMBER - EVILMJ, LIKE MOST WOMEN, 'SELDOM HAS ANY SYMPATHY FOR THE MAN'. YUP - POWER CORRUPTS, BABY.

 

are special, completely uninfluenced by sex.

OR YOU COULD BE 'SEX-POSITIVE' AND SEE HIS SEXUAL ATTENTION AS A VALIDATION OF YOUR OWN DESIRABILITY. ALSO SEE IT AS A POWERFUL WAY OF SHOWING LOVE -THAT YOU WILL ACCEPT AND SATISFY HIS WANTS. JEEZ... DO YOU REALLY WANT A GUY WITH NO LUST AIMED AT YOU? BOOORING...

 

OH, YEAH -- I AGREE WITH SHE N JAYBEE, MOSTLY, ABOUT WHAT YOU SHOULD DO. THE ABOVE IS FOR THOUGHT ABOUT A SECOND DOUBLE STANDARD AND ABOUT HOW SCREWY THE ATTITUDES ABOUT MALE SEXUALITY REALLY ARE.

SEPARATE THREAD, ANYONE???

First, you can use the Quote tags to differentiate between what I've said and what you have to say. It's much nicer than just typing all CAPS.

Now to get down to business. I don't write one-liners, I write paragraphs (usually incredibly long and boring paragraphs). When you take a partial sentence out, you are presenting my point of view out of context. If we want to do that I can note that since you said

SCREWY

I'm unsure of your experience in these matters, so I will relate my own. Since part of my discussion focused on men's behaviour online: I bought my first PC in 1989. In 1990 hooked up a modem and got online. Most of that year was spent messaging, replying to forums on a primitive system (each single modem computer, called the next computer in the network to update on a daily basis. It would take most of a week for a message to cross the US and come back). My chatting days began in 1991, and 1992-1994, I probably averaged 30 hours/week chatting with a few hundred local people (in San Diego), I also met several hundred (mostly at meetings) and had sex with 12-15 women I met online. Several of those womenI sat with while they chatted, and I began to see the differences between the online behaviour of the sexes. In 1993, I expanded my experience to the internet and have been online since that time. I'm now 44 years old and have observed hundreds of hours of chatting from the female perspective (by sitting with them and reading) and thousands of hours from the male perspective.

When it comes to online activity I have confirmed to my own satisfaction two things: 1. I represent myself honestly, and do not intentionally mislead anyone. 2. I am definitely part of a small minority.

Because this has already become so long, I'll actually begin the discussion in another post.

RaysWays, you mentioned that men are not naturally monogamous. On one level I agree. A hunting/gathering society has to continue to grow to prosper. In this primitive precursor to civilization, men have the dangerous job of killing things that don't want to die. With only rocks and clubs as weapons, this means that the outcome was usually in question. The better a man became at this activity, the larger group he could support. That meant more wives which meant more children. Figure high infant mortality, plus the natural dangers, you needed the women to stay almost constantly pregnant. With the men at risk, women should outnumber them.

Now, our primitive man probably wasn't monogamous, at least not by choice. However, unlike most non-monogamous men today, his wives all lived in the same place. They all knew each other and were all part (not necessarily a happy part) of one big family.

Anytime you're ready to live under the conditions which created male-dominant polygamy, you'll have my blessing. Heck, I want to see you explain to a woman how you're going to provide for her by running down an antelope.

Things are different. Women are at least as capable as men at providing the necessities of life in the more civilized portions of the world. The image of man as the sole provider and woman as the homemaker is rapidly disappearing. This means that women can have an equal say on how they live their lives, and who the spend their time with.

My contempt isn't for males, it's for those who chose to flout their ignorance. The world has changed, the slaves have been freed, women have the right to vote, wake up to the world of today. Too many men feel that women should live the same life their grand or great grandmother lived. When that same man is willing to work his ass off outside, in any weather, 16 hours a day, 6 days a week, like them men of that time, then he's being fair. Otherwise, he's someone who has earned my contempt.

OR YOU COULD BE 'SEX-POSITIVE' AND SEE HIS SEXUAL ATTENTION AS A VALIDATION OF YOUR OWN DESIRABILITY. ALSO SEE IT AS A POWERFUL WAY OF SHOWING LOVE -THAT YOU WILL ACCEPT AND SATISFY HIS WANTS. JEEZ... DO YOU REALLY WANT A GUY WITH NO LUST AIMED AT YOU? BOOORING...

