No, if you don't wanna be with me then don't, simple as that, don't waste my time cheating.
2
0 Reply
Anonymous
(45 Plus)
+1 y
Not to me. If there are problems in the marriage they should be worked on and if they can't be fixed, then divorce. People that cheat are lazy and/or don't want to deal with whatever the problem is in my opinion.
No, of course not. Cheating is the act of having affairs with someone else while lying to your current partner. If an action requires dishonesty, it's probably not morally right.
No, because if you don't get on well with a person anymore, you can break with him/her, and then you are free to do whatever you want.
1
0 Reply
Anonymous
(30-35)
+1 y
Sometime it is. If you are a married man and you've done all you can to get your wife to sleep with you or improve your sex life to no avail and divorce rape is a high possibility then you should cheat.
Cheaters will answer this one for me.. WATCH THE SHOW.. IT'S EYE OPENING AND WILL ANSWER THIS WITHOUT A DOUBT.. I think the show is real and makes a good point on CHEATERS
Never, if you don't get enough sex or enough affection you just have to talk to your partner and if nothing change just dump them. Nothing force you to stay in a relationship you aren't happy in...
Never. But I would understand if there is total neglect and extreme lack of sex during the marriage from a religious stand point where divorce isn't a option.
Non religious, than never. Just break up and move on.
@JacquelineBuan Well, if we're going to be nice, I'll explain: I can't view this as an isolated case. Your assesment makes no sense to me, because I'd also be considering our relationship up to that point. I've also said that it takes time for me to build legit feelings for her. So, in effect, you would be suggesting that she just kisses someone out of the blue or says "I love you" to him. Does not comute. Have we been simply saying hello and goodbye to one another all this time, then?
Well, I mean, the word "infidelity" / "unfaithful" wasn't chosen by accident, right?
And, in literally EVERY other context, that word refers to... well, basically, a dereliction of duty. Like... A "faithful" delivery person comes at the same time every day. The opposite wouldn't be sneaking extra deliveries to other people (lol); it would be not hitting YOUR route at the right time.
In some instances it's both. Like, legally, a "faithless employee" is someone who takes one company's trade secrets/patents and uses them to benefit another company -- but, again, dereliction of duty, AND active engagement with rivals.
Etc.
__
And, I mean, "cheating" ALSO means the same thing.
If you have to run extra laps as a penalty after sports practice... "cheating" isn't running even MORE laps for another coach. Cheating is NOT running the laps you're supposed to run.
Etc.
Like, it's actually weird to me that people so commonly dfine infidelity/cheating in such a one-sided way. ESPECIALLY
because LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE IMPORTANT in a rl is regarded by default as a **compromise**. Like, literally absolutely everything.
One person feels like the other doesn't do enough around the house? ... compromise, meet in the middle
One person doesn't feel spntaneous enough, but the other thinks there should be even more planning? ... compromise, meet in the middle
One person thinks the other starts TOO many "talks", while the other feels starved for communication? ... compromise, meet in the middle
Like... srsly It's fucked up that this is literally THE ONLY MAJOR THING where compromise is simply **not expected** by, well, just about anyone.
Imagine if I applied the same logic to ANY of those other things. Like the communication thing -- "Srry sweet cheeks, yr partner just isn't mentally equipped to talk about the rl more than once a year. You'll just have to adjust. You'll do it if you REALLY love her/him."
Or the housework thing, or the ANYTHING thing. It'd be ridicu
Like, rlly, I wonder how we got to a point where literally THE ONE THING YOU AREN'T SUPPOSED TO GET FROM ANYONE ELSE (= sex) ... so, theoretically, that should be the MOST important compromise, right? -- somehow got to be the one thing that DOESN'T have to be a compromise, and where the person with greater needs is just, well, screwed. (Ahah the irony of "screwed" or "fucked" here)
@redeyemindtricks That reminds me, I should say "cheating is having sex behind your partner's back". Swinging isn't my thing, but it works for some people.
"somehow got to be the one thing that DOESN'T have to be a compromise, and where the person with greater needs is just, well, screwed."
