The Student Room Group

Why Men Cheat

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Nepene
Your idealism is of little use in the real world. She shouldn't have cheated on you, maybe she should have broken up with you. She did, she had whatever reasons, who she was, what you did, what she did, her genetics, whatever. Talking about morality assumes the other person cares about your morals. She probably didn't.

If a person in a relationship doesn't care about the other's morals, it renders them, instantaneously and irrevocably, a bad person in the context of that relationship, which is the context that we're working with here. Also, I'll take this chance to highlight something that's gonna be a recurring theme as I destroy your post: what's your alternative to my idea? It seems that your alternative to presenting a guideline for this issue is that individuals should just do whatever they want, and the affecting individuals should just deal with it.



If you're in a sexless marriage there's a good chance you have attrocious communication, so it's rather hard to talk to them about your issues. It's good to not cheat. It's also good to have open lines of communication.

Plus, a lot of people are shy and suck at talking to people about awkward issues.



This was the funniest part of your post: being shy excuses cheating? As for the "awkward issues" term, that was excellent, I mean... seriously?

"I've been cheating on my husband for so long, I mean, I really want to tell him but, well, you know... it's just so... awkward to talk about stuff like this!"

So your alternative to trying to open communication in a couple in order to avoid cheating, and discontent is... wait for it... to NOT open lines of communication, because it might be awkward?



It's not good to cheat. It's not good to abandon everyone you love and flee. When people have conflicting morals they tend to do bad things.

Plus, if you get a second partner maybe they can protect you.




I lied actually, this was the funniest part.

Your alternative to leaving an abusive relationship, is to stay in it, but sleep around until you find someone who's bigger and meaner to beat up your original partner?

What kind of bizzarro, law-of-the-jungle world do you live in?


Ok, so you call the police. He posts bail. He then comes back and beats the crap out of you. You drop the case, and while the police try to push it forward they don't have much of a case. Everything goes back to normal.

Or you call a police. You have no real evidence and they can't do anything, and she's a female so they don't care. She beats you up some more and nothing happens.

The authorities are rarely an easy answer to violent people. If you're a guy being beaten up its worse, the police are probably more likely to arrest you than her.


I don't know what fired where in your head, but it definitely missed when you tried to argue this angle. Firstly, just for clarity's sake, your alternative to being in a relationship with someone, who will kill you if you leave them, is to cheat on them.

Anyway, you argue that evidence would be the main issue with my alternative. So get evidence. So far in this scenario, all that's happened is one partner has threatened the other on the basis of their leaving. So, set your iPhone to voice record, stick a video camera in the corner, set-up a live webcam, whatever, then ask them again what would happen if you left them, and thus: evidence.




You don't have to accept it, but that doesn't mean you telling everyone else that your morals are right and they have to shut up and accept your viewpoint gets annoying.



I corrected your mistake, and I would suggest that my viewpoint, based on your counter-"arguments", stands correct. I would encourage you to come back with more though, since I am open to correction if the logic is there.




I've gotten be honest, dude/dudette, your post nearly made me wet myself.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 61
Original post by Calpurnia
If a person in a relationship doesn't care about the other's morals, it renders them, instantaneously and irrevocably, a bad person in the context of that relationship, which is the context that we're working with here. Also, I'll take this chance to highlight something that's gonna be a recurring theme as I destroy your post: what's your alternative to my idea? It seems that your alternative to presenting a guideline for this issue is that individuals should just do whatever they want, and the affecting individuals should just deal with it.


Moral disagreements in a relationship are frequent and often not a cause for breakups in my experience, so my experience is counter to yours.

My alternative is maintaining good communication in a relationship, finding out what people's morals are, and making them feel free to talk to you about any issue. If they have morals you feel are untennable in your relationship, break up or see if you can convince them they are wrong.

This was the funniest part of your post: being shy excuses cheating? As for the "awkward issues" term, that was excellent, I mean... seriously?

"I've been cheating on my husband for so long, I mean, I really want to tell him but, well, you know... it's just so... awkward to talk about stuff like this!"


I've been watching the show cheaters a lot. A common complaint on there by the cheaters, when asked why they didn't say anything was that they tried to say something but the person didn't listen. If a person is shy then it's very very easy to make them not communicate. You should be aware of such shyness and work extra hard to communicate.

"My husband never listens to me and he drinks all day. I've tried to talk about it with him but he just ignores me or stomps off. So when my boss started flirting with me I said yes."

Your alternative to leaving an abusive relationship, is to stay in it, but sleep around until you find someone who's bigger and meaner to beat up your original partner?