Sex Positive? Sexual Attention as a Validation or your own desirability?? A Powerful way of Showing Love??? I can see we're going to have to start slow here. Sex is a physical act, period. Love is an emotion, the emotional condition where the health, happiness and well-being of another is more important than your own. If you require sexual attention to validate your desirability, you have no self-esteem, i.e. you have no desirability. You are merely a subsitute for your partner's hand. You mention the woman accepting and satisfying the man's wants, what about the woman's desires and needs?

When a man tells lies about himself and misleads a woman about his intentions just to get her to have sex with him, then yes he is a creep. He's scum and worthless in my opinion. If a man is upfront about himself and his intentions, he's just as likely to find women to have sex with. The difference is the women will typically be more attractive and emotionally more stable. They understand that sex is just that, nothing more. Sex and love can exist together, and my own experience says sex with love is much more satisfying than sex without love.

Reverse the roles. A woman that lies to get things, is no better than the man who does the same.

The "screwy attitudes about male sexuality" you mention certainly exist. The problem is, it's men that usually have them.

OH, YEAH -- I AGREE WITH SHE N JAYBEE, MOSTLY, ABOUT WHAT YOU SHOULD DO. THE ABOVE IS FOR THOUGHT ABOUT A SECOND DOUBLE STANDARD AND ABOUT HOW SCREWY THE ATTITUDES ABOUT MALE SEXUALITY REALLY ARE.

Would a second double standard be a quadruple standard?

Of course there is a double standard. Men and women are different (I've checked), they think differently, and respond differently. Men are typically driven by basic needs, women are more complex. We want food, sex, sleep and things that make lots of noise. Women want to have their taste buds aroused, their passions fulfilled, to feel safe and secure in their dreams and things that satisfy their sense of touch or smell.

I think it boils down to many men being intimidated by a woman who can think for herself.

RaysWays, you mentioned that men are not naturally monogamous. On one level I agree. A hunting/gathering society has to continue to grow to prosper. In this primitive precursor to civilization, men have the dangerous job of killing things that don't want to die. With only rocks and clubs as weapons, this means that the outcome was usually in question. The better a man became at this activity, the larger group he could support. That meant more wives which meant more children. Figure high infant mortality, plus the natural dangers, you needed the women to stay almost constantly pregnant. With the men at risk, women should outnumber them. Now, our primitive man probably wasn't monogamous, at least not by choice. However, unlike most non-monogamous men today, his wives all lived in the same place. They all knew each other and were all part (not necessarily a happy part) of one big family.

This sounds good but isn’t true. It is believed that neolithic men were in fact far more monogamous than polygamous. The nature of the environment, and society is such that men can’t afford polygamy and it made much more sense to pair bond. Sure polygamy and cuckolding would happen here and there, but the small settlements made even thing like cuckolding easy to discover. Some say that language was perhaps invented originally to gossip so men could keep an eye on their mates by asking their relatives if she was faithful. I don’t quite go that far, but men simply couldn’t afford to be polygamous (how many poor men are polygamous?) as there was no way to accumulate wealth. There is no bonus to being pregnant in the stone age if you don’t have a mate, women do have a say in this, in fact polygamy is more harmful to males than females genetically. After all if you have more than one wife and the sex ratio is 1-1, someone is going without. Male mortality may have been high, but so was female mortality, just think how scary childbirth would have been.

Anytime you're ready to live under the conditions which created male-dominant polygamy, you'll have my blessing. Heck, I want to see you explain to a woman how you're going to provide for her by running down an antelope.

That time would be any civilization including our own, though currently its only a far cry from where it used to be. Roman males were wildly polygamous and female slaves were used mostly for sex. This is why you could get a refund on a slave if she turned out to be pregnant or a non-virgin. This is also why household male slaves were so often freed. They were the Roman males illegitimate sons. Some empires like the Inca even had a legal number of wives per title. In every city the emperor had a harem of 1500 women. This went down to the lowest official. Other men had to do without. In medieval Europe male peasants often did not marry until they were in their late 30's, while the females were sent to work in the lords manner. What do you think they were doing there? It was a harem not unlike any sultan’s only a bit more of an open secret. Bastard children were often at official family events.

