quote:

ORIGINAL: MadameMarque

Oh, save us all from the pitiful moral state of justifying our own bad acts by pointing at someone else and saying, "But they knew!"
 
It's not only irrelevant to the fact that you did something you know is wrong, but it doesn't even make any sense. 
 
If you choose to do what you freely agreed not to do - presumably, in this case, get romantically and/or sexually involved with someone outside your current relationship - without letting your partner know before doing it (so that they, in turn, can choose what they want to do, before you've ever betrayed your agreement) 
and without letting them know after (so that your partner can have a chance to choose whether or not they want to expose themselves to the various problems and risks you've brought into the relationship), 
then you're keeping it a secret, aren't you?  And if your partner knew, then you wouldn't have to hide it at all, would you?
 
And if they discover or realize you're cheating, but can't bring themselves to confront it, because they're scared of losing you or can't stand to deal with the pain, how does that make you any less guilty of doing something wrong?
 
"But they knew I was cheating."  This is a cheater's argument.  And "cheating" is wrong.  Look it up - the word, I mean. 
 
I responded to the original post on page 8 of this tome.  But I was amazed to see the thread still active, and I come back to find it's degenerated into the, 'but they knew I was cheating' defense.  Arggh

"Those are my principles.  If you don't like them,
  I have others."
 
- Groucho Marx

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

There are mitigating reasons people murder but it is still wrong to take a human life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SusanofO

Well it is not an altogether fair comparison. When someone is murdered, they're dead. They're not gonna ever get a chance again to do much of anything else, let alone cheat, or not cheat. When someone is cheated on, they are still very much alive. Altered, perhaps, but still very much alive. That is a significant difference (to me)

- Susan

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

quote:

susanofO
domiguy: I am not going to argue. Apparently, you have a worldview that insists on one side always "winning" or "losing" at another's expense. You seem to think I am having an argument w/you that in fact, simply doesn't exist.

 
ar·gu·ment  [image]http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/premium.gif[/image]  [image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image][image]http://cache.lexico.com/g/d/speaker.gif[/image]  /ˈɑr[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]gyə[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]mənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ahr-gyuh-muh[image]http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png[/image]nt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun



1.
an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation.



2.
a discussion involving differing points of view; debate:



3.
a process of reasoning; series of reasons



4.
a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point.



5.
an address or composition intended to convince or persuade; persuasive discourse Yes SusanofO, you have bee involved in an argument with the majority of the people who are out here, including me....However, the third definition as well as the fourth do not apply to you. Christ, not really even the fifth. 

quote:

SusanofO....
.I also noticed it is comprised of many studies, not simply one, nor one conclusion - if you didn't notice this, then read it again, and maybe you will - because to me, that fact practically screamed off the page. I aready know what's in there - I found it, remember?

Yes you found it and still for some God unknown reason you can't grasp that when someone includes in their paper the words:"

"What Do Infidelity Statistics Mean "
It probably means there are going to tell you "What in the Fuck the Infidelity Statistics Mean!!!!!

And Voila here it is....Wow! 

"What Do Infidelity Statistics Mean."
http://www.menstuff.org/columns/sommer/archive.html#infidelity

I'm tired. I don't know what to tell you...Take your meds...get some sleep....Masturbate! 

Start another rant.. I don't care.. I was just illustrating the fact that both you and cloudboy don't read the material that you think will aid you case....I don't care ....To prove it! I am going to fuck three other women and not tell sub susie,,,I don't care! 

Do something more constructive with your time....For fuck's sake, I know I can find anything  better to do with mine...(Domiguy looks around and realizes there is some unfinished whittling that needs gettin done)

Go away.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl


She has neither agreed, nor approved. She doesn't know. Whether she thinks there's chance it could happen is irrelevent.

The only way he could escape being a *cheater* would be if he told her firstly.

If she considers the possibility and asks.......he's a cheat. If she considers the possibility and doesn't ask.....he's still a cheat.

He can't assume that he had either approval or agreement by her *not asking*. All he can claim is that she didn't ask.

HER reasons for *not asking* are irrelevant. It's HIS actions that determine whether he is or isn't a cheat.

agirl

First of all, i am not arguing the point that your father is a cheat.  If he is seeing someone on the side without your mother's consent (presuming that he is), then he is a cheat.

But, your mother has accepted that this may be a possibility, without question....yes or no?
And your mother has agreed to continue to allow this possibility by not questioning your father.

Once again, i am not saying that your mother said 'i know he is cheating and i approve of that or i agree with it' but your mother has agreed to letting your father go away, do his thing, and not question him.....yes or no? 

If she didn't agree to do that, the outcome would be much different, wouldn't it?

