What is infidelity?

[ItsGraceActually]

You know, many some men can convince themselves it's only cheating if there was penetrative sex ... some women people feel betrayed if their DP so much as hugs another. Then there's the whole emotional affair.

Hmm. Great theory, EM, only I'm unconvinced that affairs really do signify something wrong in the home relationship. Sometimes (often?!) they happen just because they can. I really believe VERY few people actually go looking for an affair - and, if someone does, it's more likely to be something wrong inside them, not their partner or the relationship per se.

That little saying about hamburgers out vs steak at home is lovely - but misleading, I feel. Even if you have prime rib-eye for dinner every night, you're liable to start wondering if it'd be fun to grab a takeaway once in a while ...

I do agree Grace and that's why I feel there aren't differing levels of 'forgivability'.

Anything proffered as an excuse is just that because often there is little of nothing wrong within the main relationship. I think I was almost pre-empting the most commonly trotted out response to 'why affairs happen'.

...and that saying was only created to help the steak feel less hurt when the hamburger did run away with the spoon!

Seriously, there is really no rhyme or reason as to why some do it (not forgetting, some don't!). Having said that, I do think there is a type of person that would ...because I know I'm the type of person that wouldn't.

In the time since X's affair, I've thought all sorts about human kind. I've dredged the depths of my soul, desperate to understand hows and whys but I never truly will. I nearly lost myself in trying to understand something that I never genuinely can, it's as if whatever programming is in some people to enable them to betray just isn't in me.

The healthiest conclusion I reached was to put my faith in myself (as I said yesterday, a pact not to mistrust my instincts) and to be aware that the only person worth taking the risk of trusting again is someone who truly and with self awareness and genuine intention, enriches my life.

Because they truly want the best for me, I can only hope (and feel safer in hoping) they wont do the worst to me.

Although I would never take it as far as denial (and so, losing touch with my instincts) I have to believe (and it's taken much courage to do so!) that it's possible it wont happen again. Hope would be a horrific aspect of my nature to lose. Without it, what do we have?

Actually, one category of people who have a lot of affairs is those who are both hysterically monogamous and stupidly romantic. Because they believe that 'infidelity' is a breach of 'true love' then their logic can insist that if they are sexually attracted to someone other than their existing partner then the new person must be their ONe True Love and the existing partner them becomes disposable.

I agree, a breach of trust doesn't have to follow sexual attraction and it frazzles my brain to think that some people would see that (attraction) as a cue (excuse or reason!) to philander.

I fully understand the moral code that is intolerant to any straying. But just to say that we shouldn't be all that judgemental. Sometimes you can take too good people who are stuck in bad ways...and doesn't matter how they try to resolve things they are stuck in a rut which includes imbalanced sexual appetites...and perhaps they really, really don't want to break up the family...then in that case who are we to judge what infidelity is in the context of their relationship....

Yes, that's the sort of thing I was thinking of before, TD. On another, very pro-marriage forum I visit, there's an immensely long thread devoted to those who are locked in sexless marriages. Where the non-sexual partner insists on fidelity from the other ... my feeling is that THEY are acting immorally.

Tragically, those people (they're mostly practising christians) honour their vows and their partners' wishes. To my mind, they're being most cruelly abused.

I've tried to point out that those vows include "worshipping one another with their bodies"! Unfortunately, it seems that part's been removed from the Modern marriage service

...a little bit of life is for living

A relationship with one celibate partner would be an untenable relationship for me. Either an agreed move from monogamy or an end of the relationship would be choices I would explore but infidelity as an option? No, because What would be left of the relationship if it was reduced to deceit and lies anyway?

Infidelity is often a good thing though in that it gets people out of really bad relationships. Because people in really bad relationships are often so horribly ground down that they can't summon up the energy to leave, an affair is often what rescues them.
Affairs also sometimes seem ti improve relationships that are not torpedoed by the affair: sometimes the non-straying partner has been in need of a short sharp shock and the affair performs this function.

