The term "cheating" is erroneous and stupid, and no one should use it.


I expect to get some peoples' feathers in a ruffle with this one, sadly; can't be helped. It is what it is.

The term "cheating" is erroneous and stupid, and no one should use it.

Why? What is ^ that supposed to mean? Girl has sex with guy who isn't her boyfriend/husband/significant other, that's cheating, right? Guy has sex with girl that isn't his girlfriend/wife/significant other, that's cheating, right?

Why no? Well, it's complicated, as are many things in life. The easy answer is that life, relationships, sexual desires, physical attraction, are not normally black & white-- they're generally rather grey. To use the term "cheat" implies that there are, well... rules. If you cheat on a test, it is to get you an advantage (getting a higher/passing grade) that you wouldn't have otherwise gained without looking at someone else's paper when the teacher's back is turned. If you cheat at the board game Monopoly, it is to get an advantage in either money or property that you could not reasonably have gotten had you followed the rules and not moved ahead three spaces when the other players weren't looking. Because if you could have gotten it by following the rules, in either of those instances, why would you do it at all? Why circumvent the rules?

What am I getting at? Well, simply put: Romance does not have any rules (we're not talking about criminal elements here like domestic violence or sexual assault; this topic is only about non-violent and consensual stuff). Romance, sex, physical attraction, etc. are constantly being fretted over and over-analyzed by people both male and female every day, a million times a minute. There is no interpretation of the rules of Chess or Risk or Stratego-- they're written there on the page in the game box and either you follow them or you don't, and if you don't follow them but the other players do, that's cheating. To imply that relationships have rules is to imply that there is some overlord to it all, some mastermind that says what gets to fly and what does not, and that's crap. "Well aren't some rules inherent and unspoken?" you may ask. And I would argue that... well, no, not really. Respect your partner(s), love them, and don't physically hurt each other, and try not to emotionally hurt them either. That's about it. But that last one comes with a caveat...

Notice, hopefully-- I said "try not to hurt each other emotionally." No one wants to feel pain, not really, outside of controlled kinks or whatever like spanking or BDSM. I sure don't, and most other people don't either, right? Physical or otherwise? Well what if some inherent desire of yours, even one that's actually quite normal, would be something that would emotionally hurt your partner, and you know it? Such as the very, very normal desire due to evolutionary biology -- especially for most guys-- to want to have sex with several people at once, like a threesome? Or to have multiple partners? Should you force yourself to shield those desires, tamp them down beneath all the layers of being a "normal" day-to-day everyperson in order to please everyone but yourself? Your partner especially? Well... no. You shouldn't. And you shouldn't because you will simply end up winding down a path of frustration that you are not getting what you want out of life. We all only have one life to live.

How does this relate to "cheating?" Simply that people "cheat" due to being unhappy with something. They are not satisfied in their relationship. They aren't satisfied with just one person. They aren't satisfied with the sex. They aren't satisfied with the attention or affection they're getting, and so seek it elsewhere. It is


for people to want to have sex with other people, not just one. Especially guys to want to have sex with other girls, because that's what having a dick and lots of testosterone have designed us for. If this was a Take about why girls want to reproduce so badly and get baby fever and want to settle down due to their evolutionary biology, most people wouldn't bat an eye. But as guys, wanting lots of girls is seen as immature or trifling nonsense, when it's not.

Here's the part where most of you who are already annoyed by the title and have only gotten more progressively annoyed as you read-- since people these days aren't used to actually reading things that challenge them and that they don't already agree with-- are saying "Cool man, have sex with whoever you want and however many you want, as long as you're HONEST AND UP FRONT ABOUT IT." And, sure, that makes sense... at least, before you scrutinize it. Telling a girl that you like (or guy for that matter) on your first meeting that you think the mindset that strict monogamy is *supposed to be* the default for the human race (despite all the evidence to the contrary) is actually weak bullshit, and that people should be freer with being able to have sex with other people, well... no one is going to give you the time of day. She, your date, will be like "Oh cool this guy's a pig or a 'player'" or whatever else.

But think about it: Do girls who want to get married or who want a serious relationship (which is almost all of them) tell the dude on THE FIRST DATE as they casually grace the blueberry sorbet that, by the way, they want a ring within a year? Or else, there's no point in us going out on a second date? Uh, no. They don't. Because that is a surefire way to get the guy to fucking RUN AWAY AS FAST AS HE CAN. Why do you think that is? And why, in that instance, is *female* silence--holding her cards, so to speak-- on an important romantic/sexual matter something that isn't a big deal, but *male* silence on a different but similar matter is seen as shitty? We really believe that people are supposed to talk about their deepest sexual desires on a first or second date? How incredibly unrealistic and naive is that ideology? I guess it's possible, I mean it probably has happened, maybe, at some point, with some people, but it's incredibly rare and not something most people are going to do. People naturally hide some of their cards; they hide some of their desires out of fear of unnerving the other party.


