Monogamy Isn't Realistic?

[joyfulgirl]

I would, because I would never be able to trust that person again.

Forgive? Yes, I might be able to forgive. In fact, I need to forgive - it is a command.

I've seen relationships that were strengthened when an infidelity came to light. For a lot of reasons, communication in the relationship had broken down, and both parties were acting out in different ways. When the infidelity was exposed the relationship went into full-blown crisis, the couple got counseling to save the marriage, and not only did it work but it totally re-enlivened what had become a dead marriage. Things that appear to be bad or negative on the surface are often just symptoms of deeper issues and once those issues are worked through there's no reason not to trust again because both parties are taking responsibility for the one indiscretion instead of just casting blame at the other and playing the victim, and both are recommitted to working through it and they can even fall in love all over again. For me it wouldn't be a deal-breaker in and of itself. It would depend on many issues going on. A person can be disloyal in sex but completely loyal on a million other different and, imo, equally important levels.

An inability to trust a person again in some cases reveals more of a weakness on your part than theirs. Just a thought.

 

[Liesje]

I've seen relationships that were strengthened when an infidelity came to light. For a lot of reasons, communication in the relationship had broken down, and both parties were acting out in different ways. When the infidelity was exposed the relationship went into full-blown crisis, the couple got counseling to save the marriage, and not only did it work but it totally re-enlivened what had become a dead marriage. Things that appear to be bad or negative on the surface are often just symptoms of deeper issues and once those issues are worked through there's no reason not to trust again because both parties are taking responsibility for the one indiscretion instead of just casting blame at the other and playing the victim, and both are recommitted to working through it and they can even fall in love all over again. For me it wouldn't be a deal-breaker in and of itself. It would depend on many issues going on. A person can be disloyal in sex but completely loyal on a million other different and, imo, equally important levels.

An inability to trust a person again in some cases reveals more of a weakness on your part than theirs. Just a thought.

I mostly agree with this except that I know there are situations that have nothing to do with a bad relationship or poor communication (or things where both people are BOTH responsible), but just one person totally disrespecting and walking all over the other person by having a relationship on the side and sneaking around and lying about it.

 

[anitram]

To me, cheating is a matter of disrespecting the person you are with. If other people are willing to tolerate that in the context of their relationship, that's fine by me as it doesn't affect me.

 

[Irvine511]

An inability to trust a person again in some cases reveals more of a weakness on your part than theirs. Just a thought.

beautifully said. i had never thought of it that way, but i think you're absolutely right.

still, people find absolutes comforting. it's easier than thinking and working and dealing withthe complexity of reality.

 

[joyfulgirl]

I mostly agree with this except that I know there are situations that have nothing to do with a bad relationship or poor communication (or things where both people are BOTH responsible), but just one person totally disrespecting and walking all over the other person by having a relationship on the side and sneaking around and lying about it.

No doubt. There are so many different possible scenarios.

 

[80sU2isBest]

I've seen relationships that were strengthened when an infidelity came to light. For a lot of reasons, communication in the relationship had broken down, and both parties were acting out in different ways. When the infidelity was exposed the relationship went into full-blown crisis, the couple got counseling to save the marriage, and not only did it work but it totally re-enlivened what had become a dead marriage. Things that appear to be bad or negative on the surface are often just symptoms of deeper issues and once those issues are worked through there's no reason not to trust again because both parties are taking responsibility for the one indiscretion instead of just casting blame at the other and playing the victim, and both are recommitted to working through it and they can even fall in love all over again. For me it wouldn't be a deal-breaker in and of itself. It would depend on many issues going on. A person can be disloyal in sex but completely loyal on a million other different and, imo, equally important levels.

An inability to trust a person again in some cases reveals more of a weakness on your part than theirs. Just a thought.

When you marry someone, you make a vow to stay faithful to that person. Cheating on the person even once breaks that vow. What reason is there to ever trust the person again?

I don't care what "issues" there are. There is no excuse for cheating on your spouse. Not one.

 

[MissMoo]

There might be no excuse for cheating but aren't the statistics something like 60 percent of men cheat? I think they've even discovered that women are close to the same percentage.

 

[80sU2isBest]

still, people find absolutes comforting. it's easier than thinking and working and dealing withthe complexity of reality.

Talk about easy.

