RE: CIAW

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: CIAW

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: CIAW

Page: << < prev 21 22 23 [24] 25 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 5:03:02 AM

agirl

Posts: 4530
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline

I inhabit a place of uncertainty about right and wrong. I don't think in that way.........I think things are unwise, or unfair, or selfish, or understandable, cruel, kind, stupid, ignorant, sad, unfortunate......many things, but my first thoughts are rarely ever *That is wrong*.

I can think that the act of cheating, lying and deceit is *wrong* in a debate on ethics, but as applied to human behaviour and circumstances, I don't think it's necessarily the wrong thing for a person to have done.

I think that people in long term relationships go through many changes, the relationship itself changes and both people aren't always *in it* at the same time, in the same way. How and why people stay together isn't always clear.

agirl

(in reply to cloudboy)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 5:34:27 AM

Devilslilsister

Posts: 1262
Joined: 8/3/2006
Status: offline

can you believe you all are still talking about this?

_____________________________

My ability to cope with BS is at an all time low - me

i may look like i'm doing nothing, but i'm very busy at a cellular level

(in reply to agirl)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 6:50:46 AM

Posts: 27
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: offline

Shades of gray people...

What if I break into an office building with a gun and demand that everyone pair off and start having sex or I start shooting. Are all the married people wrong if they do it? What if one or two of them, in a wierd perverted way (something none of us here know anything abour, right?) actually enjoy that sex? Are they going to burn in hell for it? Yes, that will probably never happen, but it could in theory, and wouldn't that include it in the term "always".

Anyway, the ultimate point here, without rambling for an hour, is that nothing is "always right" or "always wrong". Give me an hour and I could probably concoct a situation where doing the above (breaking into an office building and making everyone have sex) is the "right" thing for me to do.

Beyond the fact that speaking in absolutes is "always" a bad idea (hehe, like that?), we all make value judgements every single day, and everyone's value system is different. In stagnant relationships where communication has been attempted and failed, it is not out of the realm of possibility to suggest that one spouse or the other (or both) may have to choose between the pursuit of happiness and fidelity (but not both). Some people will value the pursuit of happiness more, and others will value fidelity more. Is it wrong to say that niether person is inherently wrong? Or perhaps we should start quantifying our decisions by saying a given action is 55% wrong and only 45% right, therefore it is ultimately wrong?

-Charlie

Edit: Totally didn't realize this thread went on for 25 pages! Read the first page and posted, lol My forum writing skills are lacking apparently.

< Message edited by Plethora22 -- 3/15/2007 6:52:18 AM >

(in reply to velvetears)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 8:12:46 AM

Posts: 14867
Joined: 12/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SusanofO

LaT's comment made me also think about what are gay folks supposed to do? This is another reason I've never been able to get into the CIAW camp. I mean, do some really realize just how much societal pressure there was, in, 1970-75, for example, (or even today, depending on who one associates with, or is influenced by), for a gay person, in many, if not most instances - to get married and try to procreate with the opposite sex, regardless of the fact they weren't going to ever be able to get their sexual needs met within their marriage to a straight person without cheating?

As someone who isn't straight I do understand the pressure to be straight. However, that doesn't change the fact that you are utterly deceiving someone. You are telling someone that you love them and are sexually attracted to them when you really aren't. I don't think that is fair to them.

My opinion is that you shouldn't do that to someone. The older homosexuals I've talked to who were in this situation felt terrible about cheating and left the situation when they could. They didn't hide under the banner of "Well, I couldn't marry someone I really loved, so it's ok." They hurt someone who didn't deserve it. That is the bottom line.

_____________________________

Without my dominance you cannot submit. Without your submission I cannot dominate. You are my equal in this, though our roles are different.-Val

It was ok for him to beat me but then he tried to cuddle me! - Me

Member:Clan of the Scarlet O'Hair

(in reply to SusanofO)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 8:18:43 AM

Posts: 2933
Joined: 6/19/2006
Status: offline

i agree with you Pleothra and if you want to torture yourself and go back and read those 25 pages you'll see my pov. It's funny the scenario you mentioned about making people have sex at gunpoint - that actually happened years ago at a diner here in NY out on LI - i remember hearing about it and getting a sort of sick little thrill thinking about it LOL. Don't get me wrong i think what happened to those people was horrid and awful, but i guess i was kinky even before i knew i was kinky

_____________________________

Religion is for people who are scared of hell, Spirituality is for people who have been there

(in reply to Plethora22)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 9:46:25 AM

Posts: 68
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plethora22
In stagnant relationships where communication has been attempted and failed, it is not out of the realm of possibility to suggest that one spouse or the other (or both) may have to choose between the pursuit of happiness and fidelity (but not both).