Things are different. Women are at least as capable as men at providing the necessities of life in the more civilized portions of the world. The image of man as the sole provider and woman as the homemaker is rapidly disappearing. This means that women can have an equal say on how they live their lives, and who the spend their time with.

But they can’t change their brains. Women are in part homemakers because thats what they are wired for, men break things because thats what we are wired for. Give fraternal twins, one boy one girl, equal toys, and the boys will play with the cars, gun, etc and the girls will play with dolls. Give a girl only male toys, she will treat it as if it were a living creature. Its how we are its how we evolved.

My contempt isn't for males, it's for those who chose to flout their ignorance. The world has changed, the slaves have been freed, women have the right to vote, wake up to the world of today. Too many men feel that women should live the same life their grand or great grandmother lived. When that same man is willing to work his ass off outside, in any weather, 16 hours a day, 6 days a week, like them men of that time, then he's being fair. Otherwise, he's someone who has earned my contempt.

The world has changed, or more fair to say civilization has changed, but WE have not changed. Males still seek out healthy young females for breeding potential (why is young beautiful) while women seek out status and power.

Sex Positive? Sexual Attention as a Validation or your own desirability?? A Powerful way of Showing Love??? I can see we're going to have to start slow here. Sex is a physical act, period. Love is an emotion, the emotional condition where the health, happiness and well-being of another is more important than your own. If you require sexual attention to validate your desirability, you have no self-esteem, i.e. you have no desirability. You are merely a subsitute for your partner's hand. You mention the woman accepting and satisfying the man's wants, what about the woman's desires and needs?

I hate to be agreeing with the guy, but sex appeal is perhaps the universal self-esteem builder. We are wired for it as we are all the children of ‘sexy’ parents. Those who don’t enjoy sex, or don’t worry about sex appeal have less children in the following generations. There is a fine line of course, I know I feel better about my self when I look better, but you need not have to prove it constantly by sexual conquest.

When a man tells lies about himself and misleads a woman about his intentions just to get her to have sex with him, then yes he is a creep. He's scum and worthless in my opinion. If a man is upfront about himself and his intentions, he's just as likely to find women to have sex with.

The creep part is of course true. The second part isn’t. If someone were a low status male, lying will be their only way to appear to have status (and women are more attracted to status, or self confidence if you will), these lies will be found out but briefly he will seem more attractive.

The difference is the women will typically be more attractive and emotionally more stable. They understand that sex is just that, nothing more. Sex and love can exist together, and my own experience says sex with love is much more satisfying than sex without love.

Reverse the roles. A woman that lies to get things, is no better than the man who does the same.

Women can’t lie like a man to get sex. It doesn’t work. Only the most low status male would be attracted to a female based on status. We are not wired for it, this is why you will more often find poor attractive females marrying rich males, than poor attractive males marrying rich women. In fact its been shown that the more successful a woman is the more they expect their men to be successful. So a woman can’t lie with words and get laid. She lies with makeup, surgery, and hair die to look younger. This is what men are really after as a whole.

The "screwy attitudes about male sexuality" you mention certainly exist. The problem is, it's men that usually have them.

Oh women have them too. Most people are unaware of their own innate nature, or use it for an excuse if they are aware. Saying men gain more genetically being a polygamist isn’t an excuse for leaving a string of bastard children across the country.

Of course there is a double standard. Men and women are different (I've checked), they think differently, and respond differently. Men are typically driven by basic needs, women are more complex.

This is you not understanding your nature. Men and women are sexually programmed for the SAME needs which is children in the next generation. We don’t think about it that way but thats why we are programmed as we are, because its worked best. Women are not more complex in needs, they just have different needs for seeing their seed is in the next generation. A man can have a few children a day if he is able, a woman is always limited by biology. As such her needs are different if she is to perform maximally in terms of children than a man.

We want food, sex, sleep and things that make lots of noise. Women want to have their taste buds aroused, their passions fulfilled, to feel safe and secure in their dreams and things that satisfy their sense of touch or smell.