It's an alternative that I've often seen on cheaters and in real life. The cheating person normally gives them lots of attention too.

I don't know what fired where in your head, but it definitely missed when you tried to argue this angle. Firstly, just for clarity's sake, your alternative to being in a relationship with someone, who will kill you if you leave them, is to cheat on them.


You are an unpleasant person indeed. I presented to you some common moral ideas that people have and you mock me. Ugh. But onwards.

I said destroy, not kill. It's common that the person will make vague threats and say something like, if you leave I'll destroy your career, your homelife, etc. However, people enjoy intimacy. So they prefer to try and have both, be with someone who cares about them and not have their career/ homelife ruined.

Most people don't say "If we break up I will make every effort to make the breakup easy and will do nothing awkward or annoying." So it can be easier to cheat and remain with them than breakup. There's only so much the police can do as well, if a person wants to make your life unpleasant there are lots of legal or semi legal ways they can do it.

Anyway, you argue that evidence would be the main issue with my alternative. So get evidence. So far in this scenario, all that's happened is one partner has threatened the other on the basis of their leaving. So, set your iPhone to voice record, stick a video camera in the corner, set-up a live webcam, whatever, then ask them again what would happen if you left them, and thus: evidence.


There are lots of ways to screw with someone that are completely legal and which no evidence can stop.

Also, while your approach could work for some people who are in abusive relationships, a lot are rather submissive and beaten down and don't especially want to risk spying on their partner as that is easy to catch.
Original post by Nepene
Moral disagreements in a relationship are frequent and often not a cause for breakups in my experience, so my experience is counter to yours.

My alternative is maintaining good communication in a relationship, finding out what people's morals are, and making them feel free to talk to you about any issue. If they have morals you feel are untennable in your relationship, break up or see if you can convince them they are wrong.


I've been watching the show cheaters a lot. A common complaint on there by the cheaters, when asked why they didn't say anything was that they tried to say something but the person didn't listen. If a person is shy then it's very very easy to make them not communicate. You should be aware of such shyness and work extra hard to communicate.

"My husband never listens to me and he drinks all day. I've tried to talk about it with him but he just ignores me or stomps off. So when my boss started flirting with me I said yes."



Look, perhaps my morals are just totally skewed, but there is just no justification for cheating, ever. Of course, there are reasons why people would but none of them make it right. In your "husband drinks, boss flirts" scenario, there's a couple of things that stand out: the boss is a scumbag for approaching a married woman and the whole thing is subject to corruption; there's every chance the husband genuinely DIDN'T know what was going on and wife, who was apparently already keen on the boss enough to accept his advances, didn't feel like busting a gut to tell him. Even if husband spent all day drinking/didn't listen for no reason, she should've ended with him because he sounds like a terrible partner. Perhaps, preferable to either of these options would be an effort to help the partner with his drinking/other issues for the sake of the relationship.



It's an alternative that I've often seen on cheaters and in real life. The cheating person normally gives them lots of attention too.



Leaving the TV show to one side, rather than cheating, if we apply your idea, to attain someone who is physically strong enough to beat them up, and not have to fear retribution, surely it would be preferable to make a friend who would fit this bill, rather than just go cheat on one's partner?

This would seem to lead to a preferable situation more than sleeping with someone for the express purpose of protection.



You are an unpleasant person indeed. I presented to you some common moral ideas that people have and you mock me. Ugh. But onwards.



Whilst I appreciate you were presenting "common" moral ideas, I am not required to recognise they have any sort of value for that reason. Also, I would be quick to point out that this is perhaps a difference of morals again, you say I'm unpleasant because I said you're stupid, even though it appears you're not, and I think you're unpleasant because you're advocating cheating in a relationship.



I said destroy, not kill. It's common that the person will make vague threats and say something like, if you leave I'll destroy your career, your homelife, etc. However, people enjoy intimacy. So they prefer to try and have both, be with someone who cares about them and not have their career/ homelife ruined.

Most people don't say "If we break up I will make every effort to make the breakup easy and will do nothing awkward or annoying." So it can be easier to cheat and remain with them than breakup. There's only so much the police can do as well, if a person wants to make your life unpleasant there are lots of legal or semi legal ways they can do it.



This is very closely related to my issue with our "husband drinks, boss flirts" scenario: relationships can't always be easy. Sometimes it's important not to take the path of least resistance, and to actually stop thinking about how to make life easiest for yourself on a moment-to-moment basis. Yes, cheating in this scenario will mean you get lots of attention without as much risk of a reprisal, however, does this then mean that you're happy to spend the rest of your life living a lie, just so you don't have to actually make the call and end your relationship?


