NationStates Jolt Archive

And what about gay men and gay women? Or transmen and transwomen?

What about bisexuals?!

And people with mustaches!
http://www.hollywoodoutsider.com/pictures/lost_treasures_pics/duellist/duellist5.jpg
I might even grow one! We facial-hair people are quite tender.

Heh. *ass pinch*

The thing is, I've had the opportunity to be the "other woman" several times. But...why would I want to be with the kind of guy who cheats? If he'll cheat with me, he'll cheat on me. I can do better.

You are indeed the Holy Grail of cheaters. ;)

What about bisexuals?!

They're just greedy.

They're just greedy.
Yep. I require a partner who will satisfy twice as many needs twice as often.

He gets very little sleep, doncha know, though he doesn't seem to mind...

FYI, I did laugh at your presumption that only insecure men cheat. Tells me all I need to know about how little you understand this entire issue.




No, I think its you who doesnt understand. You are the one saying utterly sexist, blanket, and bullshit statements. You get with married men. Great. Just dont assume that because you fuck them you understand everything there is to know about cheating.

And your comment about how when Im 40 Ill understand when a 20 year old hits on me, first of all, if you flirt with married men twice as old as you...oh fuck it I wont even go there.

Secondly, you are assuming that 40 year old men are naturally insecure and therefore need some hottie who is half their age to come on to them to make them feel valid.

The real reason men cheat on their wives/girlfriends or vice versa is because theyre scumbags or pricks, or sluts. As Bottle said, there are plenty of grown up ways to deal with relationship problems without sticking it in another person's hole. Communicating for one. Welcome to adult relationships. If you cant handle it dont start one.

That's impossible, since old starts at 20.



Bah, kids these days, with their Rock and/or Roll, the hip hop, and long hair....

You think wrong. Again. :D


Hey, I'll freely admit I have less...experience...with cheating men than you do. I simply don't think that puts me at a disadvantage. ;)


I am glad I am wrong and you are not an angry person. :p

I don't think of it as a disadvantage, I certainly find no advantage to having the experience. It simply makes me more knowledgable about the reality of it all. You can only speculate on something you have not experienced. Be glad for that. I cheated, I have been cheated on, and my parents marriage dissolved due to my father's infidelity and my mother's inability to forgive him for it. If you think I have not worked my entire life to understand the whys and wherefores of this issue you are sorely mistaken.

It isn't funny, nor do I take pride in my actions. It was wrong. I was only being completely forthcoming regarding the "why" the two people I had affairs with even happened. Their perspective and mine. One was married (and is still married), and in one I was the married party (and am no longer married to that person).

My first hubby cheated on me, it took me years to understand how that happened. I was absolutely adamant that such a thing could not and would not happen in my marriage. I was also adamant that I would never do such a thing to anyone else. Lesson here...never say never.

Also my father after 30 years wrote me a very long letter explaining to me why he chose to cheat and ruin many lives in the process.

And yes it was an old man trying to get into heaven type letter, but it still was honest and forthcoming. He didn't have to ever explain it to me, but I am glad he did. It has helped me understand the mechanics of it. That letter and loads of counseling.

I am happy for everyone who has never had to deal with this, I hope they never do have to deal with it. It just isn't as black and white as many here would make it.

Fair enough. Apologies for diving too far into that end of the pool.


I'm glad we're on the same page. It's what's making this conversation worth having :)


Honestly, I can imagine that there are people out there who are so stupid that they can't figure out that they're "getting into a situation" when they flirt or set up meetings with exes or what have you. I just can't imagine that they can also walk and chew gum at the same time.


I wouldn't say it's stupidity a such. Naivete' perhaps. Inexperience, maybe even a little bit of guilt.


Real feelings of temptation is where it needs to stop, then, and where one should realize that "innocent flirting" when married is the least slippery portion of a slop coated in axle grease. Other than that, you are very close to the Shariya law interpretation of women -- that they (even their exposed ankles) somehow affect someone's judgment so badly that they are no longer responsible for their deeds. And that's just 100% bullshit.


Just to clarify: I'm not suggesting that somehow Chuck was an innocent victim of his own hormones. I'm only pointing out ways in which an otherwise honest and rational person can do something totally against his or her character.


Okay, before I continue the rally by volleying again, let me stop and say that I think I agree with you here. However, it's a fine line between "the wife wasn't meeting certain needs" and "it's therefore no surprise she got cheated on" -- and that line is crossed WAY too frequently. Here's the part where we agree: COMMUNICATION. Example: If I let my wife know that sex once a month isn't enough and she tells me to piss off and deal with it, we have a problem and it needs to be discussed. If it can't (or won't) be duscussed, then it becomes an irreconcilable difference, and thus potential grounds for divorce.


Agreed. Although I would say as a side note, can you imagine the flak you'd get if you divorced a woman for not having sex with you enough?

You'd be labeled a sex hungry animal and accused of thinking of her as nothing but a sex object.

But I digress....


Amen. Thing is, I sure as hell didn't get to the head of the curve by not making mistakes. I made plenty, and I learned from them. Hell, one woman I was with thought I communicated too much (I suppose there is something alluring about mystery, but that's another fine line, I suppose).


Same here. I also like to think I've learned from the experiences of others so I don't have to be where they are to learn.


Spending time is one thing -- I'm friends with a few of my exes. It's the bolded part that sticks in my throat. I don't think you're suggesting that men as a whole cannot control their urges, but...well...are you? 'Cause I have to call BS on that. Once you realize that sex is a possibility, THAT's where looking at the wedding band comes in. There are any number of points where Chuck could have looked himself in the mirror and asked "what am I doing"? If he did that but ignored the answer or lied to himself, I have no sympathy. Someone who can see only others' flesh when they're married, and can't seem to remind themselves that they're married probably shouldn't be married.


No you're right, I'm not suggesting that.

A few years ago I read a book called 'Willpower is not Enough." I bought it at a Mormon bookstore but I'm sure you could find it at any Christian family type bookstore or maybe even Amazon.com.

One of the interesting points the book made was an analogy that willpower is sort of like a guardrail on a mountain pass. When you're driving along that road you don't drag against the guardrail the whole way... You drive in the middle of the lane and stay well clear of it but it's there if you mess up. So it is with willpower. Ideally, you live your life avoiding situations that might put you in a situation to be tempted in the first place, relying on willpower as a last resort to keep you out of trouble.

(This is why I make it a personal policy not to flirt in the first place.)

Another good point made by the book, and I think this is really the core reason why once you're deep into temptation you're probably screwed (no pun intended) is that most of our decision making is based on emotion rather than reason. Consider the example of a cigarette ad in a magazine. It's usually a picture of a bunch of attractive people having a great time, laughing, enjoying the sun, conveying feelings of fun and happiness and well-being. That speaks to emotion. Yet, at the bottom of the page is a big box (enlarged in recent years by legislation with no effect) telling you, in essence, 'if you smoke, you die.' Yet, the ad is effective. Why? because thhe emotional appeal is much more compelling than the appeal to reason NOT to smoke.


I'm sorry, but I'm gonna have to agree to disagree here. We are not animals. Life is not a Hollywood movie. I fail to see how a man can be THAT devoid of personal control and responsibility. I don't deny it happens, but I tend to think a bit less of those married men who give in.


That's natural. All I'm saying is the issue isn't so black and white as many people claim.


On this point, we agree. But how Susan reacts after being cheated on has nothing to do with why Chuck cheated. If Susan was genuinely interested in saving the marriage, and not, as is popularly portrayed, interested in holding the infidelity over Chuck's head in order to live in a marriage that equates to a master-servant relationship, then she should have sincerely and wholeheartedly forgiven AND forgotten.


Agreed. But then I did specify that there was nothing she could have done to prevent it in this case.


True, we are creatures of long memory, and forgetting a betrayal is very difficult. But to wield it like a sword of Damocles is only slightly less worse than the infidelity itself. If she wanted to hold it against him forever, she needed to do it as a divorcee.


Absolutely.


Blessed indeed. Congratulations!


Thanks!


Seriously? I wouldn't go so far as to hang a man for what goes on in his mind, but if you're going out of your way to meet a woman who isn't your wife, and the conversation isn't exclusively about work, and she's asking pointed questions about how happy you are in your marriage -- what color should the flying mallet be painted so that you'll notice it as it strikes your skull?