What is the takeaway from this? Well simply that monogamy doesn't have to be the default, but since people *think it does,* that leads people up front to not be altogether honest with each others' innermost deep desires. "WELL THAT'S DUMB STILL BE HONEST OR YOU SUCK OMGWTFBBQ KLAHDHS &(Q^(T!!!1!" is what some peoples' reactions online seem to be, and that's all very well and dumb, but if they're honest with themselves about all the times they haven't been honest at every single juncture in life, since total honesty at all times 100% by everyone about everything is not possible or sustainable, they'll realize that they're being silly. An inherent desire for monogamy to not be the default is what leads some guys and gals to have sex with people who are not their significant other. Or, "it's complicated."

"But @Thatsamazing, are you actually arguing for alleged dishonesty?" Nooo, I'm not arguing for dishonesty; people should be able to be honest with each other about what they want. But that's just the issue: People often can't be honest about what they want with their partner because the vast majority Bell Curve of partners wants to sexually own their other partner like property, which is unhealthy unless it's something both people are into, like a kink or something. But despite being unhealthy (cough, jealousy, cough), people do it in spades, because people often are not logical about romantic matters.

Semantics; why does this matter?

Is this all just semantics then? Yes and no. Would a better term for "cheat," since there are no rules, be instead "Having sex with someone who isn't your significant other?" Well... actually yeah that would a lot better. So, say that instead. WHY DOES THIS MATTER? Because over time, without the unnecessary stigma associated with the word "cheating," hopefully we will end up closer to a world in which people are more freely able to flirt and be fun and open with and have sex with more than one person, and have more open sexual discussions with their partners-- sexual dissatisfaction is a large component in breakups and even divorce according to some studies I've read, and though there are other factors present as well usually, why not eliminate that one as best as we can?

If you disagree and actually have substantive reasons for doing so, please leave comments below.

~ Thaaaanks. Hugs and kisses.

The term "cheating" is erroneous and stupid, and no one should use it.
Add Opinion

Most Helpful Guy

  • Haaps
    Not saying I agree with it but If someone want to be polyamorous under certain set rules, that's their own business, but having these mental gymnastics to try and rationalize cheating in a monogamous relationship as a normal part of life because "we can't control our sexual feelings so we should just have sex with whoever since it will be better for everyone and remove the stigma" is just lazy and wrong.

    I have met many people who think like you that try and justify this kind of position and it doesn't go without running into objective problems. The reality is people are naturally pair bonding and a monogamous relationship built on trust and exclusivity between two people is by far the healthiest and most effective and for society throughout history. Yes, people have sexual desires and thoughts, but does simply following listening to them whenever they pop up mean that's the right choice or you'll be better off? Of course not! That doesn't mean suppress those feelings but be honest with yourself and your partner and handle them in a healthy way.

    Romance DOES have certain rules and each couple can set their own, but not wanting to follow and and calling it all crap at the end of the day makes it blatantly obvious you're trying to justify having as much sex as possible without any repercussions.
    Is this still revelant?
    • It's really not lazy, and it's really not wrong. Normal human behavior that doesn't physically harm others needs to stop being classified as wrong. No, desiring multiple people-- not just one-- for the rest of your life isn't wrong. People need to open up.

      "... you're trying to justify having as much sex as possible without any repercussions." Um... yeah. Duh. That's the point. And so should more people.

Most Helpful Girl

  • Some_Goof
    People who want to have multiple partners should be in polyamorous relationship. Or at least have an open relationship.
    Having multiple partners is not what we call cheating... betraying your partner, breaking their trust and loyalty, doing something behind their back is what we call cheating. If your partner is okay with you being with someone else, it wouldn't be considered cheating.
    Is this still revelant?

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

  • Lightning8
    Just look for people who are also polygamous/polyamorous. If you want to do the extra work of being with a person who wants serial monogamy, i. e. most people, while you're polygamous, you could give it shot if you really want; because I do believe serial monogamy does employ the "multiple people" element like polygamy, as it tries to somewhat superficially reconcile certain aspects of human nature (think consumerism) with a now residual social enforcement/stigma.

    What I will say is that your example where you compare a woman holding her cards for marraige to a man holding his cards for polygamy doesn't hold weight. Put simply, how can anyone know they want to marry their someone on the first date? However, you can know that you have a sexual attraction for someone on the first date.

    Anyone woman or man can say either yes or no to a proposal, yet that often doesn't mean the relationship is over if there is no engagement. As long as it stays monogamous, then the relationship can continue.

    Polygamy, or "cheating", or "infidelity" is something that can happen outside of your partner's consent even in open relationships. Remember that consent is the difference between sex and rape. So it matters a lot. Plus you can come home with an std without even knowing who it came from. The root problem here is betrayal. That's what makes you immoral in any relationship.