There are lots of ways to screw with someone that are completely legal and which no evidence can stop.

Also, while your approach could work for some people who are in abusive relationships, a lot are rather submissive and beaten down and don't especially want to risk spying on their partner as that is easy to catch.


Again, I would just say that if a partner has the confidence, freedom and time to cheat, they definitely have the freedom to seek advice from someone who actually knows what they're talking about. As a justification, it just doesn't hold up, and it totally vulnerable to misuse; "yeah, I think he'll, like, hack my Facebook if I leave him, so I'm just gonna stay with him and have 5 guys on the side".


So here's my fundamental issue with you trying to justify cheating:

as soon as you advocate ONE case FOR it, everything else becomes fair game. As you noted early on in your other post, perhaps this is me being ideological but I think that without absolute morals on the issue, and indeed, there doesn't appear to be any logical reason against this, people will be free to cheat on their partners without ANY sort of guilt or moral accountability and this really upsets me. Because it ALWAYS hurts to be cheated on, and you know what, most of the time, people cheating think they're in the right for whatever tiny little reason they're holding in their head. Here's a couple:

- I'm not getting the attention I need
- I'm in love with this other person but don't want to hurt my partner
- The relationship has been over for a long time, we've just drifted apart (despite the partner not having a clue this was the case)


If any of your scenarios are taken and morally justified, all of the other reasons for cheating become legitimate. So I don't think this is an argument I will ever reconsider because there's just no room to manoeuvre, either cheating is never acceptable, or it's always acceptable. You're probably sitting there incredulously thinking "it's not like that", but it is. As soon as you put the job of rationalising cheating into the hands of someone who wants to do it, they can and will rationalise it, probably based on something that you have said here is valid. They shouldn't have that option, there's no need for them to have it.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Anonymous
Flirting isn't the same as cheating.


In most relationships it is, if you're hiding it or you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating.

Is grinding with someone on the dancefloor not cheating?
Reply 64
Original post by Wilfred Little
In most relationships it is, if you're hiding it or you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating.

Is grinding with someone on the dancefloor not cheating?


So your level of immorality is predicated upon your own sense of irrational possesiveness and pety jealousy? How ironic.
Original post by py0alb
So your level of immorality is predicated upon your own sense of irrational possesiveness and pety jealousy? How ironic.


lol shut up son.

If you've both agreed it's unacceptable then one of you does it, it's cheating.

Just because you might be comfortable with your girlfriend letting some drunk guy grind his painfully engorged cock up and down her thigh doesn't mean we all are, so please take your patronising posts somewhere else.

Thanks.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 66
Original post by Wilfred Little
lol shut up son.

If you've both agreed it's unacceptable then one of you does it, it's cheating.

Just because you might be comfortable with your girlfriend letting some drunk guy grind his painfully engorged cock up and down her thigh doesn't mean we all are, so please take your patronising posts somewhere else.

Thanks.


So if you tell your girlfriend you're not happy with her looking guys in the eye when she passes them in the street, shes a cheating slut if she does so?

Your argument is really quite ****.
Original post by py0alb
So if you tell your girlfriend you're not happy with her looking guys in the eye when she passes them in the street, shes a cheating slut if she does so?

Your argument is really quite ****.


You're clutching at straws.

If you agree flirting is unacceptable then she is flirting with someone in private and hiding it then yes I would consider it cheating.

We are talking about sexual flirting here.

flirting is therefore, either seriously or jokingly, intended to be interpreted as a romantic or sexual overture.


lol @ calling it petty jealousy tho.

You have no right to tell someone what they should and shouldn't be comfortable with.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/07/14/when-does-flirting-become-cheating-red-flags/

When Does Flirting Become Cheating? 9 Red Flags

1. When it's secretive

7. If your spouse doesn't like it
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 68
Original post by Wilfred Little
You're clutching at straws.

If you agree flirting is unacceptable then she is flirting with someone in private and hiding it then yes I would consider it cheating.

We are talking about sexual flirting here.



lol @ calling it petty jealousy tho.

You have no right to tell someone what they should and shouldn't be comfortable with.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/07/14/when-does-flirting-become-cheating-red-flags/



Using a fox news gossip column as a scientific source? Now that's what I call bringing out the big guns. Wish I had thought of that for my PhD, woulda saved me a lot of time reading journals.

I clearly must concede defeat.
Original post by py0alb
I clearly must concede defeat.


Clearly, as you've not countered my points.
Reply 70
Original post by Wilfred Little
Clearly, as you've not countered my points.


You didn't make any. Your entire argument is retarded:

You literally defined cheating as:

"If you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating."