Emotion is not driven by logic - this is clearly an emotion-packed situation, one should not and try to logically dissect it. It's an issue of compatibility.
.. so if you're not fucking like I'm fucking then get the fuck out! .. [C. Rock]
Seriously speaking, it's too difficult for me to wrap my head around. I haven't lived together with a woman for half a century [read: 5 years] to relate to it. I can theorycraft it, but I would base it on logic, making my arguments redundant.
Well, like, duhhh I know people are not fundamentally logical. It's not like I'm entirely -- or even mostly -- logical, either. lol.
But nonetheless... When people approach LITERALLY EVERYTHING BUT ONE THING in fundamentally the same way, but then that ONE thing is treated completely differently... there's usually a whole series of clearly identifiable reasons behind that. In fact, there almost ALWAYS is. That's why I am wondering about this. Because in general, most peopel are either (a) basically consistent across the board, or (b) completely situational, case-by-case about basicallly everything. This is a case of (a) -- except this one single thing. It's so weird.
@redeyemindtricks Hey, for some people it's enough for them to see their "SO" literally [has to be the word of the day] eating from the same plate with someone else other than them :D [not even kidding, seen this shit play out in front of my eyes, fortunately, as a spectator.]
Perhaps, consistency across the board [except sex] is coincidental and only (b) applies. Suitably, our case by case decisions would seem to be in tune with some form of logic, which may or may not be consistent. Treatment of sex being the iconsistent bit. See how this goes haywire the moment you attempt to apply logic? :D
Where you going, bae? Your sister called, she wants to get fucked.
I mean sure, lol. Conveniently, I'm not particularly "logical" nor have I ever been considered particularly "smart"... so I'm not constrained by those things.
(I always lol when people say "That's a logical fallacy" as though that actually DEFEATS an argument. Like, as if that's something that matters at all to more than 0.05% of people. This is the biggest reason why people who carry around the "smart" reputation are... almost always horrible at persuading anyone of anything -- because somehow they've gotten all the way to adulthood thinking that arguments are supposed to be "logical". Double lol when they do this for arguments ABOUT EMOTIONS. Like really guys? But yeah, they do that.)
@redeyemindtricks Logic is a fixed formal system [this well get hairy very quickly] that has rules. It's not your fault if you have never got familiar with actual logic. You may catch a glimpse of this discipline at www.youtube.com/watch should you be interested :)
As for arguments. It depends on situation [see, (b) does apply :) ] and kind of person you are dealing with. You will not convince me, for instance, by abusing logical fallacies, I will catch any and every logical mistake you make, because I am trained to do so. It's my job, I have to be logically sound to make decisions involving huge amounts of money on a daily basis.
.. but I only apply that when it matters or when I want to be annoying or a troll.
Regardless, being logically sound is preferable, for then you would convince the people whose opinion is more valuable [and these people do constitute a healthy chunk of nation-wide if not local population].
@redeyemindtricks "This is the biggest reason why people who carry around the "smart" reputation are... almost always horrible at persuading anyone of anything" Not precisely sure what you mean by "smart" reputation. I would distinguish between the ones that are wannabeish and those that really "know their shit". Persuasion a. k. a people skills is actually a consequence of logic. The "smart" people you are talking about seem to be familiar with only the basis of logic, not its consequences.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
51Opinion
No, if you don't wanna be with me then don't, simple as that, don't waste my time cheating.
Not to me. If there are problems in the marriage they should be worked on and if they can't be fixed, then divorce. People that cheat are lazy and/or don't want to deal with whatever the problem is in my opinion.
No, of course not. Cheating is the act of having affairs with someone else while lying to your current partner. If an action requires dishonesty, it's probably not morally right.
Under absolutely no circumstances is cheating acceptable or justified.
No, because if you don't get on well with a person anymore, you can break with him/her, and then you are free to do whatever you want.
Sometime it is. If you are a married man and you've done all you can to get your wife to sleep with you or improve your sex life to no avail and divorce rape is a high possibility then you should cheat.