And that speaks to Chuck's foolishness as described earlier. I think on some level he thought he could handle the temptation without going too far. In essence, he was riding the guardrail and it ultimately broke free.


That depends on what kind of time (lunch, dinner, midnight snack?) and how the conversations go. Surely even the dumbest person can tell when someone's trying to steer the conversation into sexual matters.


I'm not privy to exactly what was discussed and when, but my understanding is there was a lot of guilt being dumped on him because it was initially Chuck that broke off that particular romance, and I think she was accusing him of dumping her for Susan. It was important to him that she not think that as it wasn't true, and it's probable that she used that guilt to get what she wanted from him.


Getting warmer.
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!
Still time to realize the path you're on. Nobody can claim the label of civilized human being and use the hormone excuse.
Are you kidding me? If, at this point, you dont' realize that you're about to dick-in-puss with someone other than the woman you married, you are a complete moron.


I'd have said he had no business being alone with her at all. But my goal in that post was to find out what Dyakovo meant in his posting.


Yes. I can also tell that if you hear that a lot, your friends have ethical anorexia.


No it isn't like that. It was a lot of telling the story in an effort to understand wtf had happened and I was there as a shoulder to lean on. It wasn't him bragging so if I gave that impression I apologize.


You can assure me of that, can you? 'Cause I don't think you can. I think Chuck might have said that in order to rationalize or salve his conscience and sense of self-recrimination (now THERE's an urge harder to resist than infidelity), but I'd place more money on the wager that there was at least one moment where he told himself that this was going to happen. His conscience was screaming at him, and he chose not to listen. Now, if he was drugged or in some other way incapacitated, you'd have a point.


I guess IMHO on some level when one places themself in a situation with that level of hormones and temptation in the air, they do tend to behave as if they were intoxicated.


Perhaps as a teenager, when you're still figuring out how everything works, you can be overcome int he face of all rationality. But if you were adult enough to go through everything involved in a wedding and commit to the level of responsibility involved there, you're adult enough to say "gee, the women trying to fondle my balls through my corduroys is not my wife...golly, maybe I should go."


Good point. Chuck was 18 at the time.


I'm sorry, but at some point, he knew what he was doing and knew the consequences. How could he not? So you may be right -- it may not be "malfeasance", but it is at least "neglect", and it is deliberate. How many times did his conscience ask him what he was doing as he drove to the trysting spot? Unless he has absolutely no inner monologue at all, he had twinges and he had to have ignored them as he drove.

I suppose there's merit to this idea. I'm just having a hard time wrapping my mind around how hard it is to not see that the woman whose tongue is in your mouth is not your wife...and that's...bad.


Which is exactly why I'm not suggesting he was an innocent victim of his hormones.


AMEN, BROTHER!!!

Thirded :D

No, I think its you who doesnt understand. You are the one saying utterly sexist, blanket, and bullshit statements. You get with married men. Great. Just dont assume that because you fuck them you understand everything there is to know about cheating.

Personally, I think women who sleep with married men are probably not the most trustworthy source when it comes to judging the motives of those men.

Yeah, Ms. Other Woman, I'm sure those married men who fucked you were being totally honest when they shared their "needs" with you. I'm sure you had a deep and meaningful emotional connection with the 40-year-old married man who boned your 20-year-old self. I'm sure your history of hooking up with cheaters makes you a real expert on the male psyche and on how to have successful relationships.

And yes, I'm quite interested in buying that piece of the True Cross that you are selling.

Personally, I think women who sleep with married men are probably not the most trustworthy source when it comes to judging the motives of those men.

Yeah, Ms. Other Woman, I'm sure those married men who fucked you were being totally honest when they shared their "needs" with you. I'm sure you had a deep and meaningful emotional connection with the 40-year-old married man who boned your 20-year-old self. I'm sure your history of hooking up with cheaters makes you a real expert on the male psyche and on how to have successful relationships.

And yes, I'm quite interested in buying that piece of the True Cross that you are selling.

How utterly venomous and totally uncalled for. Is it really so bizarre and truly unfathomable that someone who has been involved with cheating men just might know something of the mentality of some of those cheating men?

For someone who so frequently rails against judgemental anc closed minded behavior you certainly demonstrate a lot of it. How in the world do you know what conversations went on between them?

How utterly venomous and totally uncalled for. Is it really so bizarre and truly unfathomable that someone who has been involved with cheating men just might know something of the mentality of some of those cheating men?

No, its not unfathomable, and she very well might. In fact, some of her comments were insightful. But I didnt quote them because Im too busy gettig pissed that she keeps making these blanket statements and such. Also, I find her idea that there is never an innocent party to be utter BS. Sometimes, people just suck, and there was nothing wrong with the other person.


I know this wasnt directed at me, but since Ive been shaking my fist at Pelecanus too I feel like I need to justify my statements.

I am happy for everyone who has never had to deal with this, I hope they never do have to deal with it. It just isn't as black and white as many here would make it.

I think a lot of people need to make it a black and white issue because on some level it absolves them of the responsibility of having to actually make an effort to understand it. Also, by putting one's self in judgement of others, it can enable oneself to feel more secure. I think on some level to acknowledge that it's a complex issue is to admit that it could touch them in their life, and that's not a pleasant thought.

I mean no offense to anyone on the opposite side of this debate. If I'm wrong, don't flame let's just talk about it.

I think a lot of people need to make it a black and white issue because on some level it absolves them of the responsibility of having to actually make an effort to understand it. Also, by putting one's self in judgement of others, it can enable oneself to feel more secure. I think on some level to acknowledge that it's a complex issue is to admit that it could touch them in their life, and that's not a pleasant thought.

I mean no offense to anyone on the opposite side of this debate. If I'm wrong, don't flame let's just talk about it.


Thank you.

I think a lot of people need to make it a black and white issue because on some level it absolves them of the responsibility of having to actually make an effort to understand it. Also, by putting one's self in judgement of others, it can enable oneself to feel more secure. I think on some level to acknowledge that it's a complex issue is to admit that it could touch them in their life, and that's not a pleasant thought.

I mean no offense to anyone on the opposite side of this debate. If I'm wrong, don't flame let's just talk about it.

I know sometimes what drove somebody to cheating is not always inhernat prickdom. But the fact of the matter is, if the way you deal with a relationship problem is to go pound someone else, rather than talk about said probelms with your partner, you are simply not ready for a grown up relationship.

Also, I still refuse to ever back down on the concept that sometimes, it is black and white. Sometimes, the guy just sucks at life, and sometimes the girl is a ho. Sometimes, the person who was cheated on bears no responsibility.

Thank you.

Please check your TGs when you get a chance.

I know sometimes what drove somebody to cheating is not always inhernat prickdom. But the fact of the matter is, if the way you deal with a relationship problem is to go pound someone else, rather than talk about said probelms with your partner, you are simply not ready for a grown up relationship.

Also, I still refuse to ever back down on the concept that sometimes, it is black and white. Sometimes, the guy just sucks at life, and sometimes the girl is a ho. Sometimes, the person who was cheated on bears no responsibility.

We agree on some parts of that. We agree that cheating is a piss poor way of dealing with it. All I'm saying is that it's a VERY common problem and I don't think society is helping matters by being unwilling to take a hard, honest look at the root causes, whatever they may be.

But yes, sometimes it is black and white, but I maintain that it is very rarely so. The Chuck example is pretty black and white in terms of blame, but not in terms of cause-effect.

How utterly venomous and totally uncalled for. Is it really so bizarre and truly unfathomable that someone who has been involved with cheating men just might know something of the mentality of some of those cheating men?

Sure, a woman who has been with a cheater might know something of the mentality of those cheating men. They also have a whole crapton of motive to lie about the mentality of those cheating men, both to themselves and to me. So I use my judgment when deciding whether or not to believe what they say.

But, more importantly, I can judge the behavior of the women themselves. In this case, we have a profoundly sexist individual who likes to blame the wives of the married men she's fucking. Forgive me for not buying what she's selling. :D

Plenty of women have been with men who cheat and have gained valuable insights from their experiences. The "other woman" in this thread is not one of them.


For someone who so frequently rails against judgemental anc closed minded behavior you certainly demonstrate a lot of it.

Erm, you must have me confused with somebody else. I wholeheartedly support and encourage people to judge like crazy. I'm like the #1 advocate of criticizing absolutely everything.