How much skill at communication does it take for someone to say "hey, i'm going to screw other people"...before they actually screw other people?

(in reply to Plethora22)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 9:48:40 AM

crouchingtigress

Posts: 4387
Joined: 3/19/2006
From: Maui
Status: offline

i disagree with the premise...because cheating is lying....if that gun thing happened sure it would suck...but there is no inhereant deciet.

i am with the always wrong crowd with the exception of a partner in a coma....everthing else is just folks being chicken poops....and not having the guts to live up to thier commitment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plethora22

Shades of gray people...

What if I break into an office building with a gun and demand that everyone pair off and start having sex or I start shooting. Are all the married people wrong if they do it? What if one or two of them, in a wierd perverted way (something none of us here know anything abour, right?) actually enjoy that sex? Are they going to burn in hell for it? Yes, that will probably never happen, but it could in theory, and wouldn't that include it in the term "always".

Anyway, the ultimate point here, without rambling for an hour, is that nothing is "always right" or "always wrong". Give me an hour and I could probably concoct a situation where doing the above (breaking into an office building and making everyone have sex) is the "right" thing for me to do.

Beyond the fact that speaking in absolutes is "always" a bad idea (hehe, like that?), we all make value judgements every single day, and everyone's value system is different. In stagnant relationships where communication has been attempted and failed, it is not out of the realm of possibility to suggest that one spouse or the other (or both) may have to choose between the pursuit of happiness and fidelity (but not both). Some people will value the pursuit of happiness more, and others will value fidelity more. Is it wrong to say that niether person is inherently wrong? Or perhaps we should start quantifying our decisions by saying a given action is 55% wrong and only 45% right, therefore it is ultimately wrong?

-Charlie

Edit: Totally didn't realize this thread went on for 25 pages! Read the first page and posted, lol My forum writing skills are lacking apparently.

< Message edited by crouchingtigress -- 3/15/2007 9:51:12 AM >

_____________________________

Service slut, durable plaything, and ponypenquincatdogpig, to Lee Harrington

This is him

"Its none of my buisness what other people think of me."

(in reply to Plethora22)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 11:18:39 AM

Posts: 5672
Joined: 12/19/2005
Status: offline

Well personally I am chalking much of any misunderstandings that did occur to personality-differences, and the fact that people can easily mis-read someone's true intent when they post sometimes on the internet, and I still think of it as a pretty worthwhile discussion, overall. I agree w/what agirl said. I just don't think in those terms either, most of the time. But heck, I think everybody who posted is basically fine. I just am averse to intense arguing stuff, and it is possible that I might sometimes see it when it isn't even there (it could just be an INFJ thing, maybe). Maybe sometimes maybe what I see as arging is somebody else's idea of mere debate (although I can be a darn good debater when I put my mind to it, sometimes). Plus everybody's got a right to their opinion, too.

But those "feeler" types, they can take what is said really to heart, trust me (and it doesn't necessarily mean they always just need to grow a thicker skin, etc. They've got their place in the world. Everyone does (the thinker types do too, and I think it's great they're here, I really do. They can bring in an objective POV a lot of times). And occasionally, people do just screw up and mis-spell a word (Lord knows I am about the world's worst typist), but overall, I think cloudboy's got a point (and know him well enough personally to know he does not strike me as someone who jumps to conclusions. I also noticed he waited for pages and pages, before he ever made a comment, really, about that, not that it is especially pertinent), but I'm not gonna make a big deal about it.

I am not sure it has to do w/age, as much as someone's personal experiences, though, possibly. If someone's never observed marriages like that much (the "don't ask-don't -tell" kind, for example) I am sure it probably strikes many as less than ideal. And it is, if I recall, that's what he said. But there are reasons for those types of situations, IMO, not always apparent to people who aren't in those relationships, and in many cases in pragmatic terms it is a lesser of two evils (I know I had mine, and basically am fine w/what I did). People can bemoan that they exist, but they're are probably more than a few of those arrangements out there, IMO. I don't have a problem w/the fact they exist (what am I gonna do about it anyway, realisitically speaking?)

And I definitely separate those instances from a person who is bedding every person they see, spreading STDs w/not thought to anyone else's health, and letting everyone they bed think they are un-atttached, if they're not. It might seem like some sort of weird self-justification, but, IMO it's really not. I know people in those relationships who appear to me to be content. I am a realist, and I figure if they really hated the way they were living, they'd leave. I also think in a lot of cases the spous knows and just doesn' say anything, and they've usually IMO got a whole host of reasona of their own for staying silent. Of course there are exceptions to that, and sometimes people do get hurt in those situations, of course, but I rarely hear anyone discuss the former instance is all.