How hard is it to deal in the reality that you have set up for yourself, the one that openly admitted to - that monogamy isn't necessary? How hard is it to keep that commitment?

 

[80sU2isBest]

There might be no excuse for cheating but aren't the statistics something like 60 percent of men cheat? I think they've even discovered that women are close to the same percentage.

I don't know what the stats are. But people need to master their libidos, not be mastered by it.

 

[MissMoo]

I don't think it's a libido problem, I think it's a romance problem.

 

[joyfulgirl]

When you marry someone, you make a vow to stay faithful to that person. Cheating on the person even once breaks that vow. What reason is there to ever trust the person again?

I don't care what "issues" there are. There is no excuse for cheating on your spouse. Not one.

I am not going to try to convince you to change your mind. I just think that sometimes a person has trust issues that go way, way back and long precede the relationship in which the trust was broken, and in fact, sometimes a person's trust issues are so big, and so deep, that they draw the very situation to them that they most fear and most would like to avoid, thereby reinforcing their inability to trust. The one who was unfaithful might actually never ever be unfaithful again while the one who cannot trust is the one who is unable to heal and move on because they are so attached to the idea that they can't trust that person--or anyone.

 

[80sU2isBest]

sometimes a person's trust issues are so big, and so deep, that they draw the very situation to them that they most fear and most would like to avoid, thereby reinforcing their inability to trust.

How does mistrusting someone force that person to cheat on you? If that's not what you meant, please explain it further to me.

 

[joyfulgirl]

How does mistrusting someone force that person to cheat on you? If that's not what you meant, please explain it further to me.

I'm not talking about 'force.' I'm talking psychology here. We sometimes draw to us exactly the thing we're trying to avoid. It's the subconscious mind's way of getting us to face our fears.

 

[80sU2isBest]

I'm not talking about 'force.' I'm talking psychology here. We sometimes draw to us exactly the thing we're trying to avoid. It's the subconscious mind's way of getting us to face our fears.

I'm still not certain I understand. Are you saying that people who are overly afraid of being cheated on might be drawn to people who are more likely to cheat?

 

[joyfulgirl]

I'm still not certain I understand. Are you saying that people who are overly afraid of being cheated on might be drawn to people who are more likely to cheat?

Bingo! Exactly.

It's just like statistically most people who are raped as adults were also sexually abused as children.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Bingo! Exactly.

It's just like statistically most people who are raped as adults were also sexually abused as children.

Ok, I understand. But that still doesn't give any one an excuse for not controlling himself.

 

[Irvine511]

Talk about easy.

How hard is it to deal in the reality that you have set up for yourself, the one that openly admitted to - that monogamy isn't necessary? How hard is it to keep that commitment?

how hard is it to realize that humans are fallible and that for some people infidelity might be a deal breaker, but for others it isn't?

and i pity those for whom it is a deal breaker.

humans try their best, and they screw up. i'd rather forgive and work for the future, than toss everything to the side because someone broke a vow.

i don't think infidelity is a good thing. i think monogamy should be the goal. i also don't think that we should measure the success of our marriage by our adherence to predetermined rules.

it's all negotiation and compromise.

 

[80sU2isBest]

how hard is it to realize that humans are fallible and that for some people infidelity might be a deal breaker, but for others it isn't?

Ha ha. I didn't say that other people should go out and trash a marriage because of infidelity. I said that's what I would do.

Seems to me that in this case, you are the one who thinks everyone should think the same way as you do. You said:

"and I pity those for whom it is a deal breaker."

Do you realize how funny what you just did is? On one hand, you make a plea for understanding that people have different ways of handling the fidelity issue; then, you turn right around and say you pity those who don't feel the way you do about the fidelity issue.

 

[Irvine511]

Ha ha. I didn't say that other people should go out and trash a marriage because of infidelity. I said that's what I would do.

Seems to me that in this case, you are the one who thinks everyone should think the same way as you do. You said:

"and I pity those for whom it is a deal breaker."