How in the world do you know what conversations went on between them?
Why in the world would I need to?

Erm, you must have me confused with somebody else. I wholeheartedly support and encourage people to judge like crazy. I'm like the #1 advocate of criticizing absolutely everything.

Ah but that's not true at all, I've seen you be, for fear of overusing the word, very critical of people who are critical of other groups...mysoginists, homophobes, christian fundamentalists, you've made very little efforts to deride those groups you find too judgemental.

Why in the world would I need to?

One would think that if you are going to deride a poster for saying something that she didn't actually believe you'd have something more than your own, admittedly biased, intuition as to what she believes. Specifically to point, one would think you would "need" to have some basis of understanding in her relationships before you felt justified making the following, quite sarcastic comment:

I'm sure you had a deep and meaningful emotional connection with the 40-year-old married man who boned your 20-year-old self.

I'm not partial to big boobs, but you could sign me up for a couple of moderately-boobed teenagers.

Pssh. You can't possibly want that, since you are female and that is not a Female Need, silly. Haven't you learned that your gender determines exactly what you want in a partner yet?

I think a lot of people need to make it a black and white issue because on some level it absolves them of the responsibility of having to actually make an effort to understand it. Also, by putting one's self in judgement of others, it can enable oneself to feel more secure. I think on some level to acknowledge that it's a complex issue is to admit that it could touch them in their life, and that's not a pleasant thought.

That might very well be true.

However, there are also many of us who see it as a "black and white issue" in the sense that we think cheating is always a scummy choice, and that it is always the fault of the cheater, but this has nothing to do with an unwillingness to look at the complexity of the issue.

As I have said throughout this thread, I am completely aware that there are lots of different reasons why people may cheat. There are lots of different motives behind cheating, and an infinite number of individual situations that may lead a person to cheat. Some cheaters are simply assholes, while other cheaters are generally decent people who happened to make a really shitty choice.

That doesn't change the fact that, for me, cheating is simply a shitty choice. That much is "black and white" to me. Cheating is the fault of the cheater. That much is "black and white" to me.

It's like how I feel about hitting in relationships. I feel that it is simply wrong to strike your partner (BDSM excluded, of course). It doesn't matter if she made you really really angry, you still are WRONG if you hit her. It doesn't matter if he cheated on you, you are still WRONG if you hit him. You do not hit. That is another "black and white" issue for me. I can understand all the complex reasons why an otherwise-decent person might lose their temper and hit, but I still believe they are flat-out WRONG if they hit.

And, for whatever it's worth, judging others doesn't make me feel any more secure than I feel otherwise. If anything, the opposite. I'm human just like everybody else. The fact that I'm capable of judging somebody else's actions doesn't mean I'm magically immune from making bad choices of my own. It doesn't magically protect me against having somebody behave rotten toward me.

I feel that it is simply wrong to strike your partner (BDSM excluded, of course).

Ahhh my work here is done.

Ahhh my work here is done.

You really are the resident sex deviant;)

Ah but that's not true at all, I've seen you be, for fear of overusing the word, very critical of people who are critical of other groups...mysoginists, homophobes, christian fundamentalists, you've made very little efforts to deride those groups you find too judgemental.

Totally wrong. The reason I lay into the groups you list has nothing to do with them being "judgmental."


One would think that if you are going to deride a poster for saying something that she didn't actually believe you'd have something more than your own, admittedly biased, intuition as to what she believes.

In this case, I have her own words.


Specifically to point, one would think you would "need" to have some basis of understanding in her relationships before you felt justified making the following, quite sarcastic comment:
Actually, that information would be totally irrelevant to the point I was making.

When a woman who likes to have affairs with married men steps forward to share absurd, ignorant, sexist stereotypes so she can place blame on the wives of her married lovers, I've got all the information I need.

And what about gay men and gay women? Or transmen and transwomen?

What about bisexuals?!

Bisexuals don't exist (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoBisexuals)

That might very well be true.

However, there are also many of us who see it as a "black and white issue" in the sense that we think cheating is always a scummy choice, and that it is always the fault of the cheater, but this has nothing to do with an unwillingness to look at the complexity of the issue.

As I have said throughout this thread, I am completely aware that there are lots of different reasons why people may cheat. There are lots of different motives behind cheating, and an infinite number of individual situations that may lead a person to cheat. Some cheaters are simply assholes, while other cheaters are generally decent people who happened to make a really shitty choice.

That doesn't change the fact that, for me, cheating is simply a shitty choice. That much is "black and white" to me. Cheating is the fault of the cheater. That much is "black and white" to me.


All of which would be perfectly valid, if only our point were that cheating is somehow justified.

As I've stated to the point of ridiculous repetitiveness, that is not the case, so you're looking more like you just have an axe to grind but are missing the actual argument being presented.


It's like how I feel about hitting in relationships. I feel that it is simply wrong to strike your partner (BDSM excluded, of course). It doesn't matter if she made you really really angry, you still are WRONG if you hit her. It doesn't matter if he cheated on you, you are still WRONG if you hit him. You do not hit. That is another "black and white" issue for me. I can understand all the complex reasons why an otherwise-decent person might lose their temper and hit, but I still believe they are flat-out WRONG if they hit.


Yes. But at the same time are you suggesting that if someone DOES commit an act of physical abuse, that no analysis is needed to determine the true cause NO MATTER where it leads?


And, for whatever it's worth, judging others doesn't make me feel any more secure than I feel otherwise. If anything, the opposite. I'm human just like everybody else. The fact that I'm capable of judging somebody else's actions doesn't mean I'm magically immune from making bad choices of my own. It doesn't magically protect me against having somebody behave rotten toward me.

The problem is you've crossed the line from judging actions to judging people. This is demonstrated by a tendency to want to simply dismiss someone who has done it rather than approach it in a more constructive and useful way.

Totally wrong. The reason I lay into the groups you list has nothing to do with them being "judgmental."


In this case, I have her own words.


Actually, that information would be totally irrelevant to the point I was making.

When a woman who likes to have affairs with married men steps forward to share absurd, ignorant, sexist stereotypes so she can place blame on the wives of her married lovers, I've got all the information I need.

You know you do have the information, you just can't seem to process it correctly. All your guess work is pretty silly in reality.

Btw you nor anyone else can beat me up any worse than I have myself. So rail away if it makes you happy. But know that you are not understanding me at all. No where did I ever say that I liked having affairs. I said it happened. Whether you realize it or not, most people having affairs agonize a great deal.

As far as blaming the wives, or being sexist. Nonsense. I have only said there is a shared responsibility when someone seeks a missing element outside of marriage. Of course you prove that most people do not want nor will they accept that responsibility. They wonder why, throw a lable on the cheater and blame someone else in entirety. So be it. But it is a fallacy in most cases.

I will clarify something for everyone, since there are quite a bit of misconceptions being presumed here. Not that it will matter to anyone but it does to me.

I married at 19. My hubby was 21.

When I was 26 my hubby had an affair.

At 29 I had an affair. (He was 28 and my former high school sweetheart...and he was single).

At 29 we divorced.

I lived with a guy from age 29-40.

At 41 I had an affair with a married guy who was 35. He is still married.

I married again at 43.

At 43 my current hubby had a one night stand with my best friend's daughter (who was 21).

I am now 47 and hope to God I have learned something. :headbang:

I am now 47 and hope to God I have learned something. :headbang:

Know what makes a person 'good' in my book? It's not avoiding mistakes or being perfect. It's their ability to learn from it.

There are many kinds of people involved in this thread. Some are here just to spew vitriol and look down at you. I say that I find myself having more respect for you, as someone who's been there and knows how hard that road can be than for those who sit around and congratulate themselves for their perfection.

You have learned something valuable that you can share with others. They have learned nothing. In a thread like this, they have the opportunity to learn from your experience (and Chuck's which I have shared) and instead they stick their fingers in their ears and shout 'LALALALALALALALALA' because they're so convinced they've got all the answers already. That's a perilous mentality to have, and they know less than they realize.

(Nobody take offense. If you don't think that applies to you then chances are, it doesn't. It's not aimed at everybody.)

Know what makes a person 'good' in my book? It's not avoiding mistakes or being perfect. It's their ability to learn from it.