And there is much to be said for the last line of cloudboy's theory, IMO. If somebody is going to really become an embittered person, and make life hell for their spouse and kids, for instance, because they have a spouse who is less than what they consider ideal, and are constantly bickering and throwing things, and counselling isn't working, or they can't seem to make it work, or even if it just appears there is too-wide a bridge as far as the way the two partners view life to make them really get back to where they started, so to speak (people change, life isn't static)-but they still have otherwise very valid reasons for staying in the relationship and not disrupting the rest of the family's life, than I think an affair really might in some cases be the wisest course of action for the other spouse or partner.

I might have a rather fluid way of viewing the world, but I am also consider myself a realist. Is it ideal? Of course not - but the people involved are dealing w/ a less than ideal situation from the get-go anyway. Ideal is off the table. It's no longer an option, plain and simple. And there may be a lot of other practical considerations at stake. I see relationships like this in my neighborhood (or what I think are ones like this) and to me, they certainly do appear to be the lesser-of-two evils, sometimes.

I dunno, I just like it when everybody gets along, am a genuine people-liker overall, and I don't wanna use up all my aspirin. Which of course doesn't mean everyone isn't entitled to their POV. That they are goes without saying. Hugs to all.

- Susan

< Message edited by SusanofO -- 3/15/2007 12:15:32 PM >

_____________________________

"Hope is the thing with feathers,
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all". - Emily Dickinson

(in reply to crouchingtigress)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 11:55:27 AM

Posts: 13029
Joined: 2/24/2005
From: Pennsylvania
Status: offline

I see this as a discussion of "mitigating circumstances" and "rationalizations". These are tools that can make you feel better about practicing deception. It's all about a person's value system and integrity, not everyone's is the same.

_____________________________

“If you want to live a happy life, tie it to a goal, not to people or things.”
- Albert Einstein

(in reply to SusanofO)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 12:12:27 PM

Posts: 5672
Joined: 12/19/2005
Status: offline

Well not everyone's is the same I agree. Nor do they have to be (which I know is what you meant). I mean, of somebody asks me to do something I consider intolerable, or that I personally really do believe has the inhernet potential to really devastate someone, I say no. In my particular case, the person I was seeing was a bachelor, there was no famly or wife to consider. If he'd had a spouse, and a wife who loved him dearly, and was out-right decieving her, I'd probably have re-thought the whole thing.

But I can envision circumstances where the person has a family, and they take a lot of time to cover their tracks, etc., and as he said, that takes a lot of energy, but maybe they are successful at it, who knows? And maybe it is the lesser-of-two evils - to them (actually, I think what cloudboy wrote was pretty objective, as far as listing options for folks). Are they deceiving someone else? Yes, no doubt about it (sometimes I really believe the other partner stays silent for their own reasons, and people just aren't really aware of those, though) .

Maybe they've got a spouse who they've talked to who just plain refuses to change in some pretty fundamental area that is affecting them (say they drink too much, or gamble too much, or have sexual performance problems they refuse to address, for instance). I can certainly see why it happens. And I also know how really ugly people can be to eachother when it comes to things like divorce - my sister is a divorce attorney. People can do unbelievably gut-wrenching things to eachother sometimes, in the divorce process and settlements, etc.

Integrity - to somone, in a particular instance, might mean something that keeps the family more stable -like not dragging thier family thorugh a gut-wrenching divorce, having their kids in counselling for years due to the emotional fallout, and facing possible financial ruin. Myabe the already know their spouse would bever go for an "open relationship" (or havdn't thought of it, or know that type of thing exists, or think it would be too complicated to manage).

I still say unless somebody knows all of the details, they can't really say which would be the best course of action. People can bemoan the fact they exist, but I can certainly understand why these situations exist.

Nor am I saying that some cheaters haven't devastated people. I am pretty sure some of them have.

- Susan

< Message edited by SusanofO -- 3/15/2007 12:34:37 PM >

_____________________________

"Hope is the thing with feathers,
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all". - Emily Dickinson

(in reply to KatyLied)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 2:04:13 PM

Posts: 186
Joined: 10/28/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
... replace the word "cheating" with "murder"... is murder always wrong?

Yes, of course it is. Three short stories to prove it.

A man murders his wife. She has an incurable illness, is in unrelieved pain and begs him repeatedly to end her life. In the eyes of the law it's murder. Murder is always wrong.