Do you realize how funny what you just did is? On one hand, you make a plea for understanding that people have different ways of handling the fidelity issue; then, you turn right around and say you pity those who don't feel the way you do about the fidelity issue.

i do pity you, 80s.

this doesn't mean i think you should change your views. i'm just sorry you don't. in the end, in my opinion, you will be the one who misses out.

and you've become excessively obnoxious, and that chip on your shoulder gets bigger all the time.

frankly, you've become extremely unpleasant. i don't think i'll be responding to any of your posts in the future.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

 

[80sU2isBest]

i do pity you, 80s.

this doesn't mean i think you should change your views. i'm just sorry you don't. in the end, in my opinion, you will be the one who misses out.

and you've become excessively obnoxious, and that chip on your shoulder gets bigger all the time.

frankly, you've become extremely unpleasant. i don't think i'll be responding to any of your posts in the future.

Hey, who started it, Irvine? Who made the comment that "people find absolutes comforting. it's easier than thinking and working and dealing withthe complexity of reality", and who was it directed toward? You might not admit it, but you aimed that at me. I know it.

Save your pity for someone who wnats to be pitied. And it really matters not one iota to me whether you respond to me ever again.

 

[Irvine511]

Hey, who started it, Irvine? Who made the comment that "people find absolutes comforting. it's easier than thinking and working and dealing withthe complexity of reality", and who was it directed toward? You might not admit it, but you aimed that at me. I know it.

Save your pity for someone who wnats to be pitied. And it really matters not one iota to me whether you respond to me ever again.

that post just made my point better than i could ever have.

bye.

 

[MissVelvetDress_75]

who the hell is Billy?

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

i do pity you, 80s.

this doesn't mean i think you should change your views. i'm just sorry you don't. in the end, in my opinion, you will be the one who misses out.

and you've become excessively obnoxious, and that chip on your shoulder gets bigger all the time.

frankly, you've become extremely unpleasant. i don't think i'll be responding to any of your posts in the future.

Irvine, you've been posting here a long time and I know you're well aware that personal attacks aren't acceptable in FYM. There is no need to call someone "excessively obnoxious" and "extremely unpleasant" just because you disagree with them - please try to express disagreement without name-calling.

Thanks.
*Fizz.

 

[Liesje]

Hey, who started it, Irvine? Who made the comment that "people find absolutes comforting. it's easier than thinking and working and dealing withthe complexity of reality", and who was it directed toward? You might not admit it, but you aimed that at me. I know it.

I'm not saying I agree with his views, but he may have meant it towards me since I said I'm a person who prefers absolutes.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

who the hell is Billy?

Billy Bush

 

[80sU2isBest]

I'm not saying I agree with his views, but he may have meant it towards me since I said I'm a person who prefers absolutes.

No, it was toward me. He's always getting on to me about speaking in absolutes, and I was the one who made the "absolutist" statement he was referring to.

 

[Irvine511]

Irvine, you've been posting here a long time and I know you're well aware that personal attacks aren't acceptable in FYM. There is no need to call someone "excessively obnoxious" and "extremely unpleasant" just because you disagree with them - please try to express disagreement without name-calling.

Thanks.
*Fizz.

what i am finding obnoxious was the inability to deal with the issue at hand and focusing on semantical distinctions within arguments in some kind of one-upsmanship.

that is what i find obnoxious and unpleasant, not the arguments presented. if you go back you'll find repeated examples of my disagreeing with people very respectfully, because ideas contrary to my own have been presented. with 80s, i get no substance and all attitude, all childish nah-nah taunts like an 11 year old who's angry because his mother said she would pick him up at 4:30 and she arrived at 4:37 -- "but you SAID you'd be here at 4:30 and you weren't so you're a LIAR!!!"

hence, unpleasant.

so i'm backing out.

 

[80sU2isBest]

what i am finding obnoxious was the inability to deal with the issue at hand and focusing on semantical distinctions within arguments in some kind of one-upsmanship.

that is what i find obnoxious and unpleasant, not the arguments presented. if you go back you'll find repeated examples of my disagreeing with people very respectfully, because ideas contrary to my own have been presented. with 80s, i get no substance and all attitude, all childish nah-nah taunts like an 11 year old who's angry because his mother said she would pick him up at 4:30 and she arrived at 4:37 -- "but you SAID you'd be here at 4:30 and you weren't so you're a LIAR!!!"

hence, unpleasant.

so i'm backing out.

Childish Na-Na?

Who told me twice to "grow up" and then didn't even tell me what you were referring to?

Who answered me with a simple "blah", just yesterday?

 

[joyfulgirl]

You just proved Irvine's point. Again.