In your initial post about this, you stated that you had more respect for your father because he cheated, was able to keep it a secret, which in turn did not disrupt your mother's life, which in turn made her happy. 

Is this like 'what you don't know won't hurt you'?  Or 'ignorance is bliss'? 

i have heard people say that they reached a point in their relationship where they no longer cared if their partner cheated or not.  They were pretty much done with the relationship and were just biding their time until they got out.

i have heard people say that they know their partner is cheating but are staying for the money or kids or whatever.  They have chosen to turn a blind eye.

But your mother just doesn't want to know because if she knew for certain, it could change her life as she knows it now.

That still does not make your father's cheating right.  And in my eyes, it does not make it admirable.  The fact that it has not interfered with their marriage is because your mother has not pursued it to that point, nor has your father brought it out in the open. 

Still cheating.  Still not right.
 
Edited to fix quotes.

DG

quote:

ORIGINAL: KatyLied

Breach of contract as an analogy?  Isn't that exactly what it is?  Within the bounds of a legally-recognized marriage, anyway.

quote:

I suppose one could plea diminished responsibility.

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: AquaticSub

If you know what situations cheating is ok in, can you answer the question why is it ok to remove the right to informed consent for sexual activity?

I didn't say, at any time, that *I* thought it was *ok*. My comment was in reference to Dan Savage and his quote.

agirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

i just had a thought... this question is for the CIAW crowd. What if your spouse masturbates, doesn't tell you, therefore you don't get as much for yourself from them..... you didn't give your consent for them to masturbate - is this a form of cheating in your eyes?

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

i just had a thought... this question is for the CIAW crowd. What if your spouse masturbates, doesn't tell you, therefore you don't get as much for yourself from them..... you didn't give your consent for them to masturbate - is this a form of cheating in your eyes?

quote:

ORIGINAL: hisannabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

i just had a thought... this question is for the CIAW crowd. What if your spouse masturbates, doesn't tell you, therefore you don't get as much for yourself from them..... you didn't give your consent for them to masturbate - is this a form of cheating in your eyes?

well, in any kind of relationship, i wouldn't have put the expectation on them not to masturbate, so no. if we had a mutual agreement to not masturbate, and they deceitfully went behind my back to do it, that would be another story.

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

"Cheating removes the ability to make informed sexual consent." - that's the question continually being asked - i would say anyone who masturbates regularly, not telling their partner they are doing so, is removing the "informed consent" part of the bargain.  Define cheating - going behind your partners back - even if its to go bowling - does everyone in the CIAW camp announce - honey i am going to go slap the moneky... see ya in a little while [:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: velvetears

i bet some out there would consider it cheating.  Let's hear from you if your out there lurking [;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: adaddysgirl

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: agirl


She has neither agreed, nor approved. She doesn't know. Whether she thinks there's chance it could happen is irrelevent.

The only way he could escape being a *cheater* would be if he told her firstly.

If she considers the possibility and asks.......he's a cheat. If she considers the possibility and doesn't ask.....he's still a cheat.

He can't assume that he had either approval or agreement by her *not asking*. All he can claim is that she didn't ask.

HER reasons for *not asking* are irrelevant. It's HIS actions that determine whether he is or isn't a cheat.

agirl

First of all, i am not arguing the point that your father is a cheat.  If he is seeing someone on the side without your mother's consent (presuming that he is), then he is a cheat.

But, your mother has accepted that this may be a possibility, without question....yes or no?
And your mother has agreed to continue to allow this possibility by not questioning your father.

Once again, i am not saying that your mother said 'i know he is cheating and i approve of that or i agree with it' but your mother has agreed to letting your father go away, do his thing, and not question him.....yes or no? 

If she didn't agree to do that, the outcome would be much different, wouldn't it?

In your initial post about this, you stated that you had more respect for your father because he cheated, was able to keep it a secret, which in turn did not disrupt your mother's life, which in turn made her happy. 

Is this like 'what you don't know won't hurt you'?  Or 'ignorance is bliss'? 

i have heard people say that they reached a point in their relationship where they no longer cared if their partner cheated or not.  They were pretty much done with the relationship and were just biding their time until they got out.

i have heard people say that they know their partner is cheating but are staying for the money or kids or whatever.  They have chosen to turn a blind eye.

But your mother just doesn't want to know because if she knew for certain, it could change her life as she knows it now.

That still does not make your father's cheating right.  And in my eyes, it does not make it admirable.  The fact that it has not interfered with their marriage is because your mother has not pursued it to that point, nor has your father brought it out in the open. 

Still cheating.  Still not right.
 
Edited to fix quotes.

DG

Absolutely. I didn't say it was right. You had said that it was a *bit different* to sneaking around. I merely said that it was still cheating.

agirl