Would it be considered cheating?

CM · Post by CM » Thu May 12, 2005 3:14 pm

[QUOTE=Cuchulain82]That's an interesting concept. I wonder if people get divorced more often now because it is easier to do so- society accepts it, women can survive unmarried, etc.- now more than ever before? Maybe people just suffered in lousy marriages in years past because divorce wasn't a viable option until relatively recently.[/QUOTE]

I attribute it generally to hedonistic desires and alot more emphasis or me me and more me instead of thinking of both people in the relationship. Basically more selfishness. But yeah it is easier to do so, in Islamic society divorced is usually used as a threat to keep the wife submissive and in chains (not literally)

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:17 pm

[QUOTE=Cuchulain82]That's an interesting concept. I wonder if people get divorced more often now because it is easier to do so- society accepts it, women can survive unmarried, etc.- now more than ever before? Maybe people just suffered in lousy marriages in years past because divorce wasn't a viable option until relatively recently.[/QUOTE]
Yes, those factors do play a part in it too. However, I can't count the times I see (or hear about) people getting married after knowing each other for less than 3 years. I mean, come on, by that time you just found out her favorite colour

...
Mutual respect is the basis for me. I can have erotic feelings with other women, may be even more than with my own girlfriend. But there's no one in the entire world that I respect, understand, and appreciate being around me more than her.

Cuchulain82 · Post by **Cuchulain82** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:17 pm

[QUOTE=CM]Cheating i think is generally defined as without consent ie, the other person doesn't know or the idea is hidden from the SO. That is cheating. However if it is accepted it isn't cheating.

But i do agree with your ex that emotionally "cheating" is far more damaging and dangerous than physical stuff. A relationship from what i have seen is very very emotionally charged. You depend on each other and your trust each other. If someone comes in the way of that it can cause trouble.

Believe it or not Bollywood made a very interesting movie on that. The indians actually produced something entertaining and socially responsible. The story is as follows: A girl grew up with a family friends son. So they are very close and stuff. Then the girl gets married and the said female does what she normally does. She spends a great deal of time with her childhood friend and came to him instead of her husband for emotional support and help. Then you see the fireworks.

A very well done movie even by Western standards, as all indian movies come with english subtitles now i will get the name and see if you can rent it from Jackson Heights here in NYC.[/QUOTE]
Please do- I would be interested in seeing it if you think it is worthwile.

I think many accusations of "emotional cheating" stem from deeper problems within a relationship. People will go to someone who can give them love, respect, etc. if it is missing from the relationship with a partner/significant other. Also, I know that sometimes people can be manipulative, and essentially force their partner away only to reproach them later on and cause guilt. Not healthy stuff...

btw- I always laugh it when Pakistanis talk trash about Indians- they're usually really sly about it, like the above "The indians...".
(Of course, it is funny when it goes the other way too- I'm an equal opportunity trash-talk-appreciator

)

Cuchulain82 · Post by **Cuchulain82** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:20 pm

[QUOTE=Rudar Dimble]Yes, those factors do play a part in it too. However, I can't count the times I see (or hear about) people getting married after knowing each other for less than 3 years. I mean, come on, by that time you just found out her favorite colour

...[/QUOTE]
I see your point, but I just wonder is divorce is more prominant now because in the past womer were expected to be married by the time they were 18 or 20. Divorce wasn't an option, and women didn't really have full citizenship either (I'm talking about a few centuries ago). Now that people can divorce when things get really bad, rather than being forced to stick it out, divorce has gone up. I don't really have an answer, just the question.

That said, I agree with most of your post Rudar.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 12, 2005 3:25 pm

[QUOTE=Rudar Dimble]I said that IMHO contracts indicate something obligatorily. Which IMHO it does. Therefore it is a contract.[/quote]

And what's wrong with developing obligations as a relationship develops? What's wrong with expressing these obligations so that unrealstic expectations don't creep into a relationship?

But these responsobilities are there only because you created them yourself. They are responsibilities to yourself, not to your partner.

Let's assume, for the moment, that the relationships we're discussing are romantic ones, since that's the theme of this thread.

These relationships involve something felt on both sides, and obligations on both parties. If only one party feels any obligations, then I'd suggest they're deluded. It can be called a relationship, but it's a dysfunctional one.

I think the question I framed for you still remains valid, and would like to know how you would answer: If we're friends, there are certain expectations within that relationship that can formulated clearly in the terminology used for a contract. Does this make the friendship less viable, simply because it was expressed in written terms?