I think the details of what is acceptable is usually going to differ depending on the individual, but is always a question of respect. People should respect each other enough to talk about what the are/aren't comfortable with, then respect each other enough to stick to those boundaries, and if they can't do that, they should then respect each other enough to attempt to renegotiate or end the relationship.

You've totally summed it up there, Ryuk

May I ask: would it be more usual, these days, for a couple to have A Talk about what, precisely, this all means to them and what their expectations are? I don't think anybody discussed it in my day [gets out Zimmer frame] as it was "supposed to be obvious". I started the thread as part of my self-improvement project: envisaging a style of relationship that (unlike any previous ones) would be truly life-enhancing. I'm very stuck on the fidelity issue(s) - it's fascinating to hear other people's take on it.

Having just posted a variant of my usual socio-anthropological essay in the "men's nature to cheat" thread, I'm revisiting another old idea. It goes like this: Historically, people lived in small, close-knit communities that were largely isolated from other groups. They were, basically, extended family groups where all responsibilites were shared. You would breast-feed the nearest hungry baby; your partner would till whichever field needed it. Communal faithfulness was the priority, because it took the shared efforts of the whole village to keep any one of its members alive.

If we still lived like that - married to the village, if you like, not just your own little family - would couple faithfulness matter less? Would it seem pretty reasonable for your partner to help impregnate a girl with fertility issues? Would you consider it your duty to have sex with a recently-bereaved and lonely neighbour?

OK, it's not how we live now ... just wondering, though.

ANyone who enters into any kind of relationship these days without discussing boundaries on monogamy, etc. is setting him/herself up for disappoinment or worse.
OK if you start the first date by saying 'Hi, I'm looking for a deep commitment before i feel comfortable having sex' you might well get the other person going, hang on, I have no intention of having sex with you at all. What often also goes wrong is that someone says, early in in the dating, look I am not monogamous, I am not looking for anything serious, I have lots of fuckbuddies - well that's great, that's honest, but someotimes you have said it to a bunyboiling twat who is going to decide that s/he will be the one to Change You.

Yes Grace, NM and I discussed it fairly early on. The boundaries (not to be confused with binds in this case, SGB ) of our relationship are clearly defined.

I think I quite possibly have SGB and you, Grace to thank for helping me feel confident in entering 'The Talk' as it goes. I find a lot of what you both have to say to be inspirational and empowering.

I can't really put forward anything of any use about your question Grace. I don't know if my morals are driven by instinct or conditioning. Probably both because I can say, I don't see anything wrong with other relationship types. I just know they aren't for me and I have explored the possibilities. Hmmm.

I do think that 'handfasting' is possibly the optimum relationship type. Committed for a matter of years, rather than a lifetime, at which point everything is up for review. I think it creates an opportunity for all aspects of the health of a relationship (including levels of attraction!) to be considered before a move to further commitment (ideally) or a choice to step away. It might also help those of us that tend to fall too far, too fast to hold that little bit of ourselves back that as the safety net we might well need because, clearly, we might need it sooner rather than later.

Or, to put it more simply: It might help keep both parties on their toes!

Oooh, EM, I didn't know that's what handfasting was! I thought it was just a new-agey way of getting married
I really like the idea of a fixed-term commitment, if for no other reason than it ought to remind the partners they're in it by choice - and need to stay awake!

I'm quite overwhelmed by your compliment; thank you
Perhaps I need to summarise my own opinions to myself - channel a bit of SGB for protection - and go find somebody to practise on

Now considering changing my match.com listing to say "Looking for a sexual relationship with somebody I can manage to like; minimum anticipated getting-to-know you time 3 weeks" ...

... oh, hang on, that's what we're all saying anyway, isn't it??!!

I think infedility means being not loyal to your partner - that could be sexual or not - idiolising another over your partner.

It could also mean prioritising blood relatives over your partner.

A lot of great points being made by all above. Just a reminder that relationships are not one/two dimensional though. For some, it is valid "to stay together" for the children, for example. For some, it is for economic reasons all factors that blur the RL choices.

I think the point made about respect above is important.

TDiddy, I have to say, economical (materialistic), logistical, sociological, cultural and religious constraints all pale into insignificance for me, upon being treated like shite. If anything, it was 'for the children' that I chose not to take x back!