    Another thing is, one innate trait of humans that you're missing which supports monogamy is our pair bonding systems. It lasts about 20 years or so and it's essentially responsible for love. It gave our evolution a huge lift as it kept many fathers connected and close to their children.

    One person for life (I'll add barring abuse or very serious betrayal or cheating) is something that has to be built like a house, or airplane. But it's possible if you want it, not unlike a polyamorous/polygamous/open relationship in that way. There is evidence in human nature for and against on both sides; it's about which kind of life you choose. Just own it and be honest about it. If you worry about being seen as a player or slut, think about why that is. Honestly I don't know if there is a very substantial difference, it depends how you define these terms.
    • Regarding the marriage cards thing, I think you would be well-served by spending more time around groups of females when you're the only male present, or listening more to female talk radio or podcasts or whatever. I'm not crazy here, man. And as far as the pair bonding thing goes, it has nothing to do with sexual desire-- people still desire other sexual partners during that time. People get divorced during that time period *all the time,* and often it is due to sexual incompatibility. The female expects the male to be her sexual property and not desire any other females, and he doesn't feel the same way. People break up. I think we both know it's true.

    • Well, cheating happens in virtually every species of animal, monogamous or not. It's even in birds to a lesser degree than humans. This doesn't mean sexual desire has nothing to do with pair bonding. They're inherently connected. Desire comes from looking upon something you don't have. But as highly intelligent animals, I honestly don't think we need to go outside our relationship for that.

    • Yeah, know what that means? It means that the term "cheating" is erroneous and stupid and no one should use it. It means that we're complaining about something natural, that we think hurts us, but it only hurts us because we allow it to. It's normal human behavior.

    • Show All
  • Cammy137
    • Yay I'm special.

      You're essentially arguing that humans shouldn't be human-- I'm arguing that arguing that is pointless, since humans are human, and humans are animals. It's not logical to say that certain other animalistic aspects of sexuality (girls liking being submissive, males liking being dominant, girls wanting to be pursued, males wanting to DO the pursuing, etc.) are okay and fine, but then oh yeah monogamous sexual relationships should be the norm. Um... sure they should. That must be why half of marriages fail, a huge portion of which are because of a loss of sexual gratification/attraction/etc. Not related at all, I'm sure.

      Sigh. The only "haven't we EVOLVED over the last 10,000 years?" thing that matters is "yes-- we shouldn't be violent and kill each other just because we're mad at someone." If it's not related to hate and physical violence, it's not as big a problem as people make it out to be. People need to accept and understand the part of themselves, and others, that says "I don't just want to have sex with one person the rest of my life." And hey if magically you do, and that works out for you, then great-- it doesn't work for about half of all people.

  • Liam_Hayden
    If you've agreed to be monogamous and are not, that to me is cheating, a violation of a promise. The problem I encounter is taking a girl out on a couple of dates and her assuming that it means we are now a couple, then freaking out when she sees me talk to another girl.
    • The point of the Take is that huge numbers of people, especially guys, don't WANT to be monogamous and just say they do because society expects it, even though they shouldn't. That leads to these misunderstandings.

  • Ámayas_20
    You miss the point entirely, relationships do have rules most have the rule of no romantic or sexual activity with other people, so cheating works.
  • VaIiant
    Talk when you stop trying to catfish. We all know that photo isn't you, google reverse honey.
    • Oh honey... you again? With the obsessing-over-peoples'-profile-pics thing? You're fascinating.

    • VaIiant

      Hard not to, anon-ymous1, when you’re using someone else’s picture

  • MysteriousDarkness
    Assuming you are attracted to women.
    What would you do if multiple women got pregnant that uou had sex with? What if they all end up taking you to paternity court and it comes out you are the father of all babies?
    • I would suggest using condoms and only having sex with chicks who are on the pill so that that doesn't happen at all in the first place.

    • @Thatsamazing
      The condom could break and the woman could not have taken the pill.

    • Right, except I would require both, meaning if she's not on the pill, I'm not going to fuck her.

    • Show All
  • Purple_Summer
    Your opinion is just your opinion. Cheating is doing sexual things with someone new when you promised to be faithful. If you with your partner agree to be polygamous then the term cheating would be stupid. For those who agree only to be with eachother the ''term'' cheating is very accurate to describe if one of them strays. You can think everyone should sleep with everyone and never commit to just one person, but again that's just your opinion, many people are happy in monogamous relationships, they might find others attractive but they don't go sniffing others privates like dogs. Ability and desire to be in a monogamous and meaningful relationship is what separates an intellectual human from basic animal. You should write a new mytake on monogamy if you disagree, but the word cheating is simply to describe betrayal of trust, it's an accurate term and I don't think that's your core issue.
    • "what separates an intellectual human from basic animal" No.