There are many kinds of people involved in this thread. Some are here just to spew vitriol and look down at you. I say that I find myself having more respect for you, as someone who's been there and knows how hard that road can be than for those who sit around and congratulate themselves for their perfection.

You have learned something valuable that you can share with others. They have learned nothing. In a thread like this, they have the opportunity to learn from your experience (and Chuck's which I have shared) and instead they stick their fingers in their ears and shout 'LALALALALALALALALA' because they're so convinced they've got all the answers already. That's a perilous mentality to have, and they know less than they realize.

(Nobody take offense. If you don't think that applies to you then chances are, it doesn't. It's not aimed at everybody.)

I genuinely meant what I said about hoping no one ever has this in their lives. It was my intent only to share a very personal side of my life simply to help others. If having a target to ridicule is all some get out of the subject, well then that is all they get.

I've learned one great truth in life, when you think you know it all, that is the day you know the least.

I seem to vaguely remember being so bright eyed and bushy tailed myself once upon a time. ;)

Now? Possibly verdant.

Ah. Viridian. Celedonic, even. Got it.

My first hubby cheated on me, it took me years to understand how that happened. I was absolutely adamant that such a thing could not and would not happen in my marriage. I was also adamant that I would never do such a thing to anyone else. Lesson here...never say never.

And tell me, did you feel that you were in any way at fault? Did you "drive him to it", as Dr. Laura would have us believe?

I'm glad we're on the same page. It's what's making this conversation worth having :)

Absolutely.

Just to clarify: I'm not suggesting that somehow Chuck was an innocent victim of his own hormones. I'm only pointing out ways in which an otherwise honest and rational person can do something totally against his or her character.

I suppose...and again, the inexperience played a part as well.

Agreed. Although I would say as a side note, can you imagine the flak you'd get if you divorced a woman for not having sex with you enough?

You'd be labeled a sex hungry animal and accused of thinking of her as nothing but a sex object.

But I digress....

Well, that's not what would go in the "cause" blank on the form. Disagreement about sex could certainly be an irreconcilable difference, if all other avenues of dealing with the disagreement have been tried. Realistically, you'd hope to have such issues ironed out long before you walked down the aisle. However, it doesn't take much to imagine that there are those who don't discuss such important topics before sealing the deal. I feel sad for those who couldn't find the time to have that and other important conversations before such a commitment.

One of the interesting points the book made was an analogy that willpower is sort of like a guardrail on a mountain pass. When you're driving along that road you don't drag against the guardrail the whole way... You drive in the middle of the lane and stay well clear of it but it's there if you mess up. So it is with willpower. Ideally, you live your life avoiding situations that might put you in a situation to be tempted in the first place, relying on willpower as a last resort to keep you out of trouble.

Good analogy.

Another good point made by the book, and I think this is really the core reason why once you're deep into temptation you're probably screwed (no pun intended) is that most of our decision making is based on emotion rather than reason. Consider the example of a cigarette ad in a magazine. It's usually a picture of a bunch of attractive people having a great time, laughing, enjoying the sun, conveying feelings of fun and happiness and well-being. That speaks to emotion. Yet, at the bottom of the page is a big box (enlarged in recent years by legislation with no effect) telling you, in essence, 'if you smoke, you die.' Yet, the ad is effective. Why? because thhe emotional appeal is much more compelling than the appeal to reason NOT to smoke.

The ad is not effective at all. Do you honestly know anyone who smoked because a cowboy, cartoon camel, or image of a young, hip party scene told them it was cool? Movies and TV might be more of an influence than advertising...in many ways, those media ARE advertising. Smoking is rebellion and denial of mortality -- both powerful forces in the lives of young people. In many ways, sex is the same way, so it's not too much of a leap to take that to an extreme: adultery.

Now, I'm not suggesting that Chuck's friend Fred was saying "screw around on Susan, we're ALL doing it...". However, there might be enough subliminal approval and encouragement for licentious behavior in popular culture to equate to measurable influence.

That's natural. All I'm saying is the issue isn't so black and white as many people claim.

I'll go on believing that it is, while at the same time acknowledging what you're saying and understanding that what you see as shades of grey, I see as rationalizations and excuses for cheating. Otherwise, we're getting into the old Jimmy Carter trap ("I've been unfaithful in my mind") where thinking about another woman equals actual infidelity. That's a big ol' mess to get into.

I'm not privy to exactly what was discussed and when, but my understanding is there was a lot of guilt being dumped on him because it was initially Chuck that broke off that particular romance, and I think she was accusing him of dumping her for Susan. It was important to him that she not think that as it wasn't true, and it's probable that she used that guilt to get what she wanted from him.

If by "probable", you mean "99.99% sure", then yes. ;)

No it isn't like that. It was a lot of telling the story in an effort to understand wtf had happened and I was there as a shoulder to lean on. It wasn't him bragging so if I gave that impression I apologize.

I don't think you did. I was just looking for clarification, and you've given ample amounts of it. Thank you.

I guess IMHO on some level when one places themself in a situation with that level of hormones and temptation in the air, they do tend to behave as if they were intoxicated.

Then it's a kind of addiction? Like the undiagnosed alcoholic who knows he shouldn't go into a bar, but does? I understand the intoxication of lust all too well, but are we willing to go all the way to sexaholism (and yes, I know Sexaholics Anonymous exists) for everyone who cheats?

I think a lot of people need to make it a black and white issue because on some level it absolves them of the responsibility of having to actually make an effort to understand it. Also, by putting one's self in judgement of others, it can enable oneself to feel more secure. I think on some level to acknowledge that it's a complex issue is to admit that it could touch them in their life, and that's not a pleasant thought.

I mean no offense to anyone on the opposite side of this debate. If I'm wrong, don't flame let's just talk about it.

I don't think you've offended anyone, at least not me. I understand that there can be all kinds of rationalizations and behind-the-scenes motivations; ammunition with which someone might load the cheat cannon. However, that cannon does not aim and fire itself.

You really are the resident sex deviant;)

I try my very best

We agree on some parts of that. We agree that cheating is a piss poor way of dealing with it. All I'm saying is that it's a VERY common problem and I don't think society is helping matters by being unwilling to take a hard, honest look at the root causes, whatever they may be.

But yes, sometimes it is black and white, but I maintain that it is very rarely so. The Chuck example is pretty black and white in terms of blame, but not in terms of cause-effect.

Okay, so let me see if I can summarize this:

Cheating itself: black and white.
Motivations for cheating: greyer than Seattle in December.

You know you do have the information, you just can't seem to process it correctly. All your guess work is pretty silly in reality.

Btw you nor anyone else can beat me up any worse than I have myself. So rail away if it makes you happy. But know that you are not understanding me at all. No where did I ever say that I liked having affairs. I said it happened. Whether you realize it or not, most people having affairs agonize a great deal.

*snip the experience*

Do they? I suppose you're right, but it seems that the agonizing happens at the wrong end of the decision to have the affair. I don't want to sound insensitive, but "I didn't like it" and "it happened" sounds a lot like it was an act of nature or something. Like you tripped and fell into bed with someone. I'm going to guess that you liked it at first blush but didn't like the consequences. If I'm wrong, I'll cop to it.

Let me also add that I am profoundly moved by your willingness to share your experience in this thread. I may disagree somewhat with the conclusions you've drawn and posted here, but that does not diminish your contribution. Thank you.

Ah. Viridian. Celedonic, even. Got it.



And tell me, did you feel that you were in any way at fault? Did you "drive him to it", as Dr. Laura would have us believe?



After years of studying on why and how my marriage failed. I can whole heartedly say yes I bear a big responsibility to him having an affair.

By that time we had two sons ages 3 and 1. My libido was worn out and I was worn out. I completely ignored him sexually and expected him to take it all in stride because we were a family and you just make sacrifices. Not to mention I was completely exhausted all the time. I was taking care of my Grandmother also at the time and trying to go back to school. We had a house that was on the historical register that we were also trying to renovate, an overwhelming task. In my naivety I assumed that because we were married, that meant automatic faithfulness. I felt very sure it wasn't an issue since it was a huge issue before we married. My hubby knew without question my feelings about affairs, he knew what my parents went through and how I felt about it. I would have never believed he would have one, nor did I believe I could ever have one.

We tried to reconcile and make it work but it just didn't. I was able to get past it, but the problem was he never stopped having the affair. He is married to her today.

