Cheating and conditional sexual consent

[RiverSwift1]

Being lied to and gaslighted, having your emotional health kicked to a sad dark place, along with being exposed to potential health risks that might lead to infertility, or in the extreme, kill you (where medical intervention is too late eg genital warts leading to cervical cancer, AIDS) are some of the things dumped onto partners of a cheater.

Nobody wants to be cheated on and have to go through all the shit that goes with it….but what about the law ? Any lawyers out there? or anyone who would like to comment? A quick internet search shows the definition of conditional consent sex goes something like this quote:

"WHAT IS CONDITIONAL CONSENT?
Conditional Consent is when consent is given under imposed conditions. If an act falls outside of the given conditions, then the act is non-consensual and goes against the consent given.
The Sexual Offences Act 2003, at Section 74, requires that a person 'agree by choice, and has the Freedom and Capacity to make that choice'
Under UK law consent is specific and is required for each sexual act. In some situations it can be argued that by lying or deceitful action a person can deprive someone of making a full and free choice. For example, by removing a condom without consent or knowledge, the individual deprives the person from making a choice. The person may not have consented to the sexual encounter if they had been aware of the full facts". End quote.

........…“The person may not have consented to the sexual encounter if they had been aware of the full facts” mmm isn’t that what occurs when you are cheated on?

The below link talks about conditional consensual sex and the law in England and Wales

https://www.reeds.co.uk/insight/stealthing-and-conditional-consent/#:~:text=Conditional%20Consent%20is%20when%20consent,goes%20against%20the%20consent%20given.

The example given was a sex worker and the customer was sent to jail as it was nonconsensual sex as he removed the condom…. exposing her to potential health risks...just like a cheater does each time they have unprotected sex with their faithful partner, who has been deceived and would not in many cases be having sex with their cheater if they knew the truth. Depriving them of their wish to have protected sex, now that their cheater’s sexual health is now questionable, or to bloody abstain from further sexual encounters now the unfaithful one has broken their promise to have an honest, monogamous relationship.

(If you read through all the above link, you’ll see that the person convicted was told by her not to, and also a google search reveals he also made threats after she went to the police so it was easier with this extra evidence to convict him)

I’m not a lawyer but IMO if you’ve made promises to be faithful or have told your partner that your sexual relation is ‘Conditional upon us both being sexually exclusive’ and they agreed to that conditional consent, then they cheat, they are now having non consensual sex with you. And they are at least morally sexually assaulting you, each and every time they sleep with you. At the minimum I think they are guilty of the crime of sexual coercion.

Sexual coercion includes: “…unwanted sexual activity that happens when you are pressured, tricked, threatened, or forced in a nonphysical way.

• Tricked: “Being lied to or being promised things that weren’t true to trick you into having sex….”

www.womenshealth.gov/relationships-and-safety/other-types/sexual-coercion

Yes, I know I’m lining myself up for some backlash from some of you and there are a lot of cheaters out there. But shit it would be great if it was also politically correct to say he/she is morally a sexual assaulter, because in manly incidences it would hurt a lot less to be bashed up by a stranger than be cheated on. And yes, maybe too idealist to think humans as a collective whole could one day morph into compassionate enough people who’d say “you know Jane, I’m thinking about banging Mina from accounts next Friday after work! you got a problem with that?” first, and you know …kind of think yeah probably best to separate first if Mina is worth it.

@NewNameNigel my view is that if there is no sex in the relation the person who wants to cheat should inform the other first so both people are free to make an informed decision on what to do next. The person who doesn’t want sex should also be aware that this can lead to the relationship ending. If neither are able to separate (depending on country) at least no one is being deceived

This

Can you call it cheating if the other person has also broken the "marriage contract" by withholding sex (in your hypothetical situation)? What is the judgemental word you're going to use for the person who is withholding sex?

I have never cheated and I never would, but I think that your idea is poorly thought through.

And the legal marriage contract in UK law does not include a clause to be faithful. So your idea fails on its initial premise.

@outsurance I like it that you want to discuss this and maybe brain storm with me too. My post is about ‘conditional consensual sex’ which is a legal thing. I believe withholding sex is different to cheating (if one of the conditions of consensual sex is not to cheat) as both people are very aware when sex is not happening, while the other is about deception. You ask what I call someone who doesn’t have sex in a marriage…I call them by their name, to not have sex is their right to decide. Unfortunately the person who wants sex might need to leave if this is the case. Do you outsurance think it’s ethically and morally ok to secretly cheat on a partner ? when would it be ok for them to do so ? like at zone sex or just how many times per month? “conditional consensual sex” also means the person who isn’t getting any or enough sex -or what ever thing they both agreed upon is informed so they are able to make a decision on what to do next. And not feel trapped etc by a vow those conditions have changed.

I agree but if the married couple aren't having sex then your points about conditional consent don't really apply. Because there's nothing to consent to if there is no sex.

The legal marriage contract in the UK does not include any of those things.

If you are talking about some sort of religious vow that people choose to take, that's for them to do but it is not legally enforceable in the UK and I'm happy with that.

There is no legal enforcement of faithfulness nor should there be. Because the corollary to that is legal enforcement of the right to sex.

I have thought about this a lot recently as have been cheated on in a long marriage and ex h didn’t use condoms with his affair partner. He knows full well that I would never engaged in any sexual activity with him if I’d known the truth and I feel tricked into doing things by the deliberate omission of key information.