Women are by nature more social, they also have better memories for details. You are being overly romantic here. Men may like fishing and women gardening as a stereotype and there is truth to it, but men also are great artists and chiefs and my wife likes baseball. Men are not basic creatures any more than females are complex ones.

I think it boils down to many men being intimidated by a woman who can think for herself.

Undoubtedly this is true, and I’m not trying to agree with a creep, but evolutionary biology is a field of specialty of mine and you made a few basic assumptions that don’t hold up to study. Men are in fact more polygamist than women, but pair bonding is as big a part of our makeup as polygamy. One reason theorized for why men like young women is that we are looking for a life long breeding partner. Men who liked 40 year old women didn’t leave many decedents so the majority likes younger. Also even in the most polygamist societies, men still had a ‘wife’ who was the head wife. She bore the heirs, she received the bulk of his wealth and she even would pick the junior wives at times. We ARE a monogamous species with opportunistic polygamy. It is estimated that at least 50% of all women cheat on their husbands at some point. Its also been shown that has high as 20% of all children in MODERN society are in fact not their ‘fathers’ child. What works in males for polygamy works for females in cuckoldry. Our genes conspire against us, and while a woman my marry a provider, she will often seek to have an affair with a ‘superior’ male. Of course no one thinks in genetic terms, but she knows what turns her on. Its even been shown that women who have affairs are slightly more likely to bear the child of the one shes having the affair with. Women who have affairs tend to do so at the peek of their fertility cycles and have more frequent orgasms than with their husband. The female orgasm itself is designed to retain sperm. Hell there is even a lot of proof that we are designed to fight the sperm of our genetic rivals in the vaginal canal. Men can’t even stop fighting with each other there

As a couple this applies to swinging, in that we are able to get out our polygamist urges (men are thought to cheat in 70% of marriages) and our wives get out their desire for other men in a positive way rather than the negative method of cheating. Instead of fighting our natural urges we welcome them.

This I think is why so many single men are such idiots in swinging. They are not desirable males, no females who they find attractive will have them, so they turn to swinging as an outlet, unfortunately their flaws follow them and they fail here too.

Finally this is an idea I’m just starting to see but I think I see why the man is the problem in swinging so often in a couple. By problem I mean the man is the unattractive one to the other wife. If women are in fact attracted by status by nature, an average man who is successful will seem very attractive to females, this would be gold digging of course, but its not conscious, its just like saying a guy likes big tits, its what turns them on without really thinking about. While this matters in a mate, it does NOT matter in swinging. So even though the wives husband is special and attractive to her, he is NOT attractive to the other woman who is not worried about his status but his looks (which is all you really get out of an online photo). Personality does mater more to women but that takes a while to discover, and is normally long after the swinging rejection.

Oh then you are going to love my post.

We're creating an epic here.

This sounds good but isn’t true. It is believed that neolithic men were in fact far more monogamous than polygamous. The nature of the environment, and society is such that men can’t afford polygamy and it made much more sense to pair bond. Sure polygamy and cuckolding would happen here and there, but the small settlements made even thing like cuckolding easy to discover. Some say that language was perhaps invented originally to gossip so men could keep an eye on their mates by asking their relatives if she was faithful. I don’t quite go that far, but men simply couldn’t afford to be polygamous (how many poor men are polygamous?) as there was no way to accumulate wealth. There is no bonus to being pregnant in the stone age if you don’t have a mate, women do have a say in this, in fact polygamy is more harmful to males than females genetically. After all if you have more than one wife and the sex ratio is 1-1, someone is going without. Male mortality may have been high, but so was female mortality, just think how scary childbirth would have been.

A few things. Any discussion about neolithic cultures is going to involve assumptions. Until someone invents time travel, most reasonable assumptions have equal validity. Some extrapolations can be made based upon behaviours of primitive cultures gathered by early explorers. Judging by the few accounts I'm familiar with, childbirth isn't scary to them. It's a natural process, you might say it's the one function of the human female. Women never knew childbirth was dangerous or difficult until it was drilled into their heads. Certainly there are births which are dangerous, and which would result in death. But with all else being even, the woman's chance of dying at her occupation (childbirth) comes about once each year. The man's chance (hunting) happened at least daily. Doesn't seem likely to result in a 1-1 ratio of sexes.