Returning to the theme of what I said before-- And I have to wonder how many marriages have foundered precisely because the people entering into it had unexpressed and (as it turned out) unrealistic expectations of their spouse and married life?-- a number of marriage counselors are actually suggesting these days that young married couples having relationship difficulties work out contracts in which all their expectations of one another, and themselves, are spelt out. Obviously these contracts won't hold up in court, but that's not the purpose. They function as a psychological aid to expressing fears and hopes, while aiding any couple in learning how to better discuss their emotions and their partners.

winter rose · Post by **winter rose** » Thu May 12, 2005 5:08 pm

[QUOTE=Magrus]I just ended a relationship based on this kind of situation.

I'm not sure if I understand your friends situation.

Is the person in question going to a friend to talk about why they are upset and calm down? If so, that I don't view as cheating. However, if they don't work out their problems with the partner they have, that is a doomed way to deal with a relationship. It never works.

If they are upset with their partner, ignoring that person and going to someone else to spend time with, enjoy their company, and essentially replacing this new person with all the emotional and mental needs of a relationship while still being in a relationship, then yes. That is cheating IMO.[/QUOTE]

Magrus, I liked it best the way you wrote it. I agree completely with what it is that you have said. I don't think there is anything wrong with going to a friend for some emotional needs, but I agree that if it is done without informing the significant other, and without making sure he/she knows what is going on, then it does lead to trouble.

The interesting thing is that I have a friend who started off confiding to her close male friend and not to her bf. Now the bf did not have an issue with her going to another guy, because he was well aware of it and knew what was up. But then this girl (my friend) started telling the male friend everything and completely left out her bf. They're breaking up over this. I just thought it was interesting how it started out with everyone agreeing, but she sort of forgot about her bf in the process.

Everyone else--- thank you for the input. It was very informative.

Fable -- Yup I actually heard of that. My proff, she has been a therapist for ages and ages - she actually helped a couple outline on paper such issues and said it helped them.

Rudar--- I like the way you said that a person should do something because they wish to, not because they have to.

CM --- Bollywood movie? Goodie which one? Does this mean I can make you watch more Bollywood stuff even if it for the sake of some good relationship themes.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu May 12, 2005 6:04 pm

Fable -- Yup I actually heard of that. My proff, she has been a therapist for ages and ages - she actually helped a couple outline on paper such issues and said it helped them.

Good. I think open, honest communication between people in a world whose entertainment sources drive us ever more away from one another is the most important thing to keeping relationships real.

And while we're at it...

And I didn't say legal contract. You are reading into my wording something I didn't say. I said that IMHO contracts indicate something obligatorily. Which IMHO it does. Therefore it is a contract.

Yeah, you're right: you didn't mention legal, Rudar. But I don't think people getting married too quickly causes failed relationships, as much as they're setting out for marriage with a load of unreasonable expectations. That's why articulating clearly (and in print, if it takes that) what one wants, needs, and fears before launching into marriage seems to me a good thing to consider.

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Thu May 12, 2005 10:57 pm

[QUOTE=fable]And I didn't say legal contract. You are reading into my wording something I didn't say. I said that IMHO contracts indicate something obligatorily. Which IMHO it does. Therefore it is a contract.

Yeah, you're right: you didn't mention legal, Rudar. But I don't think people getting married too quickly causes failed relationships, as much as they're setting out for marriage with a load of unreasonable expectations. That's why articulating clearly (and in print, if it takes that) what one wants, needs, and fears before launching into marriage seems to me a good thing to consider.[/QUOTE]
I think that those unreasonable expectations are more than once based upon the expectation of continuation of their current feelings. I mean, two people having a relationship for, let's say, one year may be even two, have the feeling that 'this will never change'. I am referring to the erotic feelings and the feeling of 'having a crush on the other'. They are so hopelessly in love with those feelings, that they are blinded for what a real marriage looks like. Chances are that they will divorce rather soon, because things aren't what they've expected.
But would this change if they'd agree on some sort of contract? I don't think so, because the contract would be full of unrealistic expectations aswell.

Besides that, relationships that have gone to the point where people need pshycological help, are dead anyway in my opinion. May be they can be revived for a short period, but eventually they will die. There are always a few exceptions, though. But I think those exceptions could have been solved without that kind of help aswell.

