Is infidelity immoral and if so should society be involved or is it a strictly personal matter?

[mids2019]

Infidelity seems to be one of the few areas in life where psychological harm can be brought to bear against another. In some societies infidelity is viewed as a criminal act or at least viewed negatively.

In liberal societies infidelity is a strictly personal matter and society does not act as a stakeholder in the relationship with no civil penalty for unfaithfulness.

Do you think this is the right balance or should infidelity be thought if as a moral wrong by others? We take a dim view of people parking badly but as a society do we hav we to he same default respinse to infideliity?

No they aren’t. It’s not coercive control because divorce brings negative social or financial consequences. If you think that’s coercive control you’re very wrong.

hurting someone’s feelings, however badly, isn’t ad shouldn’t be a criminal offence. As others have said, we all know of states where morality is enforced by criminal law and none of them are nice places for women.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/relationships-education-relationships-and-sex-education-rse-and-health-education/relationships-and-sex-education-rse-secondary

RSE provides guidance on relationship education. There is mention of healthy commited relationships, what is acceptable and unacceptable in a relationship and the impact in mental health of an unacceptable relationship. I think this guidance does imply a morality+ in that it does imply a certain ideal (though maybe unattainable).

It would be interesting to see if teachers explicitly state infidelity is unacceptable or maybe it is something to be negotiated o. In a raltionship?

What about partners who completely withdraw affection and intimacy.

Your comparison to bad parking is a false equivalence, because bad parking is not a personal matter, it has a (minor) direct impact on all of society. It's socially irresponsible.

Hard disagree to all of this

Well society is involved because like it or not, our ethics and civil codes are based on Christianity and its Ten Commandments.

However, it is a civil matter, not a criminal one.

So if married, the marriage contract is broken and the person can file for divorce. Adultery may affect the courts decisions if the divorce is not amicable.

I do think that if an adulterous spouse gives you an incurable STI due to their cheating, you should be able to sue them for appropriate damages (civil matter).

I generally think that we don’t do too badly, because adults can choose whether fidelity is their cup of tea or if casual sex is their cup of tea.

Id never want it to become a crime again.

I think it's oppressive for one person to dictate to another who they can and can't have sex with.. That’s not what marriage is, unless you’re referring to forced marriage.

If everyone stopped having these unrealistic expectations of monogamy society would be a whole lot happier. Polyamorous groups don’t seem very happy to me, in fact most seem pretty miserable.

I agree that the countries which impose punishments for immorality punish females- girls and women far, far more than men. In the news today a father in Iraq has punished his daughter for ‘immorality.’ It’s note worthy that sons are not punished in the same way.
I remember a father in Huddersfield punishing his daughter for her ‘immorality.’ By the way punishment means killing.
So no I do not believe that ‘immorality’ whatever that means should be punishable by the state.
Homosexuality is still a punishable ‘crime’ in some countries, is that acceptable?

Morality is subjective so no. Unlike on Mumsnet, real life isn’t black and white. Mind your own business.

Remember, not so long ago being gay was seen as immoral. We accept pretty much anything now but if you dare say on here you merely fancy someone else other than your spouse and all of a sudden it’s like everyone’s suddenly a religious zealot.

Anyone genuinely interested in the topic, Ester Perel’s the State of Affairs is really interesting. Monogamy is a social construct like virginity or gender, not a natural state.

Even 50 years ago the worst you got for adultery was your name in the newspaper when you were divorced for adultery, do we really want to go back to the dark ages?

Where do you draw the line once you start down the morality police road?

Monogamy is a social construct like virginity or gender, not a natural state.

So? Social constructs aren’t all bad, and natural states aren’t all good.

For example, a pretty important social construct is that of consent. Without consent, rape would be the natural state.

In some societies infidelity is viewed as a criminal act or at least viewed negatively

really ? Like Saudi Arabia
or Gilead
wonderful examples

It would be interesting to see if teachers explicitly state infidelity is unacceptable or maybe it is something to be negotiated o. In a raltionship?
The RSE guidance doesn't tell teachers to discuss their views / the government's view on infidelity.

Students know monogamy is the norm in our country and given the huge amounts of content that's loaded into PSHE there's not much time to get into the rights and wrongs of hypothetical situations of infidelity and associated "but what about this other situation? But what about open relationships? But what about when people agree not to be exclusive? But does it count as cheating if you're on a break? Is it only cheating if it's just a kiss? What about sliding into someone's DMs miss? What about if the marriage is abusive is it ok to cheat then?"

As I wouldn't exist if my father has stayed married and faithful to his first wife I have complicated views about this idea.

I think marriage exists for very different purposes than creating a loving secure relationship. Its origin is closer to a business partnership, no amount of romanticism can cover that. The fact is all marriages are not created equal. Some marriages are toxic. Some committed relationships are entered into in haste, people change, feelings change. No amount of social pressure or disapproval will alter that.