That time would be any civilization including our own, though currently its only a far cry from where it used to be. Roman males were wildly polygamous and female slaves were used mostly for sex. This is why you could get a refund on a slave if she turned out to be pregnant or a non-virgin. This is also why household male slaves were so often freed. They were the Roman males illegitimate sons. Some empires like the Inca even had a legal number of wives per title. In every city the emperor had a harem of 1500 women. This went down to the lowest official. Other men had to do without. In medieval Europe male peasants often did not marry until they were in their late 30's, while the females were sent to work in the lords manner. What do you think they were doing there? It was a harem not unlike any sultan’s only a bit more of an open secret. Bastard children were often at official family events.

I believe I covered this in my original first paragraph. The more successful the provider (hunter), the more wives, concubines, sex slaves, whatever.

I'm going to stop with the quotes in the interest of time and space.

I didn't say that we have changed. Men are still men, women are still women. Our basic thought processes, strengths and weaknesses remain, basically unchanged. If you accept the possibility that neolithic man embraced polygamy, certain things might make some sort of sense. If you are one of many wives, then your "success" and the success of your offspring depends upon your husbands attraction to you. The more you please him, the more you receive, the better you can feed your offspring, they become stronger, your line prospers. Women learned a long time back how to use their sex to their advantage. It's a survival trait.

Also, status isn't the only thing people lie about. While I've seen many women lie about status (not for sex, for acceptance), they tend to exploit other areas, experience (or lack thereof), skill, and goals ("I'm not really looking for a relationship right now") in order to get sex.

Okay, one more quote

This is you not understanding your nature. Men and women are sexually programmed for the SAME needs which is children in the next generation. We don’t think about it that way but thats why we are programmed as we are, because its worked best. Women are not more complex in needs, they just have different needs for seeing their seed is in the next generation. A man can have a few children a day if he is able, a woman is always limited by biology. As such her needs are different if she is to perform maximally in terms of children than a man.

But I do understand my nature. You don't understand complexity. Billions of sperm compared to one ova. If a man eats, drinks and sleeps, he'll survive. If he has sex with enough women, his genetic heritage will survive. The man doesn't have to worry about the fate of the children, as long as he fathers enough of them. Some will survive. A woman is much more limited. For her line to continue, she must protect her children from all sorts of threats, plus continually work to ensure security and provision are provided. Not only must she protect the children from outside hazards, but from other women seeking to improve the survival odds of their own by killing off the competition. A man's contribution to species survival takes a few minutes, a woman's takes several years. I stand by my statement that women's needs are more complex.

Here's something to ponder about my "overly romantic" statement. When going out to eat and deciding on a place, men will commonly say "I don't care" or will name a few places they like. Women say "I don't care", but when the man starts naming places, it's "no, I don't feel like that" until you stumble upon the type of food she is really interested in. Men want food, women want a particular type of food.

Ask a man about a fantasy, he'll describe the woman (or women) in detail and give all the graphic details. Ask a woman the same question, she'll give more attention to the overall atmosphere, (the music, the wine, his cologne, the clothes, etc.) and give less detail about the man and the actual sex.

I can't speak for all men, but when I'm sleeping, I'm happy to be sharing the bed, but don't need to be held, or to hold. How many women out there, just love falling asleep in their man's arms, especially after a fantastic evening together?

The defense rests.

I don't quite have the energy to go point by point but I'll give you a quote and then some issues with your assumptions.

There is broad agreement amoung evolutionary biologists that most of our ancestors lived in a condition of only occasional polygamy during the pleistocene period. Societies that hunt and gather today are not much different from modern western society. Most men are monogamous, many are adulterous, and few manage to be polygamous, sharing pershaps up to five wives in extreme cases. Among the Aka pygimes of the Central African Republic, who hunt for food in the forest using nets, 15 percent of men have more than one wife, a pattern typical of foraging societies.

I can give you the journal referances if you really want it, but being I have to type eveything out I'd rather not just to make it look good

The problem with your assumptions is that hunter-gatherer people are not polygamous right now, so why can you assume they were in the past? It is not a western influence that creates this, but their own society based on their needs and lifestyle.