It is my belief that people can never be 'forced' to have some feelings. May be they can for a short period, but in this western society, it isn't going to last. Therefor, I don't think that any contract will help, even as a guideline. It all has to come for inside, from what you want; you should not just want to hurt your partner and you should not just want to have sexual intercourse with that other woman. And not because you are afraid you are breaking some sort of rule.

Magrus · Post by **Magrus** » Thu May 12, 2005 11:11 pm

A relationship IS like a contract. You discuss wants, goals, needs, rules, boundaries. Writing it down is a good idea too for people who tend to forget what was said and end up arguing later.

You are right though Rudar, you can't have a healthy relationship unless you are fully and totally ok with what it is going on in it. Putting in writing you will go to the opera every friday with your wife won't work unless you really wish to do so. If you do, and she does too, then that can be a part of your relationship. If not, then it's pointless to include it as that would include a problem.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Fri May 13, 2005 1:20 am

I think relationships are somewhat like friendships in that different people in a person's life fulfill different needs. I have several male friends whom I confide in, and often I appreciate the subsequent emotional support.
Moreover, it is very helpful to discuss relationship difficulties with a close friend who is the same gender as one's SO. Quite often that person can provide profound insights into a situation.

But yes... where the emotions are involved borders can become murky, perhaps because so often there is a high level of vulnerability. So, care does need to be taken...
However, assuming that nobody is doing anything beyond the terms of what is considered acceptable in the hypothetical relationship, than IMO it is not cheating.

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Fri May 13, 2005 3:03 am

[QUOTE=Rudar Dimble]It is my belief that people can never be 'forced' to have some feelings. May be they can for a short period, but in this western society, it isn't going to last. Therefor, I don't think that any contract will help, even as a guideline. It all has to come for inside, from what you want; you should not just want to hurt your partner and you should not just want to have sexual intercourse with that other woman. And not because you are afraid you are breaking some sort of rule.[/QUOTE]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that you should try to have a relationship you don't really want. The point is that what you expect from the other person should be explicit, not that you should make up rules for everything. This is neccessary because people are very different.

It shouldn't be a contract in the sense that it can't be broken, it should be a contract in the sense that if you want to break it you must inform your partner that the relationship must be changed in a specific way.

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Fri May 13, 2005 3:11 am

Dottie wrote:I don't think anyone is suggesting that you should try to have a relationship you don't really want. The point is that what you expect from the other person should be explicit, not that you should make up rules for everything. This is neccessary because people are very different.

I don't like to think in terms of explicit expectations. IMHO it's exactly then that a relationship starts to fall apart. Things should go a natural way, without explicit agreements on certain points. Off course I sometimes have a discussion with my girlfriend, but then we figure things out, without saying: "This is the way we are going to do it in the future", simply because you don't know how you will act of feel in the future. Every situation or problem that comes up is a new one and should have it's own considerations (which to me is only: do I want to do this?). To me there are no general rules/agreements

It shouldn't be a contract in the sense that it can't be broken, it should be a contract in the sense that if you want to break it you must inform your partner that the relationship must be changed in a specific way.

Ok, I can see your point here. Although I don't agree, but that's because of the reason I explained above. I can imagine you and other people thinking/acting like this. It's just not my way of handling my relationship.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri May 13, 2005 4:12 am

[QUOTE=Rudar Dimble]I don't like to think in terms of explicit expectations. IMHO it's exactly then that a relationship starts to fall apart. Things should go a natural way, without explicit agreements on certain points. [/QUOTE]

Why is it that you believe communicating openly about what you want, think and expect makes the relationship falling apart? What is it you believe happen? Or do you view it as a marker for something?

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Fri May 13, 2005 4:29 am

[QUOTE=C Elegans]Why is it that you believe communicating openly about what you want, think and expect makes the relationship falling apart? What is it you believe happen? Or do you view it as a marker for something?[/QUOTE]
Yes. In the past my girlfriend and I were really bounded by eachother. 'You can't do this', 'I want things to happen this way', etc. Not very much later, we broke up. It wasn't until we both came to the conclusion that we were much happier when we just let the other do as he/she thought was best at that particular moment, that we came back together. And I can say, I've never been happier in my life. I don't feel restricted in any way.
And I've seen it happen to one of my friends aswell. The moment he had discussions or made agreements with his girlfriend, they broke up.

