Have you ever cheated on a guy or girl?

[Takhisis]

If I ever see you when I'm wearing heavy boots and you're not wearing a cup, I shall remember your sage advice.

What's with the boots?

There is a proverb in Estonian: "Truudus on juhuse puudus" which rougly translates as: "Faithfulness is just lack of chance".
I think this could nicely to sum up most of this thread.

Yes, I've never had the chance…

"I have NEVER cheated and I'm not going to!"
"...because I've never had anyone to cheat..."
"...so what are the odds I could actually find ANOTHER person I could cheat the first one with...?"

That about sums it up. But some of my friends -and neighbours and relatives too- have been cheated on and it was horrible for everyone involved.

 

[Traitorfish]

Have you ever known someone who put his arm into an industrial meat grinder and said: "damn, it was SO worth it"? Or possibly someone who has made a habit of putting his limbs into industrial meat grinders on a regular basis?

Surely, that just goes to show how bad of an idea it is? I didn't realise that negative criticism required a corresponding positive to be considered valid!

Wait, I said that? Why would you think I was referring to someone you had just seen once or twice, rather than someone you considered to be in a relationship with?

Of course, that itself depends on social context; over here, even a couple of formal dates in quick succession will usually be understood as "seeing someone", which is often understood as an implicit agreement of exclusivity for as long as such dates are pursued. Seeing multiple people at once wouldn't be cheating, as such, but it will often be seen as manipulative or exploitative, especially if sex is involved. The British (and perhaps European? I think somebody mentioned it) view seems to be that "dating" is the pursuit of a romantic relationship, rather than an end in itself.

What's with the boots?

Because, without the boots, exactly which appendage I aim to have interact with his crotch is not entirely clear.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Of course, that itself depends on social context; over here, even a couple of formal dates in quick succession will usually be understood as "seeing someone", which is often understood as an implicit agreement of exclusivity for as long as such dates are pursued. Seeing multiple people at once wouldn't be cheating, as such, but it will often be seen as manipulative or exploitative, especially if sex is involved. The British (and perhaps European? I think somebody mentioned it) view seems to be that "dating" is the pursuit of a romantic relationship, rather than an end in itself.

People often have at least slightly different ideas about what constitutes a "relationship", none of which are really more correct than any other, so it is a good idea to be on the same page een if it mean discussing it.

 

[Takhisis]

Because, without the boots, exactly which appendage I aim to have interact with his crotch is not entirely clear.

Marla is a girl IIRC…

People often have at least slightly different ideas about what constitutes a "relationship", none of which are really more correct than any other, so it is a good idea to be on the same page een if it mean discussing it.

But if you're both from the same country you usually have the same idea of what constitutes a relationship. That said, talking things over and having rules isn't bad per se.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

But if you're both from the same country you usually have the same idea of what constitutes a relationship. That said, talking things over and having rules isn't bad per se.

Yes, even if you are using the same terms for the same things there is no guarantee that both are as emotionally invested.

 

[Traitorfish]

Marla is a girl IIRC…

Really? Crap, well, um... Change it to an open mine shaft without a railing. Whatever, same thing.

People often have at least slightly different ideas about what constitutes a "relationship", none of which are really more correct than any other, so it is a good idea to be on the same page een if it mean discussing it.

Oh, certainly. I was just observing that the unspoken defaults are not universal.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

Of course not, which is why it's a good idea to err on the side of caution, especially when feelings are involved.

 

[Akka]

No I never cheated, and cheating is wrong, whatever crap people may invent to justify themselves.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Never cheated, never had any serious opportunities for cheating. I never had that many girls chasing me that the situation ever came up.

That said, I would HOPE I would resist the temptation if it ever came up. But I'll probably never know. Which, all things considered, is good.

I'm currently married (first, long-time) and that's when the cost of cheating goes through the roof. Now I'd be scared to cheat even if I didn't have moral objections against it. Besides, any woman who would sleep with a married man couldn't be worth much.

 

[Narz]

(who you obviously were not sufficiently attracted to if you go off chasing other women)

That's a silly thing to say.

The fact that men cheat often has nothing to do with the fact that they're not sexually attracted to their wives. You can be in love with apples & still want to try a cantaloupe.

 

[BCLG100]

Your opinion will now be taken seriously in this thread.
...although maybe I should ask "were these three ugly as hell"?

I think Adam Sandler in Funny people sums it up when he cracks on about it being easy not to cheat when no-one wants to .... you.

As previously stated though i still don't condone cheating but nor do I feel the need to justify my previous relationships/offers of sex during them for my opinion to be valid.

 

[Yared]

Nah, no cheating.

Of course not, which is why it's a good idea to err on the side of caution, especially when feelings are involved.