    • Yeah.

    • Well... no. You saying a thing doesn't make it true. Sorry. Humans are animals. Quite literally. Deny reality if you must; I don't understand the purpose of that but hey, whatever. We have flat-Earthers and anti-vaxxers too so I guess nothing surprises me now.

    • Show All
  • DaMack999
    Well there is 2 problems with this scenario. 1) Moral grounds of international law of human kind. Any where you go. Any country you go. It doesn't matter who you dare to want marry. There is no law that will allow you to just act like animal. Hump who ever you see fit because I feel like it and I don't have to answer to anyone. That's not only immoral but degrading to human kind. We're logical and rational humans. We don't do things just cause I want feel good but because we're adults, were responsible, we use our brain rather then out biological body to sleep with everyone. Let me ask you. Your body wants to eat everything it wants are you gonna follow your body? Your body wants to use all kinds drugs and ellicite things you're just gonna follow it? Or you will say hey there is line between our human moral code of conduct and that of an animal. We should separate them. Otherwise if you want act like a dog and breed everyone your eye meets good luck. Paying child support. Because in real worlf there are consequences to our actions wheather you may like it or not. Or ignore or not.
    • Um... humans are animals, dude. I don't think you're quite grasping the situation, sorry.

    • DaMack999

      Go eat shit like pig then lol dumb ass. Or fuck ur mom. U said ur animal. Wow

    • Mmm... yes, "wow" indeed. I'm hoping that you can tell us more. You're clearly highly educated.

  • DavidHart
    Great writings.
    Even though some of it don't agree but mostly i do agree.
    And i do believe Male (s) are polygamous by nature whereas Female is monogamous by nature.
    Good information i've got here.
  • localwelshlesbian
    So say you’re in a relationship and your partner had sex with another person what would you call that
    • I would call it "you had sex with someone that isn't me," because that's what it is.

    • That’s called cheating

    • ... I think you should probably read (since I doubt you did at all) ^ what I wrote up there, or if you indeed did read it, you should probably reread it, since you clearly didn't understand it the first time.

  • sensible27
    Don't monogamous relationships have rules though?
    • There are no "rules," other than what people decide to make. That's the point.

    • "there are certain unspoken rules to love and they must be learnt silently"

    • Yeah that's not good or healthy.

    • Show All
  • Anonymous
    Cheaters are cheaters. Just as how manwhores are manwhores, sluts are sluts. Just cause you don't like the word doesn't really matter. Reality's reality.

    Cause, all in all, you're saying it's okay to be too lazy to find yourself a decent partner or be so lowbrow you can't even respect the other person you're with? Mannn your parents must be proud. Seriously. Your mentality is one I saw constantly in the lower working social classes & specifically in the welfare class of society. Fact, last town I worked a contract medical job for, you'd fit in like a T & that place was welfare alley.

    There's an old saying - birds of a feather flock together - and ultimately cheaters only attract other cheaters & people of low standards. It's to be expected. Most decent folk looking for more than basics don't want to be bothered with cheaters. And people of low standards will take whatever they can get even if it's the scrapings off the bottom of the barrel (the dregs).
    • There's no such thing as a "manwhore." But anyway.

      I don't think you actually read the myTake here, so... try again once you have?

    • Anonymous

      @Thatsamazing - Manwhore - male slut. You can google more than the local strip club hours, can't you?
      As for your "Take". I did. It's as stupid & pathetic as people justifying open relationships because they've "consent" from a partner who couldn't give a fuck because they're screwing the neighborhood too or from a doormat that knows they'd cheat/screw around anywhy and nothing said will change it.

    • ... There is no such thing as a "male slut." A "slut" is a female who has a high number of guys who have fucked her, by definition. Males are allowed to have as much sex as we want. We're literally supposed to. Blame God or the universe or evolution or whatever if you don't like that, not us.

      As to the rest of your rambling ^ right there, it's entirely beside the point. You're purposely trying to ignore the fact that what I said is correct-- people, especially males, want to have sex with more than one person for the rest of their life and sexual monogamy is not only unnatural, but stupid. This is what leads to people having sex with people who are not their significant others. Again, if you don't like that, blame who you should blame-- God, evolution, or the universe. Not me.

    • Show All
  • Anonymous
    Good writing, but I admit it's not my thing.
    My current girlfriend is pushing for a poly relationship with a girl who likes us both but I'm considering dumping her and cut them off my life.
    Maybe I'm an asshole but this situation is putting undue anxiety on me and I don't deserve it.
    They claim they love me but I see a trap or screw up honestly.
    • If it's a trap then yeah she deserves to be broken up with because that's stupid. If it seems genuine then that's fine though. However, if you're not interested, hey, you're not interested. Do you not find this other girl attractive?

    • Anonymous

      She is attractive, but I don't feel much connection and I'm quite anxious and shy around her