One of the reasons hunting and gathering cannon support much polygamy is that luck, more than skill, plays a large part in hunters success. Even the best hunter would often return empty handed and would be reliant on his fellow men to share what they had killed. This equitable sharing of hunted food is characteristic of these people (in most other social hunting species there is a free-for-all) and is the clearest example of the habit of reciprocal altruism on which the whole of society sometimes appears to be based.....trading favors in this was was the ancient ancestor of the monetary economy. But because meat could not be stored and because luck did not last, hunter-gather societies did not allow the accumulation of wealth

It wasn't until the invention of agriculture did men finally not need his fellow man and had the ability to store surplus food which became wealth of a kind for barter or consumption. Once we get into primative farming societies polygamy becomes common and in fact the norm (and I'm to tired to keep typing, take my word on it).

Also on a personal note, your view does not leave room for male pair bonding. We are not salmon who spawn and leave their young to fend for themselves. I just comforted my crying child and scratched his back so he would fall back to sleep. I did not learn this desire to see that my children are safe, I was not taught to love my son, I do not value his life above my own based on example. I just do, its illogical as any love is, but its how we are made, and me, as a male, and a high status male have these feelings. Under a different set of social rules I'd undoubtely be polygamist, but much like a Roman elite I'd still care for the welfare of my children, even were they born of slaves. This is in stark contrast to your statement...

The man doesn't have to worry about the fate of the children, as long as he fathers enough of them.

Ramese the Great, perhaps Egypts most well known polygamist, with over 100 children, still cared of their fates.

I have more I could say but we shall leave it at this for now.

Broad agreement should mean "we are just guessing" to any true scientist. Broad agreement made Galileo a heretic. Broad agreement said most of what we enjoy today is completely impossible. Even with a great deal of evidence, it is possible for multiple experts to develop multiple conclusions. One of the problems with the field of evolutionary biology (and every other field) is the need for money to conduct research. Unfortunately, many sources of funding are either controlled by those with another agenda, or by those who are interested in not agitating the status quo. In essence, God created Adam and Eve, therefore monogamy is the natural state. A vast amount of money has been spent, and will continue to be spent for research results which validate Christianity and the Christian Bible. The source of funding typically influences the outcome of research. Broad agreement on a highly speculative subject seems to be the path of least resistance.

(quote omitted, scroll up if you're lost)

Yet hunting/gathering groups do exhibit polygamy. Forget humanity and consider baboons. The form large groups, with a complex social structure. The leader is "husband" to all the adult females. The lesser males remain on the periphery of the group, as sentries and homosexual behaviour is common amongst them. When a stronger, smarter, meaner baboon comes along, the group gets a new leader, the females get a new husband.

One area I can definitely agree with you, agriculture does make polygamy a more favorable condition. Vegetables are notoriously docile. Now back to the disagreement. I haven't ventured into the area of male pair-bonding, but certainly my view (admittedly it's skewed, that's why it's mine) allows for it. Hunting a 600# predator solo is how the idea of delivery pizza came about. A group of hunters can bring in larger game. Put any men in a dangerous situation and the survivors will bond (and make jokes about any misadventures). The aborigines of the American plains used large groups to hunt buffalo (not that stampeding a thousand buffalo over a cliff is what most people call hunting).

Men protect women, women protect children. This doesn't mean that men don't or can't love and protect children, but it was not their primary focus. In most cases it is not their primary focus today. While at work, are your concerns primarily on the business at hand, providing for your family and maintaining your high status, or do you primarily concern yourself with the specific care and feeding of your children? The male is the provider, female the nurturer.

Many polygamists cared about the welfare of their children, just as many abandoned their children or slaughtered them. An obvious evolutionary dead-end.

Broad agreement should mean "we are just guessing" to any true scientist.

No, broad agreement means that the evidence is such that most people believe it to be true. For example the theory of evolution has broad agreement among biologists, the evidence points to it being correct. If it is in fact wrong, the evidence isn't there yet, which is why there is broad agreement.

Broad agreement made Galileo a heretic.

Well specifically presenting the Popes arguments from the point of view of a simpleton in a book is what made Galileo a heretic.

Broad agreement said most of what we enjoy today is completely impossible. Even with a great deal of evidence, it is possible for multiple experts to develop multiple conclusions.