I read somewhere that the most unsafe sex you will probably have is sex with your long term partner when you think you’re in a monogamous relationship with them.

I've felt this for a long time. In an agreed upon monogamous relationship/marriage. Cheating and continuing to sleep with your spouse is non consensual sex.

It would be almost impossible to police but its how I think it should be viewed.

This. You're confusing the vows some people make with the legal contract.

I do agree that morally it's wrong when people are deprived of the information they need to provide informed consent.

I totally agree with the op on this. I was with my stxh 20 years.

I only knew my H only one partner, I discovered last year he’s been cheating for several years well over 5 years with multiple partners. I actually don’t know how many as he still won’t tell me.

How is that right? How could he put me at so much risk I didn’t consent for other people to be involved in my sexual relationship with my H.

its completely wrong, I feel utterly sick every time I think about it. He should be held accountable it’s deliberate and reckless.

You exercise YOUR choice to divorce. No sex would be a dealbreaker ffo

I agree but the ops point was that cheating was bad because the other person was having sex with you without all the facts. It implies that it's OK to cheat if you aren't having sex.

Posted too soon.

No sex would be a dealbreaker in most marriages. Cheating is not acceptable.

Last time I raised exactly the same points on MN suggesting being cheated on whilst unaware or when gaslighted about affair, was akin to non consensual sex and finding out ex had been shagging a village bike in the afternoon then come home and made love with me, leaving me feeling sexually violated , I had the pearl clutching brigade asking if I was mentally sound and MN removed post and my account.

That’s totally wrong.

You so feel violated, it’s awful to think
about when you have no idea what is happening outside what you think is a monogamous marriage. It’s what I signed up too, why should the other person be so reckless with your body without consent.

I would actually feel violated if I found out my DH had been elsewhere then come home to me and had sex with me. I would not consent to sex under those circumstances. I've never really thought about it before but it is definitely a violation/assault of my body and mind. I would experience it that way and it would be very traumatic.

It can be a bit of a chicken and egg situation though, I've known many women cease to have sex when they suspect their partner is cheating. It can be a defence mechanism to prevent their sexual health being compromised.

I must admit years after the fact after the devastation of the emotional, psychological and physical abuse from the affair, the one point that really hits home is the aspect of sharing bodily fluids, many men will have sex in the day or after work and that very evening will be having sex with their wives. It really does feel like a violation, of what though, my human rights, my consent to share a sexual life with an unknown entity.

I can't see anything that could prevent it though, especially from a legal point of view considering men make most of the laws in the land, it would be disadvantageous to their own sex as I would say more men tend to be more promiscuous than women.

No I think the only answer would be in the capitalist world of earning a buck from consumers who wish to stamp out infedelity. That would lie in the scientists developing some sort of scanning equipment whereby it detects seminal fluids or pheremones, hormones of sexual activity of others which do not include the monogamous couple.

I mean if service dogs can detect, forthcoming epilectic fits and daibetic episodes I'm sure future technology could detect unfaithfulness. It sounds like an episode of Black Mirror but from a health perspective, there could be millions made from it 😂

I think I agree with you op. Interesting threat, I’d never thought about it in that way before. There is clearly a lack of consent, or coerced consent due to not having all the relevant information.

@Idoldolpoo, definitely don’t want to go back to stoning people to death, and probably best keep it at a non-jailable offence too, but I could imagine in some instances something more should be done than now..
what about if someone became infertile (Chlamydia) or got an life long incurrable disease because their consentual conditional sexual relation was not upheld and they were not inform? It's the fact that faithful one at present just has to suck it up such bad treatment by not only their cheater but the law which turns a blind eye to all this side. The only thing I can think of is fork out your own money and try to get legel commentation from the cheater for loss of fertility??

But the amount of pain, psychological damage, and health risks the cheater puts the innocent partner through is tremendously underplayed in society. One aspect which may help? in the future may be having our next generation talk about this and discuss during class (health and sex ed) the topic ‘what do you think is Conditional sexual consent?’, and ‘Stealthing’ and the law etc maybe with time and genuine, compassionate discussions more of our new generations will find it hard to imagine not informing their partner of their attraction to another before it would lead to cheating and the implications that leads too. We’ve improved so many things in the past through education.

But to expect married or partnered people to continue to wear condoms is also a bit too much…

When you say married or partnered people, you mean men. Funny how expecting men to wear condoms is a bit much but the expectation that women be solely responsible for contraception is somehow the norm.

You can’t and shouldn’t legislate for everything and the threat of prosecution would not stop most people from cheating. Considering the low prosecution rates of SA do you really think that time and resources would and should be employed for this?

I did read about someone who successfully sued the woman who had an affair with her husband.

I am reconciled but I have discussed my husband’s affair with with him as abusive and part of that is on the grounds of him removing my right to informed sexual consent. FWIW this aspect was a huge trauma to me. It does traumatise many betrayed partners. We have the language to explain it now and I think that’s a sign of moving forward. I have mentioned it many times on threads.

I wouldn’t want it legally managed in any way but I do want this talked about more as it may help prevent some people who do have a moral compass from being drawn into an affair to self sooth whatever nonsense is going on for them. People are human, they make dreadful mistakes but truly understanding the impacts of affairs may help avoid the sheer devastation and pain they cause for all involved. Removal of right of informed sexual constant is definitely one of them.

Ahh @RiverSwift1 I’ve just seen you’ve made a similar point. Well said.