Cheaters will answer this one for me.. WATCH THE SHOW.. IT'S EYE OPENING AND WILL ANSWER THIS WITHOUT A DOUBT.. I think the show is real and makes a good point on CHEATERS
There evidence that its all fake.
Never, if you don't get enough sex or enough affection you just have to talk to your partner and if nothing change just dump them. Nothing force you to stay in a relationship you aren't happy in...
of someone is cheating , first blame yourself and then after that justification , if it's not your fault , don't think twice and no second chances
No. If you have problems, either fix them or break up. Cheating is just immature
Never. But I would understand if there is total neglect and extreme lack of sex during the marriage from a religious stand point where divorce isn't a option.
Non religious, than never. Just break up and move on.
I think there are legitimate reasons that push people into cheating but I think they should leave the SO first
It isn't. There's excuses for it but that's all it is excuses.
No, but that always doesn't mean the person who gets cheated on is the victim, either
Did he get some happiness behind her back? :D How dare he!
For the record, cheating is having sex with someone else while you are committed.
so you don't consider kissing or her saying "I love you" to another man, to be cheating?
@JacquelineBuan Oh I knew somebody was going to try that. I've seen people lose their shit over simply hugs.
The "I love you" bit I can handle. No idea why she'd be kissing another man other than the meet&greet kisses on cheeks and whatnot.
by kissing I meant making out- would you be okay with that?
@JacquelineBuan No. There's no need to worry about it, either.
interesting. I don't agree with that, but I respect your opinion :)
@JacquelineBuan Well, if we're going to be nice, I'll explain: I can't view this as an isolated case. Your assesment makes no sense to me, because I'd also be considering our relationship up to that point. I've also said that it takes time for me to build legit feelings for her. So, in effect, you would be suggesting that she just kisses someone out of the blue or says "I love you" to him. Does not comute. Have we been simply saying hello and goodbye to one another all this time, then?
compute**
sorry I really couldn't understand that. But anyways, thanks for sharing your opinion
"For the record, cheating is having sex with someone else while you are committed."
^^ ... Or consistently DENYING it to someone who's committed to YOU.
@redeyemindtricks Well, I have to admit, I haven't thought about it that way. You make a good point, though.
Well, I mean, the word "infidelity" / "unfaithful" wasn't chosen by accident, right?
And, in literally EVERY other context, that word refers to... well, basically, a dereliction of duty.
Like... A "faithful" delivery person comes at the same time every day. The opposite wouldn't be sneaking extra deliveries to other people (lol); it would be not hitting YOUR route at the right time.
In some instances it's both. Like, legally, a "faithless employee" is someone who takes one company's trade secrets/patents and uses them to benefit another company -- but, again, dereliction of duty, AND active engagement with rivals.
Etc.
__
And, I mean, "cheating" ALSO means the same thing.
If you have to run extra laps as a penalty after sports practice... "cheating" isn't running even MORE laps for another coach. Cheating is NOT running the laps you're supposed to run.
Etc.
Like, it's actually weird to me that people so commonly dfine infidelity/cheating in such a one-sided way.
ESPECIALLY
because LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE IMPORTANT in a rl is regarded by default as a **compromise**. Like, literally absolutely everything.
One person feels like the other doesn't do enough around the house? ... compromise, meet in the middle
One person doesn't feel spntaneous enough, but the other thinks there should be even more planning? ... compromise, meet in the middle
One person thinks the other starts TOO many "talks", while the other feels starved for communication? ... compromise, meet in the middle
Like...
srsly
It's fucked up that this is literally THE ONLY MAJOR THING where compromise is simply **not expected** by, well, just about anyone.
Imagine if I applied the same logic to ANY of those other things. Like the communication thing -- "Srry sweet cheeks, yr partner just isn't mentally equipped to talk about the rl more than once a year. You'll just have to adjust. You'll do it if you REALLY love her/him."
Or the housework thing, or the ANYTHING thing. It'd be ridicu
lous smh.
Like, rlly, I wonder how we got to a point where literally THE ONE THING YOU AREN'T SUPPOSED TO GET FROM ANYONE ELSE (= sex) ... so, theoretically, that should be the MOST important compromise, right? -- somehow got to be the one thing that DOESN'T have to be a compromise, and where the person with greater needs is just, well, screwed. (Ahah the irony of "screwed" or "fucked" here)
Tf srsly.