A man murders his wife. He does so because she's threatening to kill their two children and in the moment he can think of no other way to prevent her. In court they rule that he should have shot to wound and the kids would probably have survived too. Murder is always wrong.

A man murders his wife. He does so because he is completely deluded. He genuinely believes she is satan's angel out to destroy the world. The mental health defence collapses as just plain fanciful. Murder is always wrong

These are just stories. Don't try this yourself at home. Murder is always wrong.

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Can anyone think of anything that's always right? - 3/15/2007 2:12:43 PM

Posts: 186
Joined: 10/28/2005
Status: offline

After 24 pages of this I just wondered if anyone could cheer me up a bit by thinking of something that's ALWAYS RIGHT instead. Just for a bit of light entertainment. I'd like to nominate chocolate and coffee...although I'm painfully aware that this could spark a debate about 101 ways to make a rubbish drink...

Laura

(in reply to gentlethistle)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 2:34:41 PM

Posts: 27
Joined: 5/16/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gentlethistle

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
... replace the word "cheating" with "murder"... is murder always wrong?

Yes, of course it is. Three short stories to prove it.

That is so misleading. I'm not arguing your ultimate point but the very definition of the word murder has "wrong" as an inherent part of it. If its not wrong, then it can't be murder. Replace the word murder with the word kill and go talk to a soldier, see if it still works.

One could then say that cheating is the same way, but if we go down that road we then need to also acknowledge that maybe what we all accept as cheating may not, in fact, actually be cheating because if there is some degree of "rightness" to it, then it is, by definition, not cheating.

(in reply to gentlethistle)

RE: Can anyone think of anything that's always right? - 3/15/2007 2:45:30 PM

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gentlethistle

After 24 pages of this I just wondered if anyone could cheer me up a bit by thinking of something that's ALWAYS RIGHT instead. Just for a bit of light entertainment. I'd like to nominate chocolate and coffee...although I'm painfully aware that this could spark a debate about 101 ways to make a rubbish drink...

Laura

I was just wondering quite the same thing. Twenty four pages (and I readily admit to not reading them all) later and it's hasn't yet been found to be a topic that some might just agree to disagree and move on?

One thing I will say. I'm sorry, but I do not feel that cheating and murder are equitably transferable terms. Murder, by definition, is an absolute that takes all life out of the body. Cheating, does not. The phrase let's get a grip comes to mind, but that might not be appreciated.

(in reply to gentlethistle)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 3:05:37 PM

Posts: 68
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gentlethistle

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
... replace the word "cheating" with "murder"... is murder always wrong?

Yes, of course it is. Three short stories to prove it.

A man murders his wife. She has an incurable illness, is in unrelieved pain and begs him repeatedly to end her life. In the eyes of the law it's murder. Murder is always wrong.

A man murders his wife. He does so because she's threatening to kill their two children and in the moment he can think of no other way to prevent her. In court they rule that he should have shot to wound and the kids would probably have survived too. Murder is always wrong.

A man murders his wife. He does so because he is completely deluded. He genuinely believes she is satan's angel out to destroy the world. The mental health defence collapses as just plain fanciful. Murder is always wrong

These are just stories. Don't try this yourself at home. Murder is always wrong.

These are like the scenarios with the person cheating on a partner who's in a coma or because a gun is held to their head. Together, they all make up a very small minority of murder and cheating, respectively. Many CIAW posters have stated they don't see cheating under these extreme circumstances as wrong or necessarily even see it as cheating...probably because most of those situations don't include dishonesty or at the very least an opportunity for honesty. I'd bet that most would also not see the killing in your 3 stories as wrong.

So, if the stories' purpose was to point out that there are rare exceptions to cheating...yes, there are. I think we've established agreement on that from both sides of the debate already.

Oh, and I second the chocolate nomination

(in reply to gentlethistle)

RE: Can anyone think of anything that's always right? - 3/15/2007 3:15:20 PM

Posts: 68
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
One thing I will say. I'm sorry, but I do not feel that cheating and murder are equitably transferable terms. Murder, by definition, is an absolute that takes all life out of the body. Cheating, does not. The phrase let's get a grip comes to mind, but that might not be appreciated.

No, they're not equitably transferable terms. If they were, they'd be synonyms instead of an analogy.

(in reply to LadyPact)

Can anyone think of anything anymore? - 3/15/2007 3:20:03 PM

Posts: 186
Joined: 10/28/2005
Status: offline

Let's concentrate on the chocolate. Chocolate is always right. Discuss.