I don't seek to excuse infidelity. I am committed and faithful and married, I have been in the same relationship for nearly 25 years and married for nearly 18.

@LolaSmiles

So what do teachers interpret from what is 'acceptable or unacceptable' in a relationship?

I guess obvious things like coercion, consent etc. could be mentioned but if you don't go into infidelity doesn't this leave the subject hanging as maybe acceptable? Monogamy is the norm in the country but do students gain this knowledge through personal awareness or can it be stated?

One thought would be that infidelity can have a devestatating impact on a relationship so why not state this to young people? If you aren't going to mention it in terms of RSE isn't this missing the point of the subject?

You may get children gaining a great deal of knowledge about sex but without relationship guidance is this really the complete picture?

mids2019
Generally it's broad: consent, coercion, having your boundaries respected, healthy communication.

Given you've cited the RSE guidance above, I would assume you've read it and understand it's just one part of an ever-increasing PSHE programme in schools. It's also quite evidently not giving lots of information about sex and nothing about relationships.

Why is it the role of teachers, in your opinion, to make moral pronouncements on complex situations that affect a range of relationships differently. Would you be happy with a child going home to their mother, who cheated but the affair gave her the confidence to leave an unhealthy marriage, saying "Mrs Blogs said you're immoral because infidelity causes mental harm"?

@LolaSmiles

Can RSE be taught without any moral input? Surely if you start to about sex and relationships there is inevitably a moral dimension? For instance commited healthy relationships are mentioned in the guidance; how do you define 'commited'?

Of course the subject is a charged one so do we ignore it?

Can RSE be taught without any moral input? Surely if you start to about sex and relationships there is inevitably a moral dimension? For instance commited healthy relationships are mentioned in the guidance; how do you define 'commited'?
The dictionary does a good job of that:
committed
kəˈmɪtɪd
adjective
pledged or bound to a certain course or policy; dedicated.
in or denoting a long-term emotional relationship

Of course the subject is a charged one so do we ignore it?
Nobody has suggested ignoring it.

I just feel rather uncomfortable when people start suggesting that the state and the courts should have a role in what happens in adult relationships and then suggests schools get to further push a particular line that's unenforceable without concerning consequences.

Would you be happy with a child going home to their mother, who cheated but the affair gave her the confidence to leave an unhealthy marriage, saying "Mrs Blogs said you're immoral because infidelity causes mental harm"?

I don't think there should be criminal charges.

I know more than one couple that have become divorced due to one side wanting to be with their new partner and it all worked out fine in the end. In fact for these people both partners are now much better off. I always think criminal charges should be based on rehabilitation not 'punishment' so I'm not quite sure how criminal charges would help rehabilitate a cheater.

What would be the penalty if a woman became pregnant as a result of an affair? Would that incur more charges than simply shaving an affair?! If someone is more wealthy can they simply 'pay a fine' or do you mean worse punishments.
Would current dc suffer as a result of any punishment.
Where is the line drawn?

Having not shaving* (!)

@LolaSmiles

I see your point and the challenges of stating infidelity as a moral wrong from a state institution.

however if the government wishes you to teach the values of commitment isn't fidelity implicit in that? You may not be stating that infidelity is wrong explicitly but it's certainly implicit.

where does morality begin and end though?.A teacher will certainly punish bullying or other poor behaviour perhaps ultimately on moral grounds (i.e. it is immoral to allow children to behave as they wish and harm others) but for possibly good reasons why away from more complex moral problems.

I think ultimately it can't be denied infidelity can lead to suffering of a member of a relationship but the challenge is how to deliver that fact in a non judgmental manner; maybe it simply cant.

I don't think infidelity should be criminalise but should we as a society aim (if at all possible) to at least make people aware of the consequences? I know obviously people have personal responsibility but if you say have a male who grows up without a moral compass with regards to affairs and there is nothing in his personal circle to change isn't he in danger of thinking this is acceptable and women won't mind really (wasn't mentioned at school)

It’s not against the law. And there are far more serious problems that cause greater psychological distress & damage than cheating. We do not need morality police in our societies.

You're viewing the whole topic from a your point of view angle and not considering the practical implications of what you seek.

The reality is that to do what you expect leaves huge space to get into the ifs and buts of different situations, some of which the pupils will have experienced.

Are you happy for a child to be told by a teacher their mother is immoral for having an affair that leads her to leaving an unhealthy marriage? Do you propose teachers start telling pupils that David's dad's situation was probably understandable, but Paula's Dad was an arsehole, and Sarah's aunt is despicable because she once had an affair with a senior colleague when she was young and foolish? All based on hypothetical 'but Sir, what if...' or 'miss, you said cheating causes mental harm and is emotionally abusive so are you saying my cousin is an abuser?'