BTW: I think I've made clear in one of my previous posts that I do communicate with my girlfriend. We just don't make agreements on how to handle situations in the future, because we believe situations can't be compared. There are too many variables to determine what your actions will be in the future.

But again, I understand the way you think, because I've done that myself. It just didn't work for me (and my friend).

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri May 13, 2005 4:49 am

@Rudar: Are you sure it was not the restriction of each other rather than the communication that had a negative effect on you and your girlfriends relationship? And what about your friend - why did they break up when they started discussing and making agreements? Was it related to the conten tof their agreements, or to something else?

These are of course personal questions, so you are by no means bound to answer, I am just interested because in general, it's very unusual that open communication have a negative effect on couples. On the contrary, if you look at studies of why people stay together and why they separate, and also if you look at statistics for familiy and couple problems in marriage councelling, straighforward and clear commincation of wishes, needs and expectations falls out as one of the most important factors. So I am curious just because it is extremely unusual that it works well in the long run.

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Fri May 13, 2005 4:58 am

@CE: I think you have a misconception on how my relationship works. Again, we do communicate. But only about things that are in the past, not about our future actions. Off course this has some effect on my future actions, but not in a way that I know exactly how I should handle, because my girlfriend said how I should act.

For instance, if my girlfriend wants to have sex with another man. Then there is no way I'm going to stop her or forbid her to do it. If she wants it, she has to do it. I want to her do restrain from cheating, because she doesn't want to cheat and not because I said or we agreed that we don't do it.
I hope this clears things up...

About my friend: he just felt too commited and too bounded by all those agreements. He was tired of having to think what is girlfriend would think of it. Now he has the same sort of relation as I do and it works for him aswell. He's happy too

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri May 13, 2005 5:34 am

@Hm, maybe I start to understand what you are getting at. From your previous posts in this thread, I got the impression that you were against the idea of explicitely telling your partner what you want, expect and what values you have on different things. To continue you example, that would for instance mean that if your girlfriend finds herself in a situation where she wants to have sex with another man, you think it would be better that you not talked about it before, so she would not know whether you would dump her if she had, or if you in fact would prefer open relationships.

When I talk about open communication about expectations etc, I mean such things as revealing to each other what you want from the other person in order to be happy and satisfied, instead of keeping those things secret and go around and think "she should understand this without me saying it because she loves me and people who love each other should understand each other without communication" if you see what I mean. In other worlds, the couple relies on telepathic mind-reading and view the ability to guess each others thoughts as a marker for love. (This may sound strange, but you can't believe how common it is). This kind of implicit communication where a person expects or even demands the other to understand without explicit communication, is what I have a very negative view of. A stereotype example would be the old joke about a woman who says "honey, do I look fat in this dress" and the husband says "well, your butt looks quite big" and the woman becomes sad and angry because she wanted the husband to say she looked beautiful.

Due to social norms, media images, personality differences and background, everybody has some kind of internal image of what they think love is and how they think relationships should be. At the same time, everybody also has different needs, different values and different ways of expressing things. Relying on telepathy for communication of such things is the death of much love. I have stated many times here at SYM that I prefer open relationships to closed. Imagine if I met a new boyfriend and I didn't tell him this before any kind of relationships started! Or, a friend of mine who is absolutely sure she does not want to have children - when you're a woman over 30, most men will think that if you enter a long term relationship and move together, children may well be part of the picture. Better then to let the guys she meet know from the beginning that if they absolutely want a family, she may not be right for them.

Also, people change. The idea of open communication is also to keep your partner updated on your development. Your priorities, values and feelings may change over time, and I think it's crucial that you develop together as a couple because if you develope one by one and don't communicate, chances are that things you once were in total agreement about may have changed. An agreement does not need to be a rule. An agreement may be just such a thing as you say about your girlfriend "if you meet somebody who attracts you, I would not like you to refrain from having sex with him if that is what you really want. It's nothing worth to me that you force yourself to do things for my sake - I want you to do things because you want it". That's exactly the kind of agreement I have had with all my partners, all my life, in all areas.

Then of course, the other person must know what is the consequences of his/her choices - that's also part of an agreement, as I see it. For instance, I would not like my partner to abstain from taking narcotic drugs because I wouldn't like it - however, if he would want to take drugs, that's simply bye-bye and a referral to some good psychotherapist.