I don't think anyone's attempting to project their views onto anyone else. We've all got different values, hence the discussion at hand

EcoMouse- agreed. Not talking about people putting up with being treated like shite. I am talking about relationships not working in other ways but people wanting to stay together for the kids. It does happen and it is not always wrong to do so. Sometimes people are able to have happy family life altho' bedroom bit doesn't work.

Infidelity is never a good thing, SGB because that means deceiving someone and lacking the courage to tell your partner that you have breached the agreement.

What about people who didn't realise they were unhappy until they met someone else, WWIFN? Or, rather, didn't realise they weren't in love.

A good friend of mine did it. I didn't like the way he spoke to his wife (disrespectful) but she never showed signs of minding. They thought they were happy. He met someone else. They had an emotional affair. Soon after it became physical, he told his wife. Is now married to OW. His XW met someone far more compatible, too, so the end of the story is a happy one.

He says "I married a fantastic woman, then met the love of my life."

It can't be right to say he should have stopped his friendship with W#2, can it? Four people would have ended up less happy than they are now. But I don't really know what would be the right way to play it ...

Sorry Grace, but I don't think the end justifies the means, unless your friend and his new wife learned from the experience and now feel that infidelity was the very worst way of ending his relationship. There were some other choices i.e. had your friend alerted his wife to the feelings he was having for someone else and discussed what that meant for their marriage before starting a physical relationship with the OW. And who's to say he isn't right now talking in a "disrespectful way" to his new wife?

I've mentioned a few times on here the one couple I know who have made a success of their relationship, having both left their marriages. They don't regret meeting eachother, but wish they had handled their feelings in a better and more caring way towards their ex spouses. They also had some counselling as a new couple to ensure that they never treated eachother that badly - and never went down the infidelity route again.

Some marriages are not built for the long distance and I've got no doubt that in many cases, other partners would be more suitable for people. But the very least you can do as human beings who care for eachother's wellbeing is to be honest before you start lying and deceiving - or trying out a new partner in bed, before deciding whether that person is good enough to leave your spouse.

The idea of ending the existing relationship before you have an 'emotional affaor' is a bit sort of impossible, really So many people in unsatisfactory relationships either don't realise that their relationship is crap (or think that there is nothing better out there and this is what life is ALl About really: grinding boredom but OK if you have enough to eat), or the relationship is so awful that the person's self-esteem and strength have been ground down to practically nothing.
Then when the new person appears and inspires the unhappy partner to end the crap relationship, there is always some overlap - the unhappy partner has to process his.her thoughts about leaving (and sometimes see if there is any likelihood of a relationship with the new person, or whether the new person is in fact going to be like an imaginary friend helping them out of the bad relationship).

SGB I think it's true that there are people who don't seem to realise they are bored until they feel excitement again, but the fact that their primary relationship has become so staid is as much their responsibility as the partner they are now going to deceive. Bored people are very often boring. So the ethical thing to do is to acknowledge their own part in letting things deteriorate and do something about it. That in itself can be the wake-up call needed for both parties.

The more selfish thing to do is to place the responsibility for the "excitement" over to someone else - the new and the old partner.

Very often I've noticed in RL that this pattern is taken into subsequent relationships - absolutely no personal responsibility - and the cycle repeats itself.

I also think that very few affairs happen in the extreme cases you suggest - grinding boredom, awful primary relationships and abusive behaviour. Rather, I think it is as simple as the very human failing of enjoying the feelings a new relationship engenders at its beginning. It is therefore grossly unfair to compare an established relationship with the heady feelings one gets during the bright beginning.

However, although I disagree that it is impossible, I'd concede that few people are unselfish and self-aware enough to see that unfairness.

End staid and boring relationship if untenable or beyond recovery, take time out to heal and reconsider values and wishes, enter into a new thing (if desired) with clarity and lighter baggage. Simple.

I don't understand why a cross-over period is considered acceptable. Try before you buy?

If we each took responsibility for our own emotional wellbeing rather than expected or allowed another to do so, maybe the whole relationship thing would be more clear cut.