So if I don't like my partner eating cheese, then its cheating if I eat cheese.
On the other hand, if I don't mind my partner making out with a girl, then its not cheating for me to make out with a girl.

Stop for a minute, put the ad hominems back in the box, and think about how ****ing stupid your reasoning is, and come up with a marginally more thoughtful definition. Or better yet, don't bother.
Original post by py0alb
So your level of immorality is predicated upon your own sense of irrational possesiveness and petty jealousy? How ironic.


Realistically though, possessiveness isn't irrational. What's irrational from a logical point of view is your belief that it's fine for you to be all right with your girlfriend encouraging sexual advances from other men.

There's every chance you're some sort of cuckold who finds no issue with your partner potentially being with other people, but for most people the thought it pretty scary and it's reflexive to want to prevent any potential inappropriate contact with another. Of course, in this case, it's probably the jealousy that's irrational, if there are no previous reasons for distrust, and since one's partner is probably unlikely to actually WANT said contact with another.

Original post by Wilfred Little

If you agree flirting is unacceptable then she is flirting with someone in private and hiding it then yes I would consider it cheating.

We are talking about sexual flirting here.


I'm not sure I would agree it's cheating, per se, but it's definitely on par with it in terms of trust abuse, and raises serious questions about the relationship and what the partner, the one who's flirting, wants from it.
Original post by py0alb
You didn't make any. Your entire argument is retarded:

You literally defined cheating as:

"If you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating."


So if I don't like my partner eating cheese, then its cheating if I eat cheese.
On the other hand, if I don't mind my partner making out with a girl, then its not cheating for me to make out with a girl.

Stop for a minute, put the ad hominems back in the box, and think about how ****ing stupid your reasoning is, and come up with a marginally more thoughtful definition. Or better yet, don't bother.


Since when did that involve other people? How can that be cheating if nobody else is involved? You're resorting to sarcasm and taking things out of context, you're not as smart as you think you are.

And as for the 2nd example, you've ignored the bit where I said both parties previously agreeing it's unacceptable. If you've agreed you can make out with other people then it's not cheating, it's an open relationship, otherwise it is cheating.

You're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Calpurnia
I'm not sure I would agree it's cheating, per se, but it's definitely on par with it in terms of trust abuse, and raises serious questions about the relationship and what the partner, the one who's flirting, wants from it.


Out of interest, would you consider cyber sex cheating?
Reply 74
Original post by Calpurnia
Realistically though, possessiveness isn't irrational. What's irrational from a logical point of view is your belief that it's fine for you to be all right with your girlfriend encouraging sexual advances from other men.

There's every chance you're some sort of cuckold who finds no issue with your partner potentially being with other people, but for most people the thought it pretty scary and it's reflexive to want to prevent any potential inappropriate contact with another. Of course, in this case, it's probably the jealousy that's irrational, if there are no previous reasons for distrust, and since one's partner is probably unlikely to actually WANT said contact with another.



Oh good, another poster with nothing to offer to the argument but silly ad hominems. :rolleyes:

The point is that one person's subjective level of jealousy is quite patently not a sensible or workable definition of cheating. Its far more nuanced than that.
Reply 75
Original post by Wilfred Little
Since when did that involve other people? How can that be cheating if nobody else is involved? You're resorting to sarcasm and taking things out of context, you're not as smart as you think you are.

And as for the 2nd example, you've ignored the bit where I said both parties previously agreeing it's unacceptable. If you've agreed you can make out with other people then it's not cheating, it's an open relationship, otherwise it is cheating.

You're just arguing for the sake of arguing.


I originally quoted you pointing out the mistake you'd made. Don't blame me if you didn't express yourself very well, you should have just admitted that when you first replied rather than getting all internet hard man on us.

Just be honest and confess you made a mistake. We won't bite.
Reply 76
Original post by Anonymous
I wrote this thread simply because I was bored


DISCLAIMER
The following is meant to be a GENERALIZATION and is in no way 100% accurate in all cases of male/female sexual relationships. I fully accept that there will be exceptions to the rule, BUT I believe that what I say is true of a good majority of male female relationships.


The age old question. Why do men cheat?
Why did he cheat?
Why did he leave me for her?
Didn’t he realise he messed up a GOOD THING

If you haven’t been in a relationship where you (or your man) has cheated on you, then you probably know someone who has. While women do in fact engage in sexual dalliances, it is much more common that men do so. In reality, there are a vast number of reasons why men cheat, but I truly believe that it can be boiled down to a rather simple answer:
THE DIFFERENCE IN GENDER ROLES/STEREOTYPES/NORMS BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN
Here I’ll attempt to summarise the main aspects of these differences as to why men cheat much more than women.
It is often difficult to tease out which behaviours are learned as opposed to which behaviours are innately present in our biological makeup. In reality, whether it is nature or nurture does not matter. Men are more likely to engage in sex, more likely to have more sexual partners, and are more likely to go outside of relationship because of sex. It is fair to say that the issue of a man cheating on a woman is a much bigger one than vice versa. I’ll only focus on the social aspects, because the genetic aspects are a bit too difficult to tease out.