Rudar Dimble · Post by **Rudar Dimble** » Fri May 13, 2005 6:07 am

C Elegans wrote:@Hm, maybe I start to understand what you are getting at. From your previous posts in this thread, I got the impression that you were against the idea of explicitely telling your partner what you want, expect and what values you have on different things.

Well, I am against it. Simply due to personal experiences. But isn't everyone drawing from personal experiences on this matter?

To continue you example, that would for instance mean that if your girlfriend finds herself in a situation where she wants to have sex with another man, you think it would be better that you not talked about it before, so she would not know whether you would dump her if she had, or if you in fact would prefer open relationships.

She knows the only reason I would dump her is when I stop loving her. If that's because of her cheating on me or not, isn't any factor in that. And she has at some point almost cheated. She didn't do it, because she didn't wanted to, not because she knew what I thought of it. Actually, she asked me afterwards what I would do. However if she gets into a similar situation again, she still would only act on what she wants and not on what I want her to do.

When I talk about open communication about expectations etc, I mean such things as revealing to each other what you want from the other person in order to be happy and satisfied, instead of keeping those things secret and go around and think "she should understand this without me saying it because she loves me and people who love each other should understand each other without communication" if you see what I mean.

Yes, I see what you mean. And it is very difficult for me to explain how this works with us. You have to understand that my girlfriend and I have been together since we were 15 (we are both 23 now), so I know her views on almost everything. Sometimes I get surprised though.

Due to social norms, media images, personality differences and background, everybody has some kind of internal image of what they think love is and how they think relationships should be. At the same time, everybody also has different needs, different values and different ways of expressing things. Relying on telepathy for communication of such things is the death of much love. I have stated many times here at SYM that I prefer open relationships to closed. Imagine if I met a new boyfriend and I didn't tell him this before any kind of relationships started! Or, a friend of mine who is absolutely sure she does not want to have children - when you're a woman over 30, most men will think that if you enter a long term relationship and move together, children may well be part of the picture. Better then to let the guys she meet know from the beginning that if they absolutely want a family, she may not be right for them.

These are mainly things you have to explore when you just start a new relationship. To be honest, I don't know how that is. Having the same girlfriend since I was 15 didn't really help with that

. To me it's totally normal that you just *know* these kind of things. May be you should discuss these things. But still...agreements? No, if you think different about these kind of important things, you should think twice about starting the relationship in the first place. But again...I do discuss things with my girlfriend. Your example on the 'childer or no children' issue suggest there's no communication.

Also, people change. The idea of open communication is also to keep your partner updated on your development. Your priorities, values and feelings may change over time, and I think it's crucial that you develop together as a couple because if you develope one by one and don't communicate, chances are that things you once were in total agreement about may have changed.

We do keep eachother up to date.
When we are watching a movie for instance, and something happens and she says: "Now I would never want that". Then I am informed or updated aswell, without going to extensive discussions.
Example: lately we were going to a fantasy clothing catalogue and she said:"Well, that would be a nice wedding dress". The dress was purple. And I said:"Hmm...I would be really disappointed if you didn't appear in a white dress on our wedding." Then she knows. The choice of the color is still up to her, though.

An agreement does not need to be a rule. An agreement may be just such a thing as you say about your girlfriend "if you meet somebody who attracts you, I would not like you to refrain from having sex with him if that is what you really want. It's nothing worth to me that you force yourself to do things for my sake - I want you to do things because you want it".

I have the idea that you keep stretching your definition of an agreement with every reply I post.

. Just trying to fit my relationship into the 'agreement thing'. Damn you

. But if this is the definition, then yes it's an agreement we have

. Does that make it a contract? I'd say no. Do we have a relationship with agreements on *how* to act? No. Why not? Because you don't know how you are going to react when being put into the situation. We only have the 'agreement' (which is how you would me to call it apparently

) that you do what you want at the certain moment. So, no agreement on 'can I cheat?', 'can I wear a purple dress?', etc

stormcloud · Post by **stormcloud** » Fri May 13, 2005 7:27 am

The thing that is the x-factor here is that the line for cheating and the repurcussions are different from person to person.

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri May 13, 2005 8:08 am

[QUOTE=stormcloud]The thing that is the x-factor here is that the line for cheating and the repurcussions are different from person to person.[/QUOTE]

But it's not an unknown factor if you establish boundaries verbally with the other person in the relationship, they do the same, and you put it all on paper so no one can claim it wasn't said.