We now have Facebook so it's easy to just put yourself as in a relationship


(This is not a reply to the specifically quoted post, but a reply to the whole conversation and the people involved)

 

[Grisu]

Nope, never cheated. It's absolutely out of the question, even if nobody ever found out, I'd hate myself for it.

About the dirtbaggiest possible thing a person can do short of violent crime, IMO.

 

[Brighteye]

in our society, an expectation of fidelity is the default position, and any variance needs to be agreed to first....

Because that's what people think it is. Society is determined by what people think society is. If you find a girl who thinks that open relationships are the default, then great, but most don't.

I'll agree with you then that an expectation of fidelity is the default. I disagree that the expectation is either justified, or requires any sort of response. Variance from an expectation does not need to be agreed if the expectation is crazy!
I can expect every person I meet to give me money, and even loudly proclaim the fact to ensure that everyone knows, but people dealing with me should have no obligation to discuss money-giving with me before we interact.

Of course not, which is why it's a good idea to err on the side of caution, especially when feelings are involved.

Erring on the side of caution would be for the person who needs certain behaviour from the other to specify that behaviour before giving the emotion. Those of us who do not have conditional love, and do not base our regard on whether someone satisfies our selfishness and jealousy, have no need for caution.

 

[Akka]

Variance from an expectation does not need to be agreed if the expectation is crazy!

You might have had a point if expecting fidelity was crazy.
But it isn't.
It's hardwired in most people that being cheated on hurts - which makes "fidelity by default" a pretty logical expectation. And if most people expect it, it's a bit weird to say that "it's crazy". Or the vast majority of people is crazy and you're the only sane man. I'll go with Ockham's razor here.

Anyway, cheating imply a relationship, and a relationship is BASED on two persons - and it means their opinions and expectations too. It seems pretty obvious, again, that taking into account logical expectation is, and should be, the norm, not the exception.
And even if the expectation ARE crazy... well, you KNOW they do exist, and as such it's logical to think that the other person has them by default, so...

 

[NovaKart]

I cheated once but the relationship wasn't really that serious. I was semi-drunk at a New Year's party and suddenly alone with a cute guy so the opportunity just presented itself. Later my ex bf slept with my former boss but I wasn't crazy about him anyway.

Now cheating is wrong, I don't mean to condone it. Now let's all pretend like we're in the studio audience of Ricki Lake and say 'what goes around comes around' in a Brooklyn/Puerto Rican accent.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

We now have Facebook so it's easy to just put yourself as in a relationship

That when I knew it was official . . .

 

[Brighteye]

You might have had a point if expecting fidelity was crazy.
But it isn't.
It's hardwired in most people that being cheated on hurts - which makes "fidelity by default" a pretty logical expectation. And if most people expect it, it's a bit weird to say that "it's crazy". Or the vast majority of people is crazy and you're the only sane man. I'll go with Ockham's razor here.

Anyway, cheating imply a relationship, and a relationship is BASED on two persons - and it means their opinions and expectations too. It seems pretty obvious, again, that taking into account logical expectation is, and should be, the norm, not the exception.
And even if the expectation ARE crazy... well, you KNOW they do exist, and as such it's logical to think that the other person has them by default, so...

A relationship is based on two people. A relationship needs the acknowledgement of both people.
Hence without another's acknowledgement, there's no relationship.
Hence expecting fidelity is wrong.

It's hard-wired that other people paying less tax is wrong. And so we expect rich CEOs to pay at least as much tax as we do (as a proportion). And yet the law provides them with many loopholes.
It is crazy to expect them to pay more tax than they must. Yes, most of the population does expect this. No, they have no obligation to do so unless they have agreed to it.

Crazy is not just what most people think. In fact, in some situations, crazy is exactly what most people think, because in some ways humans are decidedly irrational. Crazy is when someone admits that he prefers rice pudding to strawberries, strawberries to apple crumble and apple crumble to rice pudding. And yet large numbers of the population show such intransitivity.

 

[Yared]

That when I knew it was official . . .

IMO, I don't think a relationship is a relationship unless you're both willing to make it "official". And by official I mean be willing to admit it to friends and, to a lesser extent, family.

(this is assuming that there's no "over-protective dad who beats up his daughter's BFs" or some other antagonist lurking)

 

[BCLG100]

IMO, I don't think a relationship is a relationship unless you're both willing to make it "official". And by official I mean be willing to admit it to friends and, to a lesser extent, family.

(this is assuming that there's no "over-protective dad who beats up his daughter's BFs" or some other antagonist lurking)

I disagree, i've mentioned to friends before about a girl i'm seeing but at no point would i think what we were doing was a 'relationship'. It is hard to establish which is which, i tend to rely on facebook for that.