Scientific progress continues, and there are differences of opinion yes.

One of the problems with the field of evolutionary biology (and every other field) is the need for money to conduct research. Unfortunately, many sources of funding are either controlled by those with another agenda, or by those who are interested in not agitating the status quo. In essence, God created Adam and Eve, therefore monogamy is the natural state. A vast amount of money has been spent, and will continue to be spent for research results which validate Christianity and the Christian Bible. The source of funding typically influences the outcome of research. Broad agreement on a highly speculative subject seems to be the path of least resistance.

I was an atheist by age 8, I had my first degree in evolutionary biology by age 21, I've written papers on it since and taught it as late as 4 years ago, I know the type of people involved first hand. Most evolutionary biologists could care less about what the bible says. I don't think you KNOW any evolutionary biologists or you would realize just how absurd your statement is. People who care about what Adam and Eve did are not really friendly to the idea of early hominid to human evolution, period, they don't care if its monogamy or polygamy. Honestly you have no idea what you are talking about here, sorry, no other way I can state this. Polygamy is also contained in the bible, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Yet hunting/gathering groups do exhibit polygamy.

Which is as I posted, about 15%, guess what the other 85% are?

Forget humanity and consider baboons. The form large groups, with a complex social structure. The leader is "husband" to all the adult females. The lesser males remain on the periphery of the group, as sentries and homosexual behaviour is common amongst them. When a stronger, smarter, meaner baboon comes along, the group gets a new leader, the females get a new husband.

Avery ape has a different mating pattern and social life. What baboons do or don't do doesn't matter as we do not live as baboons. Chimps are different, Bonobo chimps even more different, gorillas are different. I could go into the details by there is no point we come from different lines of evolution. We pair bond by nature.

One area I can definitely agree with you, agriculture does make polygamy a more favorable condition. Vegetables are notoriously docile.

Ummm I thought the reason you said polygamy was first was because of the dangers of hunting?

Now back to the disagreement. I haven't ventured into the area of male pair-bonding, but certainly my view (admittedly it's skewed, that's why it's mine) allows for it. Hunting a 600# predator solo is how the idea of delivery pizza came about. A group of hunters can bring in larger game. Put any men in a dangerous situation and the survivors will bond (and make jokes about any misadventures). The aborigines of the American plains used large groups to hunt buffalo (not that stampeding a thousand buffalo over a cliff is what most people call hunting).

 

Men protect women, women protect children. This doesn't mean that men don't or can't love and protect children, but it was not their primary focus. In most cases it is not their primary focus today. While at work, are your concerns primarily on the business at hand, providing for your family and maintaining your high status, or do you primarily concern yourself with the specific care and feeding of your children? The male is the provider, female the nurturer.

All of the above has nothing to do with polygamy/monogamy

Many polygamists cared about the welfare of their children, just as many abandoned their children or slaughtered them. An obvious evolutionary dead-end.

Eh?

Men compete, and I knew this would be the outcome of the debate as I put your back against the wall by calling you out in my first post. By nature you would never admit to being wrong, but I'm afraid you are outclassed in this debate. You are not Galileo Galilei, you have not through careful observation and study come up with a theory. You have an opinion, one which is not backed up by any evidence other than what you create in your own mind. Its not a bad theory, but it doesn't hold up for any hunter gatherer society. Yours is not a great idea being suppressed, its an unproven theory, which has been looked at before and rejected based on lack of any evidence.

You then claim its due to some sort of Christian agenda which is so wrong it tells me you don't understand the group you speak of at all. Do you think any Church official is using this data to support monogamy? Are there subtle forces of Christianity steering money away from the polygamists? No. What we have are logical people debating the issue, and by logic a hunter gather society has a hard time supporting polygamy. These same people claim that once we started to farm, polygamy became common and is in fact the norm state for most primitive aggricultural societies. No judgements need be reached.

Humans are monogamous when the time is right for it, and polygamist when the time is right for that. Monogamy is as natural as polygamy, as is cuckolding as is cheating. Its common in many species. If we had no natural desire for pair bonding we wouldn't have marriage across human society, non christians included.

The whole crux of this is understanding how genes compete against each other for reproduction, and I'm afraid its going to be too technical a conversation for the swingers board.