@redeyemindtricks That reminds me, I should say "cheating is having sex behind your partner's back". Swinging isn't my thing, but it works for some people.
"somehow got to be the one thing that DOESN'T have to be a compromise, and where the person with greater needs is just, well, screwed."
Emotion is not driven by logic - this is clearly an emotion-packed situation, one should not and try to logically dissect it. It's an issue of compatibility.
.. so if you're not fucking like I'm fucking then get the fuck out! .. [C. Rock]
Seriously speaking, it's too difficult for me to wrap my head around. I haven't lived together with a woman for half a century [read: 5 years] to relate to it. I can theorycraft it, but I would base it on logic, making my arguments redundant.
Well, like, duhhh I know people are not fundamentally logical. It's not like I'm entirely -- or even mostly -- logical, either. lol.
But nonetheless... When people approach LITERALLY EVERYTHING BUT ONE THING in fundamentally the same way, but then that ONE thing is treated completely differently... there's usually a whole series of clearly identifiable reasons behind that. In fact, there almost ALWAYS is.
That's why I am wondering about this. Because in general, most peopel are either (a) basically consistent across the board, or (b) completely situational, case-by-case about basicallly everything.
This is a case of (a) -- except this one single thing. It's so weird.
@redeyemindtricks Hey, for some people it's enough for them to see their "SO" literally [has to be the word of the day] eating from the same plate with someone else other than them :D [not even kidding, seen this shit play out in front of my eyes, fortunately, as a spectator.]
Perhaps, consistency across the board [except sex] is coincidental and only (b) applies. Suitably, our case by case decisions would seem to be in tune with some form of logic, which may or may not be consistent. Treatment of sex being the iconsistent bit. See how this goes haywire the moment you attempt to apply logic? :D
Where you going, bae?
Your sister called, she wants to get fucked.
I mean sure, lol. Conveniently, I'm not particularly "logical" nor have I ever been considered particularly "smart"... so I'm not constrained by those things.
(I always lol when people say "That's a logical fallacy" as though that actually DEFEATS an argument. Like, as if that's something that matters at all to more than 0.05% of people. This is the biggest reason why people who carry around the "smart" reputation are... almost always horrible at persuading anyone of anything -- because somehow they've gotten all the way to adulthood thinking that arguments are supposed to be "logical".
Double lol when they do this for arguments ABOUT EMOTIONS. Like really guys? But yeah, they do that.)
@redeyemindtricks
Logic is a fixed formal system [this well get hairy very quickly] that has rules. It's not your fault if you have never got familiar with actual logic. You may catch a glimpse of this discipline at www.youtube.com/watch
should you be interested :)
As for arguments. It depends on situation [see, (b) does apply :) ] and kind of person you are dealing with. You will not convince me, for instance, by abusing logical fallacies, I will catch any and every logical mistake you make, because I am trained to do so. It's my job, I have to be logically sound to make decisions involving huge amounts of money on a daily basis.
.. but I only apply that when it matters or when I want to be annoying or a troll.
Regardless, being logically sound is preferable, for then you would convince the people whose opinion is more valuable [and these people do constitute a healthy chunk of nation-wide if not local population].
@redeyemindtricks
"This is the biggest reason why people who carry around the "smart" reputation are... almost always horrible at persuading anyone of anything"
Not precisely sure what you mean by "smart" reputation. I would distinguish between the ones that are wannabeish and those that really "know their shit".
Persuasion a. k. a people skills is actually a consequence of logic. The "smart" people you are talking about seem to be familiar with only the basis of logic, not its consequences.
Pointdexter has finished xD XD
No if any problem goes on a relationship... They could discuss it properly & make a good solution
amen, good job
nope, never. If you're unhappy in a relationship then talk your problems over or leave
CheAting is never justified. Break it off with the person first or divorce them
Do two wrongs make a right? No.
two wrongs doesn't make a right but three rights make a left
In relationships no, in video games maybe