He made the choice to have the affair, I made that choice to put everything and everyones needs before his. By the time I was 29 he wasn't even meeting my needs for him to be a responsible parent...much less a husband.

My only regret in any of it is that we were too young to realize how important genuine communication is, how reprisals and reprimands are not conducive to emotional growth in a relationship.

I whined and complained, I was perpetually exhausted. He ignored me and found someone who wanted to talk TO him not at him. He left because he was lonely emotionally and physically...I was responsible for that loneliness to a great extent.

Could I see that then? No, hindsight is 20/20. What's that movie line "I'm a love coroner....I can tell you when it went wrong, how it went wrong, and why it went wrong....after it is dead". Or something like that. ;)

Well, that's not what would go in the "cause" blank on the form. Disagreement about sex could certainly be an irreconcilable difference, if all other avenues of dealing with the disagreement have been tried. Realistically, you'd hope to have such issues ironed out long before you walked down the aisle. However, it doesn't take much to imagine that there are those who don't discuss such important topics before sealing the deal. I feel sad for those who couldn't find the time to have that and other important conversations before such a commitment.


Agreed.



The ad is not effective at all. Do you honestly know anyone who smoked because a cowboy, cartoon camel, or image of a young, hip party scene told them it was cool? Movies and TV might be more of an influence than advertising...in many ways, those media ARE advertising. Smoking is rebellion and denial of mortality -- both powerful forces in the lives of young people. In many ways, sex is the same way, so it's not too much of a leap to take that to an extreme: adultery.


I dunno I bet there's a slew of advertising execs who have studies that will tell you they're fairly effective. They'd have to be for companies to invest millions in generating them.


Now, I'm not suggesting that Chuck's friend Fred was saying "screw around on Susan, we're ALL doing it...". However, there might be enough subliminal approval and encouragement for licentious behavior in popular culture to equate to measurable influence.


I agree with that. It's one of many factors, I'm sure.


I'll go on believing that it is, while at the same time acknowledging what you're saying and understanding that what you see as shades of grey, I see as rationalizations and excuses for cheating. Otherwise, we're getting into the old Jimmy Carter trap ("I've been unfaithful in my mind") where thinking about another woman equals actual infidelity. That's a big ol' mess to get into.

Fair enough.



I don't think you did. I was just looking for clarification, and you've given ample amounts of it. Thank you.


My pleasure.


Then it's a kind of addiction? Like the undiagnosed alcoholic who knows he shouldn't go into a bar, but does? I understand the intoxication of lust all too well, but are we willing to go all the way to sexaholism (and yes, I know Sexaholics Anonymous exists) for everyone who cheats?


Actually... while I wouldn't say that for all cases but I bet there's a significant number that would benefit greatly.

I've read about cases where sexual addiction is exactly the problem. Sometimes it starts with pron and works its way up from there.


Could I see that then? No, hindsight is 20/20. What's that movie line "I'm a love coroner....I can tell you when it went wrong, how it went wrong, and why it went wrong....after it is dead". Or something like that. ;)

OMG I may have to sig that quote...

Okay, so let me see if I can summarize this:

Cheating itself: black and white.
Motivations for cheating: greyer than Seattle in December.


Yeah basically.

After years of studying on why and how my marriage failed. I can whole heartedly say yes I bear a big responsibility to him having an affair.

By that time we had two sons ages 3 and 1. My libido was worn out and I was worn out. I completely ignored him sexually and expected him to take it all in stride because we were a family and you just make sacrifices. Not to mention I was completely exhausted all the time. I was taking care of my Grandmother also at the time and trying to go back to school. We had a house that was on the historical register that we were also trying to renovate, an overwhelming task. In my naivety I assumed that because we were married, that meant automatic faithfulness. I felt very sure it wasn't an issue since it was a huge issue before we married. My hubby knew without question my feelings about affairs, he knew what my parents went through and how I felt about it. I would have never believed he would have one, nor did I believe I could ever have one.

We tried to reconcile and make it work but it just didn't. I was able to get past it, but the problem was he never stopped having the affair. He is married to her today.

He made the choice to have the affair, I made that choice to put everything and everyones needs before his. By the time I was 29 he wasn't even meeting my needs for him to be a responsible parent...much less a husband.

My only regret in any of it is that we were too young to realize how important genuine communication is, how reprisals and reprimands are not conducive to emotional growth in a relationship.

I whined and complained, I was perpetually exhausted. He ignored me and found someone who wanted to talk TO him not at him. He left because he was lonely emotionally and physically...I was responsible for that loneliness to a great extent.

Could I see that then? No, hindsight is 20/20. What's that movie line "I'm a love coroner....I can tell you when it went wrong, how it went wrong, and why it went wrong....after it is dead". Or something like that. ;)

Good on you for growing and learning from the experience, but no amount of whining you did justifies his affair. If he wasn't getting either the satisafaction or even communication regarding lack of satisfaction, he needed to let you know that this was a serious problem and if not addressed would lead him to end the relationship and find someone who would communicate with him. Again -- reasons, excuses, but the decision was still his.

Do you really think all those articles about keeping the 'excitement' in a marriage are about how to keep it exciting for the woman? LOL No, they are for the woman to learn how to keep it exciting for the man.
Why on earth would I ever get married then?

My first live-in boyfriend stopped keeping things exciting for me. He was very happy with missionary sex 3 times a week and couldn't even be arsed to give me some foreplay or even some dirty talk. I aksed him often about our sex life and he thought everythig was great so why should it change. I DTMFA for not meeting my needs sexually.

So I guess that makes me a guy. The whole needing excitement to keep myself interested and happy.
Nothing personal, PQ, but you are saying some rather absurd things. Men have "special needs" because they have a more prominent erotic organ than women do? That is thinking that has gone out-the-window with racism. Do people with brown hair have "special needs" too?
Yes, yes they do. But not blondes. Blondes have no special needs.

Why on earth would I ever get married then?

My first live-in boyfriend stopped keeping things exciting for me. He was very happy with missionary sex 3 times a week and couldn't even be arsed to give me some foreplay or even some dirty talk. I asked him often about our sex life and he thought everything was great so why should it change. I DTMFA for not meeting my needs sexually.

So I guess that makes me a guy. The whole needing excitement to keep myself interested and happy.

Thank you for this bit of information. I doubt I could do more then this fellow did, and if I ever start a relationship I shall be certain to ask about this sort of thing ahead of time...lest my partner cheat upon me. :D

Yes, yes they do. But not blondes. Blondes have no special needs.

Because they are "dumb"? :p Heh...heh...nobody is laughing....:(

My first live-in boyfriend stopped keeping things exciting for me. He was very happy with missionary sex 3 times a week and couldn't even be arsed to give me some foreplay or even some dirty talk. I aksed him often about our sex life and he thought everythig was great so why should it change. I DTMFA for not meeting my needs sexually.

Wow. I am so sorry.


That would be fucking boring.

I agree with Dr. Laura.
That's because she was thinking of you. You cheated with her. All those mentions of her hot sex life, those vitamins she likes, and her no-nonsense mommy attitude was too much.

All of which would be perfectly valid, if only our point were that cheating is somehow justified.

As I've stated to the point of ridiculous repetitiveness, that is not the case, so you're looking more like you just have an axe to grind but are missing the actual argument being presented.

The thing is, you keep saying that you don't see it as justified...but then you turn around and keep trying to explain why the other party's actions contributed to the cheating somehow. So I feel the need to keep emphasizing that no, the other party's actions did not lead the other person to cheat, because I don't think that point can be hammered home enough.

It's like how I harp and harp on how it is NEVER the rape victim's fault for getting raped. Yes, it's repetitive, but frankly that's because it needs to be said over and over and over.


Yes. But at the same time are you suggesting that if someone DOES commit an act of physical abuse, that no analysis is needed to determine the true cause NO MATTER where it leads?

Of course not. What I'm saying is that the "true cause" is not the actions of the other party. Period.

If somebody commits an act of physical abuse, you should be analyzing the situation to figure out why THEY fucked up. You should not be wasting time looking to see why their partner wasn't nicer or more attentive or whatever.

In the case of cheating, you examine what went wrong with the cheater. Why did they choose to handle their situation so poorly? Why did they choose to be dishonest and cowardly instead of behaving like a grown up?

I honestly don't think it does any good to look to see if, for instance, there wasn't enough sex being provided to the cheater. What does that establish? Plenty of relationships have that problem without anybody cheating on anybody. The existence of relationship problems does not automatically cause cheating. The only thing that causes cheating is the CHEATER.


The problem is you've crossed the line from judging actions to judging people.

Not at all. I know fuckall about PQ beyond what she's shared here. I judge her behavior and her choices and her stated beliefs as she has shown them on this topic. That's as far as I goes.

From what PQ has said so far, I don't think she's learned that much from her experiences. She's learned to blame other people for her poor choices and the poor choices of the men she dates when it suits her. She's learned to internalize sexist BS about gender roles to the point where she blames herself if her husband cheats. She's carrying around some bunk notions about how menfolks are just different and need special kinds of coddling lest they stray. She's learned to follow a very common path that many women have gone down before, probably due at least in part to the fact that it's a well-traveled and thus easier path to follow in our society.

And yes, I know that your comment about putting fingers in one's ears was aimed at me. The thing is, I do learn from what people like PQ share. That doesn't mean I blindly accept their conclusions.

I'm all about people learning from their mistakes and growing as they go. But that doesn't mean I assume that everybody who's made a mistake is wiser for it.


This is demonstrated by a tendency to want to simply dismiss someone who has done it rather than approach it in a more constructive and useful way.
I guess it's another personal thing. I find blunt criticism far more constructive and useful than the alternative.

The thing is, you keep saying that you don't see it as justified...but then you turn around and keep trying to explain why the other party's actions contributed to the cheating somehow. So I feel the need to keep emphasizing that no, the other party's actions did not lead the other person to cheat, because I don't think that point can be hammered home enough.

It's like how I harp and harp on how it is NEVER the rape victim's fault for getting raped. Yes, it's repetitive, but frankly that's because it needs to be said over and over and over.

Of course not. What I'm saying is that the "true cause" is not the actions of the other party. Period.

If somebody commits an act of physical abuse, you should be analyzing the situation to figure out why THEY fucked up. You should not be wasting time looking to see why their partner wasn't nicer or more attentive or whatever.

In the case of cheating, you examine what went wrong with the cheater. Why did they choose to handle their situation so poorly? Why did they choose to be dishonest and cowardly instead of behaving like a grown up?


If the other party has a hand in it, that isn't the same as justifying the action.

Everything in relationships is cause-effect. Everything. Now, when one person screws up to the magnitude of cheating (or hitting for that matter) then the only way to really fix it is to understand the root cause. The important thing is to get it fixed. Period. Fairness and idealism do not contribute to this.

For many, many years my ex liked to try and push my buttons when we fought because she wanted to see if she could get me angry enough to hit her (She openly admitted this toward the end of the marriage. It was one of the main reasons I left her. I refused to stay in the marriage long enough to find out if she'd eventually succeed.) But the philosophical question is: If her specific and conscious intention was to try and push my temper over the edge to the point where I did hit her, and had she eventually succeeded, would I have truly been 100% at fault? The easy answer is yes, especially since I've proven that it was avoidable by leaving, but is it the true answer? What if I had less control over my temper than I do and I had slapped her? Would you truly argue that she had -no- hand in it at all?


I honestly don't think it does any good to look to see if, for instance, there wasn't enough sex being provided to the cheater. What does that establish? Plenty of relationships have that problem without anybody cheating on anybody. The existence of relationship problems does not automatically cause cheating. The only thing that causes cheating is the CHEATER.


I think one item that hasn't been mentioned enough in this thread and is a useful thing to bear in mind is, and I admit this is just my personal observation, sex is probably NOT the most common reason for cheating. If, in a relationship, one side or the other tends to consistently put the other down, grinding down their self-esteem or over the long term just doesn't build up their spouse the way a true loving couple should, it leads to severe problems in the relationship, and most people just don't have the awareness, education or introspection to be able to identify the problem for what it is. In that way, cheating becomes almost a coping mechanism. You can't fix that just by castigating the cheater and leaving the burden on them to do all the work in fixing the relationship.

or do you agree that both sides need to work on that?


Not at all. I know fuckall about PQ beyond what she's shared here. I judge her behavior and her choices and her stated beliefs as she has shown them on this topic. That's as far as I goes.

From what PQ has said so far, I don't think she's learned that much from her experiences. She's learned to blame other people for her poor choices and the poor choices of the men she dates when it suits her. She's learned to internalize sexist BS about gender roles to the point where she blames herself if her husband cheats. She's carrying around some bunk notions about how menfolks are just different and need special kinds of coddling lest they stray. She's learned to follow a very common path that many women have gone down before, probably due at least in part to the fact that it's a well-traveled and thus easier path to follow in our society.


But the thing is, in this statement you're implicitly acknowledging a level of blame for everybody involved, not just the party doing the cheating.


And yes, I know that your comment about putting fingers in one's ears was aimed at me. The thing is, I do learn from what people like PQ share. That doesn't mean I blindly accept their conclusions.


Well, not you exclusively, but yeah collectively.

I think you'd be well advised to give more weight to what she says. From what I've gathered (and forgive me if I'm mistaken somewhere) she's older than you are and has had more life experiences that you haven't had. That means she probably has insights that would be valuable to you.


I'm all about people learning from their mistakes and growing as they go. But that doesn't mean I assume that everybody who's made a mistake is wiser for it.


And well you shouldn't, but at the same time, if you're evaluating those experiences, I don't see how it can serve you well to run them through a prism of your pre-existing assumptions, especially in an area where you don't have direct personal experience, or at least not as much (Again, if I'm wrong, I apologize)


I guess it's another personal thing. I find blunt criticism far more constructive and useful than the alternative.

Blunt criticism is a great and wonderful thing. This is why I like Simon the best on American Idol. He tells it like it is. At the same time, there's a big difference between being blunt and being nasty.

I mean think about it... even Neo Art is taking you to task. That ought to tell you something.

It is a little late the introduce funny quotes relating to the situation, but what the heck:

Freddie: "She caught me with another woman. You're French, you can understand that."

André (pauses): "To be with another woman, zat is French. To be caught, zat is American."

-Dirt Rotten Scoundrels.

Why on earth would I ever get married then?

My first live-in boyfriend stopped keeping things exciting for me. He was very happy with missionary sex 3 times a week and couldn't even be arsed to give me some foreplay or even some dirty talk. I aksed him often about our sex life and he thought everythig was great so why should it change. I DTMFA for not meeting my needs sexually.

So I guess that makes me a guy. The whole needing excitement to keep myself interested and happy.

Yes, yes they do. But not blondes. Blondes have no special needs.

Okay, so he told you everything was great sexually. What did you tell him? We don't have the whole picture in this scenario. Not having your sexual needs met doesn't make you a guy. With the limited information you've given us, it makes you somehow unwilling or unable to tell him that things are certainly NOT great sexually. Now, if you insisted upon your perception of that to him and he still brushed you off, then you were right to end the relationship.

Thank you for this bit of information. I doubt I could do more then this fellow did, and if I ever start a relationship I shall be certain to ask about this sort of thing ahead of time...lest my partner cheat upon me. :D

You and Chandelier would make the perfect couple. Please, go find her. Between the two of you, you'd have a lifetime of absence of self-esteem to keep each other asexually entertained.

Because they are "dumb"? :p Heh...heh...nobody is laughing....:(

See, but if blondes ARE dumb, then they do (according to modern education parlance) have "special needs".

Wow. I am so sorry.


That would be fucking boring.

Or more accurately, boring fucking, but either way, yeah, literally.

You and Chandelier would make the perfect couple. Please, go find her. Between the two of you, you'd have a lifetime of absence of self-esteem to keep each other asexually entertained.

Couching thrice a week is hardly asexual in my eyes. But you are correct in assuing that sexuality is not a important factor to me. Other qualities are, however, and I am far more concerned with them.


See, but if blondes ARE dumb, then they do (according to modern education parlance) have "special needs".

Special Ed...?

Couching thrice a week is hardly asexual in my eyes. But you are correct in assuing that sexuality is not a important factor to me. Other qualities are, however, and I am far more concerned with them.

And good on you for being thus concerned. Sorry, I was drawing a comparison between you, who I've already noticed has a tendency to resort to self-deprecation at the hop of a drat, and Chandelier, who bemoans her asexuality in every thread that even makes a tangential sexual reference.

There's someone for everyone. At least according to Kenny Rogers ("Coward of the County").

Special Ed...?

Bingo.

And good on you for being thus concerned. Sorry, I was drawing a comparison between you, who I've already noticed has a tendency to resort to self-deprecation at the hop of a drat, and Chandelier, who bemoans her asexuality in every thread that even makes a tangential sexual reference.

There's someone for everyone. At least according to Kenny Rogers ("Coward of the County").

Hmm. I very much doubt I would "bemoan" my sexuality. It is not that I am asexual, it merely that my loins are like the lazy father who will not mow the lawn.

Aside: "Chandelier" is not cynical enough for me..

Bingo.

So that is why they would not permit me in the class; because my hair is not blond!

Okay, so he told you everything was great sexually. What did you tell him? We don't have the whole picture in this scenario. Not having your sexual needs met doesn't make you a guy. With the limited information you've given us, it makes you somehow unwilling or unable to tell him that things are certainly NOT great sexually. Now, if you insisted upon your perception of that to him and he still brushed you off, then you were right to end the relationship.


no she was right to end the relationship for any reason or none whatsoever.

if a boyfriend isnt right for you, its stupid to keep him around.

Thank you for this bit of information. I doubt I could do more then this fellow did, and if I ever start a relationship I shall be certain to ask about this sort of thing ahead of time...lest my partner cheat upon me. :D



Because they are "dumb"? :p Heh...heh...nobody is laughing....:(
I totally didn't even think about that when I said blond. I was just thinking of my hair color last summer.

Wow. I am so sorry.


That would be fucking boring.
Yes, yes it was.

Okay, so he told you everything was great sexually. What did you tell him? We don't have the whole picture in this scenario. Not having your sexual needs met doesn't make you a guy. With the limited information you've given us, it makes you somehow unwilling or unable to tell him that things are certainly NOT great sexually. Now, if you insisted upon your perception of that to him and he still brushed you off, then you were right to end the relationship.
The guy comment was in direct response to the quote about women's magazines talking about spicing up a sex life being not for the women but only for the men. Kind of implying women like boring sex.

Oh, I totally gave him the information. I started by trying some suggestions in bed. When that didn't work I tried talking about it in a casual way, "hey, how do you think our sex life is going," he said he thought it was great. I treid to continue the coversation with "well, I'm thinking we need to change things up a bit," but he shut down the conversation as quick as he could. I then sat him down for the "we need to talk" talk. I told him I was unhappy and this was affecting our relationship and this needed to change or I would leave. I laid out specifics and told him exactly what wasn't working for me and what I needed to be happy sexually. I emphasized how important a healthy sex life was to me and why. I would generally throw in some positives but by that point there was none. Our sex happened in exactly the same way every time we had sex. Exactly. I'm not exagerationg when I say there was zero variation. From initiation to the finish, every move was burned into my memory.


no she was right to end the relationship for any reason or none whatsoever.

if a boyfriend isnt right for you, its stupid to keep him around.
Exactly.

There's someone for everyone. At least according to Kenny Rogers ("Coward of the County").


And Tommy's Love was Becky...



Oh, I totally gave him the information. I started by trying some suggestions in bed. When that didn't work I tried talking about it in a casual way, "hey, how do you think our sex life is going," he said he thought it was great. I treid to continue the coversation with "well, I'm thinking we need to change things up a bit," but he shut down the conversation as quick as he could. I then sat him down for the "we need to talk" talk. I told him I was unhappy and this was affecting our relationship and this needed to change or I would leave. I laid out specifics and told him exactly what wasn't working for me and what I needed to be happy sexually. I emphasized how important a healthy sex life was to me and why. I would generally throw in some positives but by that point there was none. Our sex happened in exactly the same way every time we had sex. Exactly. I'm not exagerationg when I say there was zero variation. From initiation to the finish, every move was burned into my memory.


I'm trying to imagine a guy who, upon hearing this information, reacts with anything but "holy crap I better do something..."

I'm trying to imagine a guy who, upon hearing this information, reacts with anything but "holy crap I better do something..."
He was surprised when I told him I was leaving. Apparently "if this doesn't change then I will leave" equalled "I'm just talking to hear myself talk, I really don't mean anything I say" in his brain.

I'm trying to imagine a guy who, upon hearing this information, reacts with anything but "holy crap I better do something..."

I'm trying to imagine a guy who wouldn;t be jumping out of his seat in celebration when told this by his girlfreind. What kind of idiot could pass up the chance for some really great, spontaneus, and new sex with his loved one?

Obviously this man was a little off in the head.

I'm trying to imagine a guy who wouldn;t be jumping out of his seat in celebration when told this by his girlfreind. What kind of idiot could pass up the chance for some really great, spontaneus, and new sex with his loved one?

Obviously this man was a little off in the head.

Oh, there are some pretty vanilla guys out there, same with the women.

I agree though, anybody that wouldn't jump at that chance is wrong in the head.

Hmm. I very much doubt I would "bemoan" my sexuality. It is not that I am asexual, it merely that my loins are like the lazy father who will not mow the lawn.

Aside: "Chandelier" is not cynical enough for me..

So that is why they would not permit me in the class; because my hair is not blond!

I don't think I'll sig that, but Parky, Parkour, my old Parking lot, that is one fanTAStic analogy!

no she was right to end the relationship for any reason or none whatsoever.

if a boyfriend isnt right for you, its stupid to keep him around.

Well, yeah, of course. I was trying to ascertain the details of the situation. Naturally you'd want to be rid of someone whenever they're not right for you and the not rightness is either ignored or dismissed when it's indicated.

The guy comment was in direct response to the quote about women's magazines talking about spicing up a sex life being not for the women but only for the men. Kind of implying women like boring sex.

Oh, I totally gave him the information. I started by trying some suggestions in bed. When that didn't work I tried talking about it in a casual way, "hey, how do you think our sex life is going," he said he thought it was great. I treid to continue the coversation with "well, I'm thinking we need to change things up a bit," but he shut down the conversation as quick as he could. I then sat him down for the "we need to talk" talk. I told him I was unhappy and this was affecting our relationship and this needed to change or I would leave. I laid out specifics and told him exactly what wasn't working for me and what I needed to be happy sexually. I emphasized how important a healthy sex life was to me and why. I would generally throw in some positives but by that point there was none. Our sex happened in exactly the same way every time we had sex. Exactly. I'm not exagerationg when I say there was zero variation. From initiation to the finish, every move was burned into my memory.

Holy smoking shitballs. I can't imagine being that dull. I mean, I'm no Don Juan (or Don Ameche, for that matter), but the thrill I get from being with a woman who knows what she wants and actually TELLS me? That's one of those things worth living and perhaps even dying for. Genuinely mutual sexual communication is priceless. For this guy to hear what you had to say and NOT immediately say WHAT CAN I DO FOR YOU, OR more to the point, TO YOU? is beyond my comprehension.

And Tommy's Love was Becky...

I knew it would be you! :D Thanks for not letting my age indicator hang out there too long without acknowledgment. I appreciate it.

Hey look, ol' Yellow's leavin'....

I'm trying to imagine a guy who, upon hearing this information, reacts with anything but "holy crap I better do something..."

No kidding. I... it just... no. I can't do it.

He was surprised when I told him I was leaving. Apparently "if this doesn't change then I will leave" equalled "I'm just talking to hear myself talk, I really don't mean anything I say" in his brain.

:headbang: *smacks head with hand* and :headbang: again. Trdphelm grldphelmp. Grabble flom og mipt speeb. Oot piffoo blaboo.

No really, I can't find actual words in any real language.

I'm trying to imagine a guy who wouldn;t be jumping out of his seat in celebration when told this by his girlfreind. What kind of idiot could pass up the chance for some really great, spontaneus, and new sex with his loved one?

Obviously this man was a little off in the head.

Trelph. Golbabba trelph.

I don't think I'll sig that, but Parky, Parkour, my old Parking lot, that is one fanTAStic analogy!

Thank you....Parking lot...hmmm.

Oh, there are some pretty vanilla guys out there, same with the women.

I agree though, anybody that wouldn't jump at that chance is wrong in the head.

I've dated three "vanilla" women. One was perfectly open to trying things, and knew enough about herself to make sure the pace of change and introduction wasn't too swift. The second would not, under any circumstances, do anything other than missionary with the lights out and the blankets over us. No reasons, no justification, no discussion of any kind. Just 100% control and prudish sameness only when she decided it was okay, and that wasn't often. I met her mother and instantly knew why. Apparently blow jobs make even married women tramps. I ran, ran like the wind.

The woman I'm with now is a kindred spirit in many ways, but she has the same sexual strictures as the second person I mentioned. Thing is, she is open to talk about them, and I discovered that there was an abusive boyfriend in her past that effectively forced her to do things she might was willing to try but didn't like. There were instances she describes that are basically rape. So when she tells me she doesn't want to do something, I know why. She also understands that I like to introduce variety. The only difficulty is that if we try something and she is in any way reminded of how her ex made her feel, she immediately shuts down, and I hold her and we fall asleep that way as she gathers that memory and stuffs it into her subconscious again. I have suggested counseling, but she's fiercely independent and does not like the idea (she's got her Doctorate and is a woman in what is largely a man's field -- department chair in academia, so she feels the need to be unassailable). I will continue to suggest she find a clinical way to work out those demons. I love her, but it's a bit frustrating when trying a new position and it, well strikes her as reminiscent of the ex, and we stop.

So I guess the point of bringing all that up was to say that "vanilla" may be a bit of a cry for help. I'd wager moreso for women than men, but still.

He was surprised when I told him I was leaving. Apparently "if this doesn't change then I will leave" equalled "I'm just talking to hear myself talk, I really don't mean anything I say" in his brain.

Well then it sounds like the poor fool was definitely not good enough for you, because if you're the kind of person who ACTUALLY communicates, then you deserve someone who will know what to do with it.


I knew it would be you! :D Thanks for not letting my age indicator hang out there too long without acknowledgment. I appreciate it.

Hey look, ol' Yellow's leavin'....


But you could've heard a pin drop when Tommy stopped, and locked the door.

(solidarity, yanno)

Thank you....Parking lot...hmmm.

Sorry if you didn't like the nickname string. I was listening to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Quandary Phase last night, and Arthur Dent's old boss spoke like that, in serial nicknames and metaphors ("Arthur, my old soup spoon, my old silver tureen, how are you?!"). The idiom has stuck in my head for some reason.

I've dated three "vanilla" women. One was perfectly open to trying things, and knew enough about herself to make sure the pace of change and introduction wasn't too swift. The second would not, under any circumstances, do anything other than missionary with the lights out and the blankets over us. No reasons, no justification, no discussion of any kind. Just 100% control and prudish sameness only when she decided it was okay, and that wasn't often. I met her mother and instantly knew why. Apparently blow jobs make even married women tramps. I ran, ran like the wind.

The woman I'm with now is a kindred spirit in many ways, but she has the same sexual strictures as the second person I mentioned. Thing is, she is open to talk about them, and I discovered that there was an abusive boyfriend in her past that effectively forced her to do things she might was willing to try but didn't like. There were instances she describes that are basically rape. So when she tells me she doesn't want to do something, I know why. She also understands that I like to introduce variety. The only difficulty is that if we try something and she is in any way reminded of how her ex made her feel, she immediately shuts down, and I hold her and we fall asleep that way as she gathers that memory and stuffs it into her subconscious again. I have suggested counseling, but she's fiercely independent and does not like the idea (she's got her Doctorate and is a woman in what is largely a man's field -- department chair in academia, so she feels the need to be unassailable). I will continue to suggest she find a clinical way to work out those demons. I love her, but it's a bit frustrating when trying a new position and it, well strikes her as reminiscent of the ex, and we stop.

So I guess the point of bringing all that up was to say that "vanilla" may be a bit of a cry for help. I'd wager moreso for women than men, but still.

I was just going along with the joke. Never said there couldn't be valid reasons.

Personally, I find constant sameness or prudishness to be a sign of a need to control. They need to control when, where, and how. My wife's like this: I'll try a come-on, she'll wave me off until later, for example ("Not right now" is one thing, and I understand it, but a 100% shot down rate is not covered by "Not right now"). But that's enough armchair psych from me.

I've dated three "vanilla" women. One was perfectly open to trying things, and knew enough about herself to make sure the pace of change and introduction wasn't too swift. The second would not, under any circumstances, do anything other than missionary with the lights out and the blankets over us. No reasons, no justification, no discussion of any kind. Just 100% control and prudish sameness only when she decided it was okay, and that wasn't often. I met her mother and instantly knew why. Apparently blow jobs make even married women tramps. I ran, ran like the wind.

The woman I'm with now is a kindred spirit in many ways, but she has the same sexual strictures as the second person I mentioned. Thing is, she is open to talk about them, and I discovered that there was an abusive boyfriend in her past that effectively forced her to do things she might was willing to try but didn't like. There were instances she describes that are basically rape. So when she tells me she doesn't want to do something, I know why. She also understands that I like to introduce variety. The only difficulty is that if we try something and she is in any way reminded of how her ex made her feel, she immediately shuts down, and I hold her and we fall asleep that way as she gathers that memory and stuffs it into her subconscious again. I have suggested counseling, but she's fiercely independent and does not like the idea (she's got her Doctorate and is a woman in what is largely a man's field -- department chair in academia, so she feels the need to be unassailable). I will continue to suggest she find a clinical way to work out those demons. I love her, but it's a bit frustrating when trying a new position and it, well strikes her as reminiscent of the ex, and we stop.

So I guess the point of bringing all that up was to say that "vanilla" may be a bit of a cry for help. I'd wager moreso for women than men, but still.

Look at it this way.
Every GOOD experiance she has with you, works against the bad ones from before. The fact that you care, you show it, and she knows it, works quite well not only in your favor, but in her favor psychologicaly.

(since she was talking about elliot spitzer)

if a husband feels the need to spend family money on overpriced whores its the wife's fault for marrying an idiot.

Oh puh-lease. Don't attack his wife because her husband did something horrible. How was she supposed to know he'd do something like that?

Oh puh-lease. Don't attack his wife because her husband did something horrible. How was she supposed to know he'd do something like that?

the remark is in response to dr laura's assertion that its the wife's fault when the husband cheats.

all i said was that her "fault" lies in marrying an idiot.

think about it. its not really an attack now is it.

Sorry if you didn't like the nickname string. I was listening to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Quandary Phase last night, and Arthur Dent's old boss spoke like that, in serial nicknames and metaphors ("Arthur, my old soup spoon, my old silver tureen, how are you?!"). The idiom has stuck in my head for some reason.

Indeed? Ha-ha. You being a fan of Douglas Adams, I would like to know, have you ever played Starship Titanic? Because I would very much like to purchase that game, but I hear it will not work on anything higher then Windows 98. Perhaps you know?

Aside: No, in actuality I really do not care what you call me. I enjoy nicknames.

Personally, I find constant sameness or prudishness to be a sign of a need to control. They need to control when, where, and how. My wife's like this: I'll try a come-on, she'll wave me off until later, for example ("Not right now" is one thing, and I understand it, but a 100% shot down rate is not covered by "Not right now"). But that's enough armchair psych from me.

Agreed. And here's hoping "not right now" is a promise always fulfilled, good sir.

Look at it this way.
Every GOOD experiance she has with you, works against the bad ones from before. The fact that you care, you show it, and she knows it, works quite well not only in your favor, but in her favor psychologicaly.

I appreciate that. She's definitely worth whatever I need to do. She just doesn't believe that yet.

Indeed? Ha-ha. You being a fan of Douglas Adams, I would like to know, have you ever played Starship Titanic? Because I would very much like to purchase that game, but I hear it will not work on anything higher then Windows 98. Perhaps you know?

Aside: No, in actuality I really do not care what you call me. I enjoy nicknames.

I have played Starship Titanic, but that was a LONG time ago. You might be able to find it on Gametap or some other game-archive site.

I'm glad I didn't offend then, Parkolomew.

the remark is in response to dr laura's assertion that its the wife's fault when the husband cheats.

all i said was that her "fault" lies in marrying an idiot.

think about it. its not really an attack now is it.

Yes, it is. This poor woman has just been cheated on, and she doesn't deserve remarks like "it's her fault for marrying an idiot". The only time the word fault should appear in a sentence about her should be with a "it's not her" affixed to "fault that her husband cheated on her".