(in reply to clover)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 3:32:59 PM

Posts: 905
Joined: 8/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: justheather

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

Only the unmarried or never been in a LTR types advocate unequivicolly that you must be open and honest about everything. The fact is, such a policy is just plain stupid in a myraid of contexts. I would never presume that absolute platitudes offer someone any help to deal with their own personal choices and responsibilities.

Well, this is pretty broad-sweeping. May I see the results of the research you did in order to make this conclusion?

First of all, you seem to be implying that everyone who says CIAW is also saying "You must be completely honest about every thing."
Would you not agree that "No, your butt doesnt look fat in those pants." (An answer to a question I would never ever ask my partner, by the way, because he would probably very gently suggest I wear something different if he felt the outfit I had chosen did not do my body justice) and "No, Im not abandoning my vow to foresake all others/our agreement to be monogamous and sharing physical intimacy with another person" are several orders of magnitude apart in terms of lies?

And secondly, some people actually value honesty over avoiding discomfort.
They also present potentially difficult truths in love and with respect to a partner who understands and is assured (because of their partner's consistency in behavior and history of loving and honest communication) that the fact that a particular truth may be difficult does not mean that they are being attacked or that they need to read any big and horrible and broad-sweeping thing into what is being said. Go figure.

Some people do not choose to participate in a culture of deceit. I can understand that if you tend to spend your time in such a culture, lying becomes something that is taken for granted. But there are people who are participating in healthy, fulfilling relationships who do not buy into the culture you are assuming is universal.

Wow, you said it a lot better than I did...this is what I was getting at. Thank you.

_____________________________

"It's nothing that I understand, but when in your arms you have complete power over me. So be gentle if you please, 'cause your hands are in my hair, but my heart is in your teeth and it makes me want to make you near me always."

(in reply to justheather)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 3:38:55 PM

Posts: 905
Joined: 8/21/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

a. Young
b. Never been married
c. Serial Monogamists
d. Victims of cheaters who universalize their own experience as opposed to differentiating it.
e. single and idealistic
f. in the romantic stage of a new relationship

You're complaining that CIAWS make the generalization that cheating is always wrong, yet you seem to think it is ok to make a generalization yourself. Yes, I do fit alot of this critiria.

I am young. I'm a serial monogamist. I'm a victim of cheating (but so are most people at some point). I'm single and idealistic perhaps. Ok so I fit your profile. Lets look at my mom and grandma.

My grandma was married to the same man for 30 years. She firmly believed CIAW. She was NOT young (she was 80!).She certainly HAD been married (3x in fact!). She was not "single and idealistic" nor was she "in a new relationship.) The ONLY one of your critieria she met was being a serial monogamist. Of course serial monogamist believe CIAW. That's why they're monogamists!

Now, Look at my mom. She's not young (44). Not never been married (she's been married twice). Not single and idealistic. Not married less than 10yrs (she's been married for 14.) Again. the ONLY criteria she meets is being a serial monogamist which is sort of a silly criteria since it's repetitive (again, CIAW is a basis of serial monogamy...it goes without saying.)

I simply know of too many older women in long term (10yr+) relationships who invalidate your little profile. I want to see some research to back up your opinion.

_____________________________

"It's nothing that I understand, but when in your arms you have complete power over me. So be gentle if you please, 'cause your hands are in my hair, but my heart is in your teeth and it makes me want to make you near me always."

(in reply to cloudboy)

RE: CIAW - 3/15/2007 3:40:02 PM

Posts: 1128
Joined: 3/19/2005
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Plethora22
In stagnant relationships where communication has been attempted and failed, it is not out of the realm of possibility to suggest that one spouse or the other (or both) may have to choose between the pursuit of happiness and fidelity (but not both).

ORIGINAL: clover

How much skill at communication does it take for someone to say "hey, i'm going to screw other people"...before they actually screw other people?

Thank you, thank you very much.

22 pages of excuses and rationalizations and about 2 pages worth of, "paint it any color you want, you know when it's wrong," later...you said, Clover.

Dan Savage and some others continue to ignore the honest but inconvenient choices, where you don't stay unhappy and unfulfilled for the rest of your life and you don't cheat.

And no amount of trivializing others, trying to characterize them as foolish, for having trusted you to act right, is going to make cheating any less wrong.

But if it'll make them feel any better to justify and rationalize, who can talk them out of it? They pay the price of leading a cynical life and don't even know it.

(in reply to clover)

Page: << < prev 21 22 23 [24] 25 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: CIAW

Page: << < prev 21 22 23 [24] 25 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.584