MEN CHEAT BECAUSE WE SOCIALLY LEARN/ARE TAUGHT TO DO SO
Social pressure/learning is the basis for the vast majority of human decisions: it is why people will wear different clothes in different countries, follow certain religions, eat certain foods, observe certain social norms despite there being no actual punishments (please and thank you).Social learning is the biggest most important determinant in a person’s life, bar none.
It is unfortunate, but the average young male is bombarded with images where male promiscuity is highly valued. This is not necessarily economically, but usually socially e.g. a guy is a “player” or a “lad” for having as many sexual partners as possible. The social/esteem status is extremely important, because one’s social standing has a direct impact on their confidence/mental wellbeing, as well as the ability to influence their life in other areas. This aspect is both direct and indirect in terms of it’s ability to influence one’s behaviour and mentality.
Women, unfortunately, do NOT understand this, as they don’t face the same sexual stereotypes/pressures as men. In fact, it is quite the opposite for women, who actually LOSE social value for being promiscuous. Thus, the ability/idea of them being monogamous is quite seamless as it fits in well into the general stereotypical idea of a woman

MARRIAGE/MONOGAMY IS IN DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO WHAT HAS BEEN REINFORCED
Unfortunately, despite the fact that men are bombarded with images of promiscuity being a positive thing, there is also social pressure to make a “choice” of long term monogamous commitment with women. There are SOME women who will be ok with the idea of sharing a man with other women. However, most will NOT. Even if the man is lucky enough to be able to have sex before the discussion of monogamy comes up, it is almost inevitable that the female will seek a committed relationship. He’s then faced with two options:
1. Commit to her, ensuring a frequent supply of sex but going against his “true” nature that he has been taught includes promiscuity
2. Refuse, meaning that he has to go through the unenviable task of starting from scratch with another woman
Most men pick option one, despite the fact that in reality there is a part of them which is constantly yearning to satisfy their ego for more women. Unfortunately, there are also societal norms which dictate him “settling down” and “starting a family” in direct contradiction to the other social norms of male promiscuity.
LOVE AND SEX ARE SEEN DIFFERENTLY BY MEN AND WOMEN
For MOST women, the two are equated. Ergo, a woman should only have sex with someone she “loves” Sex being an intimate act should, therefore, only be done in a committed relationship/marriage.
Men, on the other hand, do not equate the two. It is perfectly reasonable for a man to have sex with one woman, then go home to his wife/girlfriend who he truly loves. The two are not mutually exclusive, but instead two partially differentiated acts.


TLDR:
Men cheat because it is socially reinforced, because the human relationship system of sexual commitment/marriage goes directly against this socially reinforced promiscuity, and because men and women view sex and love differently

(PS - didn't focus on the biological factors, only the social ones)


Men cheat because women set out to steal men. There isn't a man alive who sets out to cheat on the girl he has previously committed too.
Original post by py0alb
Oh good, another poster with nothing to offer to the argument but silly ad hominems. :rolleyes:

The point is that one person's subjective level of jealousy is quite patently not a sensible or workable definition of cheating. Its far more nuanced than that.


So having a different opinion to you means he has nothing to offer?

And what do you mean "we" won't bite? You're on your own in this thread son.
Reply 78
Original post by Wilfred Little
So having a different opinion to you means he has nothing to offer?

And what do you mean "we" won't bite? You're on your own in this thread son.


He didn't really offer an opinion. He just missed the point and then made a childish crack about cuckolds.

Now then, are you going to admit your mistake or do you stick by your definition that:

"if you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating"

with no provisos or context provided.
Original post by py0alb
He didn't really offer an opinion. He just missed the point and then made a childish crack about cuckolds.

Now then, are you going to admit your mistake or do you stick by your definition that:

"if you wouldn't like your partner doing the same, it's cheating"

with no provisos or context provided.


It's relative and it was in response to somebody else, without the post I quoted you would have a point, unfortunately you do not. Anyone can lift bits and pieces from posts and twist it to mean something else.

You've gone from disagreeing that it's cheating (and conveniently knowing exactly what I meant at the time :rolleyes:) to making stuff up as you go along.

Poor.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending