# GNO or BNO



## love=pain

What's the difference?

Ladies if your man was going out drinking with his friends where there are lots of single girls how would you feel?

I bring this point up because many times the GNO is portrayed as an innocent activity yet ladies you are going out to the same bars as the men and you know what goes on there.

When the guys go out the term on the prowl or looking for some strange, basically a negative thought comes to mind. Am I wrong?

So what makes the GNO any better, women are no more trustworthy then men so why do they expect to get treated differently.

I started this thread because there have been a few other threads about GNO or the wife attending a work function at a bar and the air of innocence about these activities, I just don't understand. 

To me a GNO is like bringing the chickens to the fox den instead of the fox raiding the chicken coop either way someone's getting eaten.


----------



## The Middleman

There's no room for GNO's or BNO's in a marriage. Period. No good can ever come from them.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Another GNO thread. For some reason I never tire of these. 

I think it really depends on the individuals. When I got married my wife and I used to go out separately all the time to clubs/lounges/bars. A lot of our friends were single then. My wife could handle herself just fine. I on the other hand could not. 

If you're the type who needs the affirmation of seeing if you've still got it. Going out to clubs and bars without your spouse is a really bad idea. I'm brutally honest with myself these days and I accept that there are just some things other people can do that I can't.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

The Middleman said:


> There's no room for GNO's or BNO's in a marriage. Period. No good can ever come from them.


That's a really black and white statement. Pretty rigid views you have there. I've always been a part of GNO's and NEVER ONCE had a problem or had it cause an issue with my marriage. Maybe it's the fact that some women aren't looking for a reason to cheat, flirt or find another man. I go downtown with my girls once a month or more, (H drives me both ways, isn't that nice?) and we dance our A$$es off and have a great time. We're also in a large enough group and we all have each others back if a man were to try anything with any one of us.

Nothing is ever black and white in marriage. Every relationship has their own dynamic. I certainly would NEVER worry if my H went out with the boys, but considering they're geeks and meet at the Waffle House, it's a moot point.


----------



## love=pain

ReformedHubby said:


> Another GNO thread. For some reason I never tire of these.
> 
> If you're the type who needs the affirmation of seeing if you've still got it. Going out to clubs and bars without your spouse is a really bad idea. I'm brutally honest with myself these days and I accept that there are just some things other people can do that I can't.


HaHa I am with you the only one I worry about impressing is at home, I am too old, too tired and I just don't care about anyone else. Besides if you put me at a bar I am going to drink like a pig at a trough that's why I want her there she can drive me home.


----------



## love=pain

hopelessromantic1 said:


> That's a really black and white statement. Pretty rigid views you have there. I've always been a part of GNO's and NEVER ONCE had a problem or had it cause an issue with my marriage. Maybe it's the fact that some women aren't looking for a reason to cheat, flirt or find another man. I go downtown with my girls once a month or more, (H drives me both ways, isn't that nice?) and we dance our A$$es off and have a great time. We're also in a large enough group and we all have each others back if a man were to try anything with any one of us.
> 
> Nothing is ever black and white in marriage. Every relationship has their own dynamic. I certainly would NEVER worry if my H went out with the boys, but considering they're geeks and meet at the Waffle House, it's a moot point.


I applaud you, both you and your husband trust each other and have boundaries, unfortunately for those of us who have been betrayed grey areas just don't work very well.
I used to let my wife go out whenever no problem until... now that is not an option, on the rare occasions I went out it was Sat or Sun daytime to watch a game most of the sports bars have so many tv's you can't see any girls anyhow. 
Now I don't go out without her (didn't go much anyhow once or twice a year) I believe if I have a problem with her going out I should be held to that same standard.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

love=pain said:


> I applaud you, both you and your husband trust each other and have boundaries, unfortunately for those of us who have been betrayed grey areas just don't work very well.
> I used to let my wife go out whenever no problem until... now that is not an option, on the rare occasions I went out it was Sat or Sun daytime to watch a game most of the sports bars have so many tv's you can't see any girls anyhow.
> Now I don't go out without her (didn't go much anyhow once or twice a year) I believe if I have a problem with her going out I should be held to that same standard.


Had you said GNO/BNO regarding those who had been unfaithful, I would have totally agreed...If you've lost trust in someone, sending them out to a bar to get inebriated is a completely different story. I wouldn't do it either.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Once, at work, I heard a man say about his girlfriend, "she's going out tonight. If she can go out with her girlfriends, I can go out with mine." Really struck me and made me think.


----------



## love=pain

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Had you said GNO/BNO regarding those who had been unfaithful, I would have totally agreed...If you've lost trust in someone, sending them out to a bar to get inebriated is a completely different story. I wouldn't do it either.


I was more responding to some other threads on here today about GNO or the wife attending an event without the husband, my feelings and situation are not the reason for starting this thread. Either way the point still seems valid a bno at a bar seems to be viewed negatively while a gno is not.


----------



## Lordhavok

I've known three couples that has allowed this in their marriage, all three are divorced because of it. Keep throwing yourselves to the wolves, you'll eventually be eaten.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

love=pain said:


> I was more responding to some other threads on here today about GNO or the wife attending an event without the husband, my feelings and situation are not the reason for starting this thread. Either way the point still seems valid a bno at a bar seems to be viewed negatively while a gno is not.


I never did understand people who are married and think that one thing is okay for them, but not their spouse. (GNO being ok but BNO not) That only builds resentment and anger. 

I had a GNO last weekend, and my friend's H was having his BNO at the same time, so neither would be left alone. We all ended up at the same club at one point, it was pretty great. Not everyone is as cool as them though.


----------



## Married but Happy

There is no difference between a GNO and BNO. The only things that's different is the individuals present, their attitudes and maturity. Most are good, responsible people, but of course some groups have one or more "bad apples."

We have no problem with each other going out with friends, and for most people this is a healthy way to maintain connections with those friends.


----------



## sh987

This makes me think of something I heard/read a counselor say when asked if their clients' marriage was in trouble. His answer was "every marriage is in trouble".

I'm just not sure I see how the pros outweigh the cons when it comes to one half of a couple going out to hit the club scene, mixed in with friends, some of whom are single or married and perhaps not in a good place in their relationship, and meeting up with other members of the opposite sex, some of whom are single or married and not in a good place in their relationship. It's a recipe where the best that can happen is a bit of fun, and where the worst is the complete derailment of a marriage and/or family, with pain for all for the rest of their lives. There's just too much to risk, IMO. The world is full of cheaters who always said "I would never cheat!" before they went and did it.

I have no problem with my wife getting together with her girlfriends, or having a drink... Thing is, they do it by getting together at a GF's house, which is an infinitely safer environment, in all conceivable ways. She has her fun, she sees her friends and can giggle and laugh and talk about how I leave my socks on the floor, and she does it in a way that is respectful.

All of this goes equally the other way around, as far as I'm concerned. I knew a guy at work years ago. Nice guy. Easy to talk to. Smart, funny, and could be a cool dude and clearly wanted to be friends, as we had similar hobbies, interest in sports, etc. I also found out he was a serial philanderer, told my wife, and told her at the same time that I wouldn't be hanging out with him. How good would it make her feel if I was going out for a BNO with somebody who behaves like that?


----------



## Davelli0331

I have to wonder what threads you're looking at where GNOs are painted as innocent. GNOs are one of the reasons I came to TAM over two years ago and they've always been painted as Acts Of Satan.

It's just another one of those things on TAM that over the course of anecdotal repetitions becomes enshrined as one of TAM's Guidelines For Successful Marriages but that doesn't really have much practical application IRL because it's far too generalized.


----------



## Anon Pink

love=pain said:


> What's the difference?
> 
> Ladies if your man was going out drinking with his friends where there are lots of single girls how would you feel?
> 
> I bring this point up because many times the GNO is portrayed as an innocent activity yet ladies you are going out to the same bars as the men and you know what goes on there.
> 
> When the guys go out the term on the prowl or looking for some strange, basically a negative thought comes to mind. Am I wrong?
> 
> So what makes the GNO any better, women are no more trustworthy then men so why do they expect to get treated differently.
> 
> I started this thread because there have been a few other threads about GNO or the wife attending a work function at a bar and the air of innocence about these activities, I just don't understand.
> 
> To me a GNO is like bringing the chickens to the fox den instead of the fox raiding the chicken coop either way someone's getting eaten.


Ugh, another GNO thread! Complete with dire warnings and irrefutable proof that a GNO is a one way ticket to infidelity! Double UGH!

There are lots of ways for a couple to have time with the girls or boys at a club or other bar and keep the chicken safe from the fox!

When I go out with the girls, someone's husband usually picks us up, if it's more than just a happy hour meet up.

My husband doesn't go "out" with the boys but if he did, I wouldn't have any problems with it. Frankly, he spent so many years being a total stick in the mud I would have loved to see him go out! And I wouldn't have any problems with him going to a nudie bar for a special occasion. He's too cheap to pay for a lap dance and he would never buy a "dancer" a champale! But he would come home hot and horny so...not seeing a downside here. 

I am not threatened by the presence of younger hotter women and I LIKE that he is not threatened by the presence of other men who might look at me.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

hopelessromantic1 said:


> That's a really black and white statement. Pretty rigid views you have there. I've always been a part of GNO's and NEVER ONCE had a problem or had it cause an issue with my marriage. Maybe it's the fact that some women aren't looking for a reason to cheat, flirt or find another man. I go downtown with my girls once a month or more, (H drives me both ways, isn't that nice?) and we dance our A$$es off and have a great time. We're also in a large enough group and we all have each others back if a man were to try anything with any one of us.
> 
> Nothing is ever black and white in marriage. Every relationship has their own dynamic. I certainly would NEVER worry if my H went out with the boys, but considering they're geeks and meet at the Waffle House, it's a moot point.


Marriages have to have boundaries, but yeah it's no one else's business what those are except for the two partners. Curious though - do you dance with men, sit down and have a drink with them, let them buy you a drink etc??


----------



## hopelessromantic1

nuclearnightmare said:


> Curious though - do you dance with men, sit down and have a drink with them, let them buy you a drink etc??


HELL NO. I dance with my girls, drink with my girls and no men buy us drinks, unless it's the bartender who knows one of us. Why is it so hard for people to understand that for some, it TRULY is a Girls Night Out. I get enough "man" at home; I don't go out looking for attention, or even accepting attention if it were proposed to me.


----------



## 2ntnuf

> (H drives me both ways, isn't that nice?)


Hmmm. That is nice of him.

Edit: I was wondering, after thinking about this. Isn't this controlling and abusive? Maybe it's so you don't drive under the influence and get into an accident? My bad. Sorry.


----------



## sh987

hopelessromantic1 said:


> HELL NO. I dance with my girls, drink with my girls and no men buy us drinks, unless it's the bartender who knows one of us. *Why is it so hard for people to understand that for some, it TRULY is a Girls Night Out.* I get enough "man" at home; I don't go out looking for attention, or even accepting attention if it were proposed to me.


To be fair, it's because for some women, GNO is an opportunity to have their ego stroked. It's a chance to feel attractive when men want to dance with her, proposition her and buy her drinks. 

From what you're saying, you're more centered than that, and respectful of the boundaries which exist, but for more than a few, that's not the case.


----------



## Anon Pink

sh987 said:


> To be fair, it's because for some women, GNO is an opportunity to have their ego stroked. It's a chance to feel attractive when men want to dance with her, proposition her and buy her drinks. .


I have to say, I identify with this. My husband doesn't do compliments. He just doesn't know what to say, when to say...as if it's rocket science! He was never affectionate, and spent the bulk of his time at home closed off. Hell yes the allure of getting attention from men is indeed powerful and ego stroking! HOWEVER!!!!! This doesn't mean that dancing with a man turned into a make out session, or numbers exchanged, or clothing removed! I just don't understand how that leap is made so damn easily!

Our marriage is better now, he is getting much better with affection but no change in compliments. I have a GNO scheduled for a few days after Christmas. I intend to have as much fun as I normally have, dance as much as I normally dance.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

2ntnuf said:


> Hmmm. That is nice of him.
> 
> Edit: I was wondering, after thinking about this. Isn't this controlling and abusive? Maybe it's so you don't drive under the influence and get into an accident? My bad. Sorry.


I don't know the "motive" but it sure is nice to text him at 2am and say "ok come get me" and then he drives me home and typically reaps the rewards of being a nice guy because I'm drunk and horny LOL


----------



## Pault

For a while I was OK with My W having a GNO. Then after 3 years of monthy GNOs I became aware that things were not good. out of 4 girls My W married, another in a LTR and 2 singles. The texting got to be 5 hours a night, the bank account got strained and the single life took over. In the end I lost the plot and had to fafe her up to her marridge vows. Im still not sure if there was anything going on - Ive till to be assured 100% that things were ok.

It does depaend on the group. To many singles in the group and teh pressures on. To much freedom and not enough boundries = ticking bomb.
IMO of course.


----------



## Cletus

My wife of 27 years goes on out GNO about once a month.

I think it mostly revolves around conversations over sciatica and what brand hair color looks the most natural. 

Not only am I not threatened by it, I wouldn't want to be within a country mile. I think she's going to be a little sad when I come home and tell her to cease and desist, since it's a sign of a dysfunctional marriage, but hey, can't be afraid of the ol' lady.

Sometimes it happens at a place called "Maggie's Buns". Shoulda guessed something ontoward was going on.


----------



## 2ntnuf

FrenchFry said:


> It's a nice way to ensure it doesn't happen and cuts down on cab costs.


Yeah, I was hoping someone would realize some things are up to interpretation and perspective. If you were not in love, you may think it abusive or controlling. When in love, it's protective and loving. 

Just giving an example of that with my quote.


----------



## sh987

Anon Pink said:


> I have to say, I identify with this. My husband doesn't do compliments. He just doesn't know what to say, when to say...as if it's rocket science! He was never affectionate, and spent the bulk of his time at home closed off. Hell yes the allure of getting attention from men is indeed powerful and ego stroking! HOWEVER!!!!! This doesn't mean that dancing with a man turned into a make out session, or numbers exchanged, or clothing removed! I just don't understand how that leap is made so damn easily!
> 
> Our marriage is better now, he is getting much better with affection but no change in compliments. I have a GNO scheduled for a few days after Christmas. I intend to have as much fun as I normally have, dance as much as I normally dance.


I had meant to, additionally, say that while GNO is a chance to get that attention, the husband should be doing that already, leaving his wife just looking for fun and dancing with her girlfriends, rather than his wife realizing she can get that somewhere else. I don't mean that she'll cheat automatically, just that she's like anybody else: she likes to be noticed.

Give them what they want, because there's always somebody else quite happy to do it, even if just for one night.


----------



## AVR1962

My thought is that women do not always have the instant thought of sex and sexual thoughts when they see another man so a woman can enjoy a night out and maybe even have a dance with a man without her thoughts thinking of getting him in the sack. Generally speaking, I think women know what men want and so unless we are looking for that, we know how to have a good time and avoid it.

Men, I don't feel, have those same limitations to thought processes. When a man sees a girl he finds attractive (my opinion) it seems their first thought is sex, or sexual thoughts so a dance with a girl might not be as innocent. Or even if there is no dance involved, you go out with a group of guys and (sorry for my terms here) but it is almost like the dog pack and the vulgar comments go out and the guys have the eyes on target. Not the same on a GNO.


----------



## 2ntnuf

While I agree with that to some extent, AVR, how does that fit with conventional thinking about men and women being the same and equal? I'm just not sure about that. There have been too many threads about how women like looking at men and other similarities to just accept that; well, for me, at this time, anyway.


----------



## Anon Pink

2ntnuf said:


> While I agree with that to some extent, AVR, how does that fit with conventional thinking about men and women being the same and equal? I'm just not sure about that. There have been too many threads about how women like looking at men and other similarities to just accept that; well, for me, at this time, anyway.


Equal does not mean same.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

hopelessromantic1 said:


> HELL NO. I dance with my girls, drink with my girls and no men buy us drinks, unless it's the bartender who knows one of us. Why is it so hard for people to understand that for some, it TRULY is a Girls Night Out. I get enough "man" at home; I don't go out looking for attention, or even accepting attention if it were proposed to me.


It is hard for people to understand, because it is hard to believe.
But I'm fairly open minded. I imagine you are attractive. Do you dress sexy when you go out with your friends? If yes, why?
You and your friends choose to put yourselves in a major hook up environment when there any number of other things you guys could.

So yes, still not understanding here.....


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> Equal does not mean same.


Same boundaries; same standards of behavior.....


----------



## Davelli0331

It just depends on what exactly constitutes a GNO.

I don't think many men would have a problem with their Ws going out with a group of girlfriends to, say, dinner and a movie.

A lower but still sizable number of men I don't think would have a problem with their Ws going to, say, a movie and then drinks afterward. I go drinking with my friends and have yet to suddenly and through no fault of my own find myself in bed with someone else. Hell, I don't think I ever even speak to a woman when out drinking unless I happen to see a female coworker at the bar. And I go out drinking semi-regularly.

I don't particularly have a problem with my W going out dancing so long as it's with her GFs and we have an agreed upon time of return. Part of my comfort with this is that each and every time she goes my W practically begs me to come with her, and when I do, she's not doing anything that raises red flags for me. And I've even gone all secret squirrel and followed her when she's disappeared to "go get a drink" and, sure enough, that's what she was doing, even when she's been gone an inordinate amount of time.

In fact, now that I think on it, it usually works in my favor, bc when I go with her, she's dancing with her attractive friends, and frankly, that's hot. Then after a few drinks we go home and I take advantage of her.

Where I would draw the line, however, is with her dancing with men. That's a boundary for me.


----------



## Cosmos

love=pain said:


> What's the difference?
> 
> Ladies if your man was going out drinking with his friends where there are lots of single girls how would you feel?
> 
> I bring this point up because many times the GNO is portrayed as an innocent activity yet ladies you are going out to the same bars as the men and you know what goes on there.
> 
> When the guys go out the term on the prowl or looking for some strange, basically a negative thought comes to mind. Am I wrong?
> 
> So what makes the GNO any better, women are no more trustworthy then men so why do they expect to get treated differently.


BNO / GNO, if they take place in a similar environment, as far as I'm concerned they're the same.

For me, a GNO would involve drinks / dinner and a movie with friends. For my SO it would involve drinks at a local pub. Neither of us would feel comfortable going out clubbing whilst in a committed relationship.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

nuclearnightmare said:


> It is hard for people to understand, because it is hard to believe.
> But I'm fairly open minded. I imagine you are attractive. Thanks, I'm not medusa. But I'm no supermodel either, not one of those girls who the boys would be lining up to hit on at the bar. Do you dress sexy when you go out with your friends? If yes, why? Nope, I don't feel the need to, as I'm not there to draw unwanted attraction from the opposite sex. Last Friday I wore jeans and a long sweater that had NO cleavage, and converse. I didn't even remember to wear jewelry (gasp!)
> You and your friends choose to put yourselves in a major hook up environment when there any number of other things you guys could. Sure, this may be a problem if a woman is a giant hussy and is out looking for attention. Is it so hard to believe that women have morals and standards and are happy to be married and don't even notice men when they're out? Even if a man DID ask to buy me a drink or dance, I would politely decline and make a point to let him see the rock on my finger. Some of us DO have consciences and just aren't into entertaining the thought of cheating on our men. FYI.
> 
> So yes, still not understanding here.....


----------



## hopelessromantic1

Davelli0331 said:


> Where I would draw the line, however, is with her dancing with men. That's a boundary for me.


Me too, it's just creepy to me to think of dancing with another man, even if you weren't slow dancing. I think that's totally out of bounds. Did I mention creepy? LOL


----------



## treyvion

It's not just because there are members of the opposite sex there. It is because the BNO or GNO is centered around a actual meat market, which is designed for heavy alcohol consumption and "hook ups".

You take your married friend into the hedonistic eye of the storm and expect nothing to happen? Time and time and time again and add alcohol ontop still nothing?


----------



## treyvion

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Me too, it's just creepy to me to think of dancing with another man, even if you weren't slow dancing. I think that's totally out of bounds. Did I mention creepy? LOL


In some cultures dancing with men of the opposite sex is part of the culture. There is a way it's done respectfully, and even though it's close quarters there are boundaries which are meant to be respected.


----------



## norajane

For me, drinking, dancing and being around other people, including men, doesn't make me stop loving my SO and start wanting to bang somebody else. 

I can't speak for other people, although I can speak for the friends I go out with, we aren't interested in hooking up with anybody and aren't open to it, and are happy to go home to our guys, and that doesn't change just because we're in a bar without them. The bar doesn't suddenly transform us into cheaters, and in fact, I doubt any of us even notice the men there since we certainly don't spend time with them or talking about them.

My SO is free to go to bars with his friends without a hassle from me. Cheaters will cheat wherever and whenever. Others won't regardless of the circumstances.


----------



## treyvion

norajane said:


> For me, drinking, dancing and being around other people, including men, doesn't make me stop loving my SO and start wanting to bang somebody else.
> 
> I can't speak for other people, although I can speak for the friends I go out with, we aren't interested in hooking up with anybody and aren't open to it, and are happy to go home to our guys, and that doesn't change just because we're in a bar without them. The bar doesn't suddenly transform us into cheaters, and in fact, I doubt any of us even notice the men there since we certainly don't spend time with them or talking about them.
> 
> My SO is free to go to bars with his friends without a hassle from me. Cheaters will cheat wherever and whenever. Others won't regardless of the circumstances.


People are persuaded over time by keep involving themself in circumstances. Add in alcohol and you will do some things you would not have done before.


----------



## norajane

treyvion said:


> People are persuaded over time by keep involving themself in circumstances. Add in alcohol and you will do some things you would not have done before.


Well, I'm 46 and haven't been persuaded yet.


----------



## treyvion

norajane said:


> Well, I'm 46 and haven't been persuaded yet.


You REALLY know better as you have likely seen others fall by the wayside, and realize how easy it is, so you are very vigilent in watching yourself, because you know how destructive infidelity really is.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

treyvion said:


> You REALLY know better as you have likely seen others fall by the wayside, and realize how easy it is, so you are very vigilent in watching yourself, because you know how destructive infidelity really is.


Why can't people understand that some people are NOT going to do bad things? Many of us could get falling down drunk and NEVER NEVER NEVER cheat or do anything out of line. It's that simple. I personally don't have to be "vigilant." Maybe you don't understand, maybe you never will but some of us aren't crazed sex machines who only need opportunity to knock for our morals to go out the window.


----------



## Cletus

GNO comes with the risk of infidelity from your wife.
Having a male GYN comes with the risk of sexual exploitation by her doctor.
Working in the office comes with the risk of her banging the boss on her lunch hour.

If you're the kind of spouse who is so risk averse that you would have your spouse avoid all of these possible problems and more, that is certainly your right. If you can find a spouse who agrees to those conditions, all the better. You also might find that a tough row to hoe. 

But you MUST realize that not everyone perceives the world as a constant source of potential infidelity around every corner. Or at least, even if it is, that losing sleep and raising your blood pressure over the problem is a futile and unproductive exercise. If my spouse is going to cheat, she's going to cheat, and there's not very much I can do about it without keeping her chained to the stove and pregnant. 

Do you REALLY want to keep your spouse from cheating? Be the best partner you can be and give them no cause to even consider the alternative. That's your best defense, not some ill conceived and soon to be resented short leash.


----------



## norajane

treyvion said:


> You REALLY know better as you have likely seen others fall by the wayside, and realize how easy it is, so you are very vigilent in watching yourself, because you know how destructive infidelity really is.


Honestly, it's not even that. I love my SO, and am simply not interested in anyone else. That's it. 

I got out with the girls, business travel, conferences in Vegas, parties without my SO, I have male friends...everything that is severely frowned-upon on TAM, yet no, not interested in cheating. I'm not vigilantly watching myself at all or censoring my behavior or anything. Just not interested in seeking some strange.


----------



## Davelli0331

I've never bought this argument that normally 100% faithful women suddenly become floosies willing to entertain any and all strange penis once they've had a few drinks.

It all comes down to choice. If a woman knows that when she drinks she she begins skirting the line of infidelity, then she still chose to take that first drink. If a woman knows that she has a hard time behaving herself when on a GNO, she still chose to go on that GNO anyway. In both circumstances the woman made an informed decision and ignored the risks. She made a choice.

The argument could be made that a woman can go out with good intentions and slowly over the course of a night be plied with drinks until her inhibitions are lowered to the point that she'd cheat. But I don't buy that, either. I have been absolutely stumbling-ass piss drunk, and I have been around many people, male and female, equally drunk. I have never in all my (admittedly probably too much) drinking seen someone do something while drunk that their behavior had not hinted at while sober.

Drinking lowers inhibitions, it does not change what's in your heart IMO.


----------



## treyvion

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Why can't people understand that some people are NOT going to do bad things? Many of us could get falling down drunk and NEVER NEVER NEVER cheat or do anything out of line. It's that simple. I personally don't have to be "vigilant." Maybe you don't understand, maybe you never will but some of us aren't crazed sex machines who only need opportunity to knock for our morals to go out the window.


Many people have said the same things, and they got around the wrong people while drunk. Some of you I could estimate really know how easy it is to stray and made a promise to yourself, that you would never want to disrespect yourself or your significant other by committing in the acts, most people think it just won't happen to them.


----------



## Philat

Whether GNO or BNO is hazardous to a relationship depends on many factors:

1. Where? Restaurant or quiet bar/pub vs. hookup club?
2. When? Happy hour vs. 2am?
3. What? Dinner/movie/drinks with group vs. indiscriminate mingling in club?
4. Who: Companions who will watch out for one another vs. those who will encourage you to "go for it"? [note: if only Tears' GNO friends had intervened when they saw what was happening...]
5. Why? Getting together with friends/unwinding vs. strutting your stuff/looking for attention?


----------



## committed4ever

I really haven't been out anywhere since I had my baby 2.5 month ago. Last week I got all dressed up in a black short skirt, black lace blouse and some spike heel boots. I put on full make-up and when my H came home I was touching up the lipstick. When he saw me I said "hey babe. I'm going out. I pump enough milk to last to midnight." He was TOTALLY FLOORED. 

Then when I finish applying my lipstick I told him "I'm joking. I just felt like dressing up" and gave him a wink. I stay dress up for the night. (I even nurse in the clothes!)

My H thought that was so hot!


----------



## Anon Pink

FrenchFry said:


> That's funny, I've been going out for years and I've never tripped, slipped and fell on a penis and I've been _ Zplastered _. Alcohol is no excuse.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Have to agree, in all my wild drunken partying days of past even when I was single I never once fell on a penis. :rofl:


----------



## Anon Pink

Philat said:


> Whether GNO or BNO is hazardous to a relationship depends on many factors:
> 
> 1. Where? Restaurant or quiet bar/pub vs. hookup club?
> 2. When? Happy hour vs. 2am?
> 3. What? Dinner/movie/drinks with group vs. indiscriminate mingling in club?
> 4. Who: Companions who will watch out for one another vs. those who will encourage you to "go for it"? [note: if only Tears' GNO friends had intervened when they saw what was happening...]
> 5. Why? Getting together with friends/unwinding vs. strutting your stuff/looking for attention?


So not true!

I have been out, with single friends and married friend and friend who have affairs, I've been drunk off my ass, danced the night away and flirted ( oh the horror!) and still haven't fallen on a penis, or lips!

We are responsible for our behavior, drunk, happy, miserable, we are responsible for our behavior and we have to know where the line is at all times. If you know where you line is, there isn't anything that will induce you to cross it!


----------



## love=pain

Wow lots of responses and opinions
Many of you are correct when you say someone 100% faithful would never cheat, however I don't know of any marriage that doesn't have an issue or two and issues lead to discontent which leads to anger and resentment and that 100% faithful person can find themselves in a place they never thought. 

Not to single anyone out but the Anon person stated they go out to dance, drink and sometimes flirt then wrote that their SO doesn't give compliments very well(sorry if I did not get the facts right please correct me if needed). Whose to say there isn't an argument before she goes out that touches a nerve and after having a few drinks dances with that person who says just the right thing one drink leads to 4 or 5 and all the magic whispered in the ear leads to something else. Wait never happens hah it happens all the time read it here more than once and someone who wouldn't think to cheat has made that tragic choice. Once again Anon didn't mean to infer you ever would and if I offended you I do apologize just using the example.

If you are so strong in your devotion with a rock like character that would never stray then I say wish there were more like you, but the world is a dangerous place lacking in moral character.

One of the things my wife's infidelity has taught me is that no matter how strong the relationship seems to be(even with a few issues) and how out of character these actions are it can still happen. That is usually why the BS is so surprised and hurt, if your relationship is horrible and you know it then how surprised are you when the other person strays( no matter how bad anything is NO ONE has any excuse just leave) hurt yes surprised I don't know.

Once again started this just trying to answer the question seems to have lead to lots of different thoughts always like the debate.


----------



## treyvion

Anon Pink said:


> So not true!
> 
> I have been out, with single friends and married friend and friend who have affairs, I've been drunk off my ass, danced the night away and flirted ( oh the horror!) and still haven't fallen on a penis, or lips!
> 
> We are responsible for our behavior, drunk, happy, miserable, we are responsible for our behavior and we have to know where the line is at all times. If you know where you line is, there isn't anything that will induce you to cross it!


Part of it was respecting your own relationship good enough to not go near the risk. It may make the other party uncomfortable even if they are ok with it.

If I have 4 married friends, and 3 out of 4 have active affairs in place, why am I going to keep doing GNO type activities with them? I wouldn't do anything where my spouse isn't present.

I wouldn't do anything which my spouse could not pop up on me unannounced if they wanted.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

love=pain said:


> If you are so strong in your devotion with a rock like character that would never stray then I say wish there were more like you, but the world is a dangerous place lacking in moral character.
> 
> We're each responsible for ourselves and our behavior. Maybe a lot of people use drinking as an excuse to disregard their vows, etc... I feel like either you're a cheater or you're not and only you (the person) can decide to be one (or not be one.) Sorry you have been on the painful end of the cheating stick...just know that there ARE good people out there


----------



## Davelli0331

love=pain said:


> One of the things my wife's infidelity has taught me is that no matter how strong the relationship seems to be(even with a few issues) and *how out of character these actions are* it can still happen. That is usually why the BS is so surprised and hurt, if your relationship is horrible and you know it then how surprised are you when the other person strays( no matter how bad anything is NO ONE has any excuse just leave) hurt yes surprised I don't know.


The flaw in your logic is believing that cheating behavior is out of character for a cheater.

I don't say that to be an ass, I'm a BS, too. It's a tough truth to face. Either someone will cheat if the circumstances are right (however simple or complex those circumstances may be), or they would never cheat under any circumstances.

ETA: In your defense, there are many people who would cheat under the right circumstances but who haven't yet faced those circumstances and so claim they never would.


----------



## treyvion

People do things they wouldn't have done when they are intoxicated. Like get into auto accidents and sometimes die from it.

They may have sex with a stranger, where that inhibition was in place without the alcohol.

They may get closer to a rough or rougish crowd, and without the alcohol they would have been more sensitive to it and not liked them.


----------



## sh987

treyvion said:


> Part of it was respecting your own relationship good enough to not go near the risk. It may make the other party uncomfortable even if they are ok with it.
> 
> *If I have 4 married friends, and 3 out of 4 have active affairs in place, why am I going to keep doing GNO type activities with them? I wouldn't do anything where my spouse isn't present.*
> 
> I wouldn't do anything which my spouse could not pop up on me unannounced if they wanted.


Which goes back to what I was saying about a potential friend of mine whom I dropped once I found he was a serial philanderer. An otherwise nice guy to hang out with, but I want my wife to have confidence in what I do with my friends, and that would be tough if I'm going out anywhere with a person like that.


----------



## Pandakiss

We don't do either of those things. After 20+ years together we got used to "us against the world", so we keep people out. We are always together, you see one, there go the other. We kinda got our arms straight out like back off motherfvcker. 

Once in a while we get asked out, and we kinda side ways glance at the other, and decline. I think sometimes we are such a package deal, that nobody wants to invite either of us along. 

Oh well. We don't drink. We have 4 kids, and he works in the food and beverage industry, so we don't care for large gathering of people and noise at night. 

I think we are also off putting because we tend to start talking and we shut out everyone, as if it's just the two of us. We do have one friend whom we have known for over 10 years. He's like fam. He fits in with either of us.


----------



## Cletus

Pandakiss said:


> We do have one friend whom we have known for over 10 years. He's like fam. He fits in with either of us.


Sounds like a slippery slope towards a threesome.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

norajane said:


> For me, drinking, dancing and being around other people, including men, doesn't make me stop loving my SO and start wanting to bang somebody else.
> 
> I can't speak for other people, although I can speak for the friends I go out with, we aren't interested in hooking up with anybody and aren't open to it, and are happy to go home to our guys, and that doesn't change just because we're in a bar without them. The bar doesn't suddenly transform us into cheaters, and in fact, I doubt any of us even notice the men there since we certainly don't spend time with them or talking about them.
> 
> My SO is free to go to bars with his friends without a hassle from me. Cheaters will cheat wherever and whenever. Others won't regardless of the circumstances.



Still can't understand why married women wouldn't choose to get involved in the hundreds of other things that are not so strongly a 'singles scene'
Do groups of women never want to play golf or tennis on a Saturday afternoon? Movies,dinner at a restaurant, museum. Or if you like danger what's wrong with rock climbing


----------



## Acorn

I always find this debate (as well as the porn debates) fascinating.

If you have weak boundaries, you give up porn or GNO because it puts you at risk for affairs or poor behavior. But even if you have good boundaries, you give them up if and because you love your partner, and it makes your partner uncomfortable. Isn't it really that simple?


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> So not true!
> 
> I have been out, with single friends and married friend and friend who have affairs, I've been drunk off my ass, danced the night away and flirted ( oh the horror!) and still haven't fallen on a penis, or lips!
> 
> We are responsible for our behavior, drunk, happy, miserable, we are responsible for our behavior and we have to know where the line is at all times. If you know where you line is, there isn't anything that will induce you to cross it!


Yes but it is possible to not cheat but show plenty of disrespect to a spouse anyway. Does your husband not mind you flirting with other men?


----------



## norajane

nuclearnightmare said:


> Still can't understand why married women wouldn't choose to get involved in the hundreds of other things that are not so strongly a 'singles scene'
> Do groups of women never want to play golf or tennis on a Saturday afternoon? Movies,dinner at a restaurant, museum. Or if you like danger what's wrong with rock climbing


Of course we do all those things, too. But TAM doesnt' get all hot and bothered about them so no one starts any threads about tennis.

Actually, maybe they do:..."My wife has been going to the gym and losing weight...is she cheating?"


----------



## nuclearnightmare

norajane said:


> Of course we do all those things, too. But TAM doesnt' get all hot and bothered about them so no one starts any threads about tennis.
> 
> Actually, maybe they do:..."My wife has been going to the gym and losing weight...is she cheating?"


He should trust his gut 

I think boundaries are a matter of respect. There are just certain things that have obvious implications or raise questions about a person's limited or lack of respect for their spouse. The spouse might not like it but may feel they can't stop it. A respect issue nonetheless.

In your case you are not yet married so there is an argument to be made to not give up certain friends or lifestyle until there is a lifetime commitment.


----------



## Pandakiss

Cletus said:


> Sounds like a slippery slope towards a threesome.



If I had been drinking it have came outta my nose.....ha ha

No. It's like this. If you are friends with me, then you are friends with hubby too, and vice versa. I suppose it's more of a reason people decline our company.


----------



## Feeling-Lonely

My H would like it very much if I made more friends and went out more. I also like when he goes out with his friends, it is good to be together but it is also good to have a life besides marriage (work, friends, hobbies, GNO ect ect)


----------



## Caribbean Man

Pandakiss said:


> If I had been drinking it have came outta my nose.....ha ha
> 
> No. It's like this.* If you are friends with me, then you are friends with hubby too, and vice versa.* I suppose it's more of a reason people decline our company.


:iagree: FULL STOP.

Funny thing is, I almost got slaughtered by some other posters recently for taking this same stand.

But it happens in real life too, no problem there.


----------



## Davelli0331

These threads certainly never paint women in any kind of favorable light. Either a) the instant a woman goes out her door to meet friends she becomes a conniving, evil, and disrespectful tart trolling for strange or b) she's so dumb that she's incapable of spotting, avoiding, and falling for the predatory machinations of single men.

Certainly there are women who fall into those descriptions but not nearly so many as TAM anecdotes would have you believe.


----------



## Cosmos

Davelli0331 said:


> These threads certainly never paint women in any kind of favorable light. Either a) the instant a woman goes out her door to meet friends she becomes a conniving, evil, and disrespectful tart trolling for strange or b) she's so dumb that she's incapable of spotting, avoiding, and falling for the predatory machinations of single men.
> 
> Certainly there are women who fall into those descriptions but not nearly so many as TAM anecdotes would have you believe.


:iagree:

And the same 'artists' who to do the painting will then (quite ironically) paint women as jealous and insecure when they object to lap dances


----------



## hopelessromantic1

Here's how I see it. Every marriage is different, and every couple has things that they are comfortable with, and things that they are not. If a woman's H has no problem with her doing GNO, or vice versa, it's most likely because they KNOW their spouse and there is trust built there. People don't come out of the same mold, so it's impossible to put everyone in the same category when it comes to who will cheat and who will not. 

Bottom line is, if you don't trust your spouse yet they are still doing GNO/BNO, THEN you have a problem. If everyone's ok with it and they have agreed terms, then who, outside the marriage, has any business casting doubt or judging?


----------



## Davelli0331

Like many other issues on TAM the responses are going to be highly polarized and very skewed bc this is a marriage forum where people come for help with marriage issues, including GNOs gone bad. Many men have been burned by them, and so just like you see in CWI, you see a lot of projection on this topic.


----------



## yeah_right

Hubby and I each participate in sports teams separately with friends. Occasionally there is an after-event at a bar. We always open it up to each other to come along. Sometimes we decline but we are not so concerned because we go to these events in uniforms and sweat...and we do not drink. Do we ever get dressed up in our finest to go out with single friends to get wasted and open ourselves up to trouble - - HE11 NO! That is asking for trouble, and honestly after 20 years, going to the clubs is a bit depressing because everyone seems so desperate.


----------



## MrK

Davelli0331 said:


> It just depends on what exactly constitutes a GNO....
> 
> Where I would draw the line, however, is with her dancing with men. That's a boundary for me.


That's what all of these "I go out with my gals and have never ONCE screwed a stranger" crowd doesn't get. We all have different boundaries. My wife going out and partying with strange men is a boundary I'd rather she didn't cross. And if she wasn't into it before we got married, I have every reason to expect her to NOT start now.


----------



## love=pain

Davelli0331 said:


> The flaw in your logic is believing that cheating behavior is out of character for a cheater.
> 
> I don't say that to be an ass, I'm a BS, too. It's a tough truth to face. Either someone will cheat if the circumstances are right (however simple or complex those circumstances may be), or they would never cheat under any circumstances.
> 
> ETA: In your defense, there are many people who would cheat under the right circumstances but who haven't yet faced those circumstances and so claim they never would.


Dave you are right should have worded it like this you are surprised in the beginning because cheating seems so out of character, once you start digging you see just how morally bankrupt they really are.
That's why the shock and devastation is so bad you are just blindsided ( well most of us).

As far as being an ass when you are talking about a cheater and their actions there is nothing you could say that is worse then what they did.


----------



## samyeagar

nuclearnightmare said:


> Yes but it is possible to not cheat but show plenty of disrespect to a spouse anyway. Does your husband not mind you flirting with other men?


Everybody, and every couple has different ideas on what is disrespectful. A while back, we had a bunch of people over, and my married future sister in law and the other women were talking about the whole GNO thing, and different strategies to get guys to buy them drinks including flirting, hiding their left hand with their wedding bands, things like that. Their rationale was that if the guy was dumb enough to think he was going to get anything from them, he deserved what he got. There was a general consensus of agreement among the women, my STBW included. My future brother in law was there as well and agreed that if some other sucker would buy them women drinks, it was less money he had to spend. I didn't really let my opinion be known until later after everyone left, and my STBW and I had the talk about that.

I explained my thoughts. That going out with the girls is one thing, but as soon as a guy buys drinks, starts talking to, dancing with, flirting, it's no longer a girls night. Guys only buy drinks for strange women if they are trying to open the door to more. They don't do it just to be nice. By accepting the drinks, women are sending the message to the guy that the door is open. Hiding the rings is denying the relationship, selling it out for a few bucks worth of alcohol, horribly disrespecting her relationship with her man. It is also being deceptive, in effect lying by omission to someone to get stuff from them which is not a great character trait. She now knows, understands, and accepts my boundaries on this.


----------



## Jellybeans

Funny. The last "girl's night" I had was one I hosted at my house for my girlfriends where I cooked them dinner and we talked and drank wine.

Evil, I tell you. PURE evil.


----------



## sh987

Jellybeans said:


> Funny. The last "girl's night" I had was one I hosted at my house for my girlfriends where I cooked them dinner and we talked and drank wine.
> 
> Evil, I tell you. PURE evil.


That's the type of GNO my wife and her friends have, and they all prefer it that way. I don't think anybody around here has taken issue with that.


----------



## Caribbean Man

sh987 said:


> That's the type of GNO my wife and her friends have, and they all prefer it that way. I don't think anybody around here has taken issue with that.


:iagree:

And it's the type mine have too, also visiting each other's house , new 
" happening" restaurants, wine tasting parties etc.
She doesn't do the clubs and slow dancing or drunk bump & grind / groping thing with strange men " friends" at all.

And no,
I don't do boys night out, I much prefer stay at home pump up the volume and listen to my music.No disco or wild partying again with guy friends for me. It almost cost me my marriage, and my days for that are long gone.

Does going to a swinger party guarantee that you will automatically hook up with another person for sex?
No, _but it does increase your chances._
Does going to a dance club guarantee that you will automatically hook up with another person for sex?
Neither, _but it does increase your chances._
So chances that you will get the opportunity to hookup is significantly higher than going to a museum or library.

I find the opposite argument to be incredibly simplistic and borderline dishonest.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with a bunch of women going to a club to dance. What I have a problem with is people downplaying the risks involved in doing so.

That infidelity can occur anywhere doesn't automatically significantly lower the risks of a person under the influence of alcohol and pulsating beats , in a sexually charged environment , deciding to have casual sex.

Thing is, we're all adults here.
The problem is not GNO's or BNO's , but one of human nature , proper marital boundaries , common decency and self respect.


----------



## PHTlump

I used to have a problem with GNO. I thought that GNO was more dangerous than BNO because women and men are different. I thought that, when men went out with other men, they played golf, or went to a gun show, or watched the game over a few pitchers of beer. They dressed casually and didn't approach women. I also thought that, when women went out with other women, they dressed to the nines, drank alcohol to lower their inhibitions, and shook their asses in front of men looking for casual sex. I thought that, because men and women are different, men approach women and women act as the gatekeepers to sex. I thought that the scientific studies that show that alcohol impairs judgment and environment affects behavior applied to both men and women. I thought that, under the correct circumstances, good people could make mistakes and do bad things.

Now, I know better. I know that men and women are exactly the same, except for genitalia. I know that a group of husbands is just as likely to dress in suits and ties and twerk at a singles bar as a group of wives. I know that a group of wives is just as likely to smoke cigars on the golf course as their husbands are. I know that women are just as likely to approach men as men are to approach women. I know that science is misogynistic. I know that behavior is predestined and that a good person will never, under any possible circumstances, do anything bad.

So, now, when my wife tells me that she's putting on her best lingerie and sexiest dress to go out with her sexy friends, get drunk, and twerk with men who are going to try to have casual sex with her, I know she has enough moxie to get through the night (and early morning) without disrespecting me, or our marriage.


----------



## Davelli0331

That's clever.

What I find interesting is how so many people present this as a completely binary situation: EITHER your W will have a sensible GNO at one of her friends' houses where they knit and talk about dishwashers OR they will go to the local meat market wearing nothing but dental floss and pasties to court male attention and disrespect their marriages. There is NOTHING in between those two extremes.


----------



## sh987

Caribbean Man said:


> But chances that you will get the opportunity to do so is significantly higher than going to a museum or library.
> 
> I find that argument to be incredibly simplistic and borderline dishonest.
> I see absolutely nothing wrong with a bunch of women going to a club to dance. What I have a problem with is people downplaying the risks involved in doing so.


Agreed. 

I also disagreed with the museum example, and for the same reasons. I agree that a person could find opportunity for cheating at the grocery store, but the odds are remote compared to that of a night on the town. When I take my kids to public swim at the pool, there's a chance one of us could have an accident and drown; that chance exists. The chances, however, are miniscule compared to those odds if I have a pool in my backyard.

Stevie Wonder could see that.


----------



## Jellybeans

Caribbean Man said:


> She doesn't do the clubs and slow dancing or drunk bump & grind / groping thing with strange men " friends" at all.


I call that "clubbing." And if your wife is hitting grinding on men, then well, you have big problems. Same as if a man is doing this when he goes out with other women.



Caribbean Man said:


> Does going to a swinger party guarantee that you will automatically hook up with another person for sex?
> No, _but it does increase your chances._


If you are going to a swinger party and know you are going to a swinger party, it's likely you are looking to swing. Swinger parties are about sex.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Jellybeans said:


> I call that "clubbing." And if your wife is hitting grinding on men, then well, you have big problems. Same as if a man is doing this when he goes out with other women.
> 
> If you are going to a swinger party and know you are going to a swinger party, it's likely you are looking to swing. Swinger parties are about sex.


I think you need to reread my post.

I clearly said my wife does not, neither has she ever done that, hence I have no problem with her in that department. Her GNO's are exactly what I listed.

If you go to a swinger party , chances are that you might not be pleased with what see, or you are just curious .But chances are very high that you will be approached by someone for sex even if you don't want sex.
So logically, the chances of hooking up at a swinger party is higher than in clubbing.

Do you agree?

The same logic can be applied to clubbing. A club is a place where people go to dance , bump and grind under the influence of alcohol , and sometimes express their sexuality, through dance.
But arguably, the chances of them hooking up there are higher than going to a library or supermarket.

Do you agree?


----------



## treyvion

Jellybeans said:


> I call that "clubbing." And if your wife is hitting grinding on men, then well, you have big problems. Same as if a man is doing this when he goes out with other women.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are going to a swinger party and know you are going to a swinger party, it's likely you are looking to swing. Swinger parties are about sex.


Some situations you simply shouldn't be in.


----------



## Jellybeans

Caribbean Man said:


> I think you need to reread my post.
> 
> I clearly said my wife does not, neither has she ever done that, hence I have no problem with her in that department. Her GNO's are exactly what I listed.


I didn't mean YOUR wife. I meant WIVES in general.



Caribbean Man said:


> If you go to a swinger party , chances are that you might not be pleased with what see, or you are just curious .But chances are very high that you will be approached by someone for sex even if you don't want sex.
> So logically, the chances of hooking up at a swinger party is higher than in clubbing.
> 
> Do you agree?


Which is what I was saying. If you are at a swingers party you are looking to fvck. That is the entire point of a swingers party.


----------



## Jellybeans

treyvion said:


> Some situations you simply shouldn't be in.



Well luckily I don't go clubbing or to swingers party so that doesn't apply to me.


----------



## samyeagar

Jellybeans said:


> Well luckily I don't go clubbing or to swingers party so that doesn't apply to me.


The specific example situations maybe not, but the general premise should apply to everyone.

If you have a weakness, don't set yourself up with situations that could exploit it.


----------



## Davelli0331

I guess that just shows how out of touch I am, I wasn't even aware that women going out with their friends were all going to meat markets and swinger parties.


----------



## treyvion

Davelli0331 said:


> I guess that just shows how out of touch I am, I wasn't even aware that women going out with their friends were all going to meat markets and swinger parties.


All aren't but many are. It comes with the territory.


----------



## Caribbean Man

1 + 2 = 3 no mater how you turn it around.
2 + 1 = 3 
Can't you see?
LMAO,
Some men just can't help themselves.


----------



## Davelli0331

FrenchFry said:


> When we are not knitting at Applebees, we hightail it out to the mansion in Eyes Wide Shut. Ask me for the password.


I knew it!

You know what, we're all doomed. Someone call Tarkin and have him swing the Death Star around Yavin IV so we can be put out of our misery.


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> That's clever.
> 
> What I find interesting is how so many people present this as a completely binary situation: EITHER your W will have a sensible GNO at one of her friends' houses where they knit and talk about dishwashers OR they will go to the local meat market wearing nothing but dental floss and pasties to court male attention and disrespect their marriages. There is NOTHING in between those two extremes.


I used to think that propriety was a spectrum and a person's behavior could be entirely appropriate, entirely inappropriate, or anywhere in between.

But now I know that the notion of propriety is a tool used by the patriarchy to oppress women. What is more important than propriety is that women be true to themselves. And if drinking alcohol and partying in an environment where people are looking to have casual sex is what women need to blow off steam, have fun, and stay true to themselves, then who the hell do these husbands think they are to try to limit the behavior of their wives?


----------



## Davelli0331

PHTlump said:


> I used to think that propriety was a spectrum and a person's behavior could be entirely appropriate, entirely inappropriate, or anywhere in between.
> 
> But now I know that the notion of propriety is a tool used by the patriarchy to oppress women. What is more important than propriety is that women be true to themselves. And if drinking alcohol and partying in an environment where people are looking to have casual sex is what women need to blow off steam, have fun, and stay true to themselves, then who the hell do these husbands think they are to try to limit the behavior of their wives?


Interesting. I used to think that most people were rational and intelligent enough that they could understand that the majority of human interaction has a subtext of complexity and nuance. Then I realized that meant that to do so would force me to acknowledge that my situation and POV was not universally applicable to everyone else, an idea that I find distasteful and uncomfortable. Instead, I found a more successful tactic was to draw inane and overblown connections between my situation and more extreme situations and then use that straw man argument because it was the only firm footing I had.

I also used to think that the best way to prove a point was to make an ironical post to the contrary of my actual beliefs.


----------



## Anon Pink

Davelli0331 said:


> Interesting. I used to think that most people were rational and intelligent enough that they could understand that the majority of human interaction has a subtext of complexity and nuance. Then I realized that meant that to do so would force me to acknowledge that my situation and POV was not universally applicable to everyone else, an idea that I find distasteful and uncomfortable. Instead, I found a more successful tactic was to draw inane and overblown connections between my situation and more extreme situations and then use that straw man argument because it was the only firm footing I had.
> 
> I also used to think that the best way to prove a point was to make an ironical post to the contrary of my actual beliefs.



Awesomeness!


----------



## Jellybeans

Davelli0331 said:


> I guess that just shows how out of touch I am, I wasn't even aware that women going out with their friends were all going to meat markets and swinger parties.


:rofl: 



FrenchFry said:


> When we are not knitting at Applebees, we hightail it out to the mansion in Eyes Wide Shut. Ask me for the password.


Well, what is the password? :rofl:



Davelli0331 said:


> Interesting. I used to think that most people were rational and intelligent enough that they could understand that the majority of human interaction has a subtext of complexity and nuance. Then I realized that meant that to do so would force me to acknowledge that my situation and POV was not universally applicable to everyone else, an idea that I find distasteful and uncomfortable. Instead, I found a more successful tactic was to draw inane and overblown connections between my situation and more extreme situations and then use that straw man argument because it was the only firm footing I had.
> 
> I also used to think that the best way to prove a point was to make an ironical post to the contrary of my actual beliefs.


I like you Davelli. You're all right! :smthumbup:


----------



## nuclearnightmare

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Here's how I see it. Every marriage is different, and every couple has things that they are comfortable with, and things that they are not. If a woman's H has no problem with her doing GNO, or vice versa, it's most likely because they KNOW their spouse and there is trust built there. People don't come out of the same mold, so it's impossible to put everyone in the same category when it comes to who will cheat and who will not.
> 
> Bottom line is, if you don't trust your spouse yet they are still doing GNO/BNO, THEN you have a problem. If everyone's ok with it and they have agreed terms, then who, outside the marriage, has any business casting doubt or judging?


no question that it is up to the the husband and wife just exactly what their boundaries are; what is over the line and what is not, what is OK and what is not.
But let's all just admit that "casting doubt and judging" is part of the fun of these threads 
so we can dispense with all the "judge me not anonymous poster!" I don't think I'm being all that judgemental anyway. Casting doubt - yes. 

and Frenchfry, give me a break, if you don't like the term 'singles environment' how about I change it to 'sexually charged environment' - does that work for you? what would you consider to be a 'sexually charged environment' - an example or two - that you would not like it if your husband went there at all, or went there without you?


----------



## Dad&Hubby

AVR1962 said:


> My thought is that women do not always have the instant thought of sex and sexual thoughts when they see another man so a woman can enjoy a night out and maybe even have a dance with a man without her thoughts thinking of getting him in the sack. Generally speaking, I think women know what men want and so unless we are looking for that, we know how to have a good time and avoid it.
> 
> Men, I don't feel, have those same limitations to thought processes. When a man sees a girl he finds attractive (my opinion) it seems their first thought is sex, or sexual thoughts so a dance with a girl might not be as innocent. Or even if there is no dance involved, you go out with a group of guys and (sorry for my terms here) but it is almost like the dog pack and the vulgar comments go out and the guys have the eyes on target. Not the same on a GNO.


AVR, many of your posts are very thoughtful and intelligent, but this is just a bunch of gender biased hooey.

I've been hit on by a number of very attractive women, I've also been aware enough to recognize them as being attractive, but I haven't ONCE thought about having sex with them. Additionally, you paint women out at a night club, drinking, dancing but maintaining this 100% pure, thought process. I'm sorry, if you find someone attractive, that in and of itself is a sexual thought. Attractiveness is the first step. 

I think the environment has a lot to do with what you're thinking of. There aren't many guys who AREN'T looking to hook up, who go out to dance clubs. Now a sports bar, that's different. I would equate men going to a sports bar equivalent to SOME women going to a dance club.

I say some because there are many GNO's that are "marriage safe" even when going out to a club. But there are also many GNO's that aren't "marriage safe". If you have a faithful wife, with poor boundaries, maybe a little need for male attention, some alcohol, and a toxic friend...that's a BAD combination.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Me too, it's just creepy to me to think of dancing with another man, even if you weren't slow dancing. I think that's totally out of bounds. Did I mention creepy? LOL


Thank you Hopeless. You just defined the issue.

There are lots of wives, obviously you and others in this thread, who can go out to a club with no issue and no worry for your husband.

This is why each situation is unique. You can't put a cookie cutter approach on GNO/BNO (why do I think of body odor when I say BNO out loud LOL). 

I've been married twice. My wife...I have ZERO issues with any GNO's. Now she doesn't go dancing without me any longer, but if she wanted to, I'd have no issue. But my exwife was all about GNO's for the wrong reasons (and go figure she cheated on me). I wouldn't hold my ex-wife's actions against my wife, but aside from me being aware of the signs etc.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Dad&Hubby said:


> *I think the environment has a lot to do with what you're thinking of*. There aren't many guys who AREN'T looking to hook up, who go out to dance clubs. Now a sports bar, that's different. I would equate men going to a sports bar equivalent to SOME women going to a dance club.
> 
> *I say some because there are many GNO's that are "marriage safe" even when going out to a club.* But there are also many GNO's that aren't "marriage safe". If you have a faithful wife, with poor boundaries, maybe a little need for male attention, some alcohol, and a toxic friend...that's a BAD combination.


And you are correct of course.
But it's not " _politically correct_ " to say that on this thread.

Look out , there's a " cherry picker " on the thread.

EDIT:
My wife and I do the sports bar thing very often to shoot pool, she enjoys the competition.
In fact, the pics I have in my profile albums were taken at a Sports bar we frequent.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Pandakiss said:


> If I had been drinking it have came outta my nose.....ha ha
> 
> No. It's like this. If you are friends with me, then you are friends with hubby too, and vice versa. I suppose it's more of a reason people decline our company.


My wife and I have a good group of friends and EVERYONE subscribes to the same philosophy. The couples are friends with each other.


----------



## Caribbean Man

FrenchFry said:


> A sex club, because I hope we are monogamous.
> 
> Other than that, I'm comfortable enough with myself and with him that I feel he could go pretty much anywhere without crossing our set boundaries. I'm more in the camp of "can't control what my husband does, only what I can do" camp...and yes, I have been cheated on.
> 
> I'm glad you agree that it's up to each individual couples to decide the line of disrespectful.


I suspect in five years time you will change your mind.

I used to think just like you in the early years of our marriage.

But over time, what I saw opened my eyes ,helped me to understand myself and human nature,
A whole , lot better.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Jellybeans said:


> Funny. The last "girl's night" I had was one I hosted at my house for my girlfriends where I cooked them dinner and we talked and drank wine.
> 
> Evil, I tell you. PURE evil.


HAHA sounds like my wife.

My wife's idea of GNO is lunch shopping and maybe a movie.

When she's REALLY wild...she has dinner and the movie AFTER!!! Oh boy. She MIGHT get home after 10pm....uh oh.

My wife can't make it much past 10pm unless she's reading a really good book. LOL.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Jellybeans said:


> I call that "clubbing." And if your wife is hitting grinding on men, then well, you have big problems. Same as if a man is doing this when he goes out with other women.
> 
> 
> 
> If you are going to a swinger party and know you are going to a swinger party, it's likely you are looking to swing. Swinger parties are about sex.


My wife and I talked about going to a swingers club to walk around and voyeur together and then go back to our hotel room (chicka chicka bow wow)....does that count?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

GNO/BNO, we don't do them.We do nights out together just the two of us or with a small group.

I think GNO/BNO is something that needs to be discussed in great detail before marriage and before even living together. It can be a huge issue if both people don't feel the same about what's acceptable vs unacceptable when it comes to GNO/BNO.

My husband would fully accept me having a GNO once in a while.I don't do it though.Most of the ladies I know typically go to a bar or a club for their night out and they go wild.I know my limits as a borderline. I have to be conscious of potentially slippery boundaries especially when alcohol is involved.
I couldn't live with myself if I acted on a stupid bpd impulse and hurt him.I'd rather not put myself in a position of challenging my control over myself.I'm not even saying I'd have intercourse or make out with someone.I'm talking about things that happen so easily like dancing with a man or being flirtatious over drinks.

It's much easier to have a great time and relax with my man there with me so he can soak up all my sexual energy

Other ladies are better at drinking and maintaining boundaries.So they party and it's ok for them.

ETA: We are introverted enough to be satisfied with girls night in and boys night in  Those nights are fun. I like having his friends over so I can beat them in kinect sports


----------



## treyvion

ScarletBegonias said:


> GNO/BNO, we don't do them.We do nights out together just the two of us or with a small group.
> 
> I think GNO/BNO is something that needs to be discussed in great detail before marriage and before even living together. It can be a huge issue if both people don't feel the same about what's acceptable vs unacceptable when it comes to GNO/BNO.
> 
> My husband would fully accept me having a GNO once in a while.I don't do it though.Most of the ladies I know typically go to a bar or a club for their night out and they go wild.I know my limits as a borderline. I have to be conscious of potentially slippery boundaries especially when alcohol is involved.
> I couldn't live with myself if I acted on a stupid bpd impulse and hurt him.I'd rather not put myself in a position of challenging my control over myself.I'm not even saying I'd have intercourse or make out with someone.I'm talking about things that happen so easily like dancing with a man or being flirtatious over drinks.
> 
> It's much easier to have a great time and relax with my man there with me so he can soak up all my sexual energy
> 
> Other ladies are better at drinking and maintaining boundaries.So they party and it's ok for them.


And others are lusting after how buckwild they are going to get on their GNO.


----------



## Caribbean Man

FrenchFry said:


> Maybe, maybe not. As long as I love dnb and as long as it gets played in club-type venues, I'll go and expect my husband to be comfortable with it or divorce me.
> 
> An interesting thought that was brought up in this thread is the nature of cheaters. I *almost* agree that everyone can get into a situation where cheating can happen. What I disagree with is that a club is that situation for most/all people. More than anyone else, my husband can see that even if I am falling down drunk at a club, that is never going to be the situation where I have even the slightest temptation to cheat on him. Same reason I trust him at la strip club--that's not his weak point.


FrenchFry,
You are the exception.

I also thought that I could have gone back hanging out with my old boys clubbing and dancing.
First thing I noticed that there were women whom I knew were married at the club dancing with men who were not their husbands and their husbands were not there.

The code was " _don't ask, don't tell._"

That type of behaviour is acceptable and expected, in club culture.

But I also noticed there were a few couples who also went to these clubs together and had lots of fun and wished my wife would, because she doesn't like clubbing atmosphere.
Ultimately, I gave it up because it was time I was spending away from her and it contributed nothing to our marriage whilst at the same time exposing me to unnecessary temptation.
I wasn't looking for some strange, but lots od sexy " strange " came looking for me and not ONCE did ANY of my so call friends ever tell me about it.
In hind sight, none of them were really " our friends" they were MY friends.

As someone else on this thread said ,there is no real " cookie cutter "/ one size fits all template for this issue.
However that atmosphere whilst clubbing is definitely sexually charged ,and many people go to dance clubs for that.

Some go to let off steam and their spouse reaps the rewards in some hot , drunk sex when they get home. Others can't wait till they get home, they have sex , _on the way home._
The problem comes in when the person they're having sex with is not their spouse / partner.

One of the nicest experiences in clubbing is when a group of people who are married couples just take the floor and dance. It helps build the bonds in their social circle and create respect for each other's boundaries, when they see other couples like themselves expressing themselves in that way, dancing.

It is what it is , and couples need to be very careful with those types of environments.

i have absolutely no problem with it , but we must admit that it is a sexually charged environment.
That's why there is need to be careful.


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> Interesting. I used to think that most people were rational and intelligent enough that they could understand that the majority of human interaction has a subtext of complexity and nuance.


Rational, intelligent, complex, nuanced thought when discussing feminist topics? It is to laugh.



> Then I realized that meant that to do so would force me to acknowledge that my situation and POV was not universally applicable to everyone else, an idea that I find distasteful and uncomfortable. Instead, I found a more successful tactic was to draw inane and overblown connections between my situation and more extreme situations and then use that straw man argument because it was the only firm footing I had.


I'm not arguing extremes. I haven't mentioned going to sex clubs. That was another poster. I'm talking about a very common scenario. Most of the married women I know, when discussing GNO, mean dressing sexy, heading to dance clubs, drinking, and possibly getting a hotel room to save them the trouble/expense of getting home.

How is an example of GNO that is the common scenario, in my experience, and the experience of ScarletBegonias, a straw man? Shouldn't a straw man be an unrealistic example?



> I also used to think that the best way to prove a point was to make an ironical post to the contrary of my actual beliefs.


Well, that would just be sneaky. I'm just a recently converted feminist out trying to spread the good word.


----------



## Davelli0331

I always find the GNO debate to be quite fascinating. It is an interesting debate that I think tends to reflect more about ourselves than about the subject itself.

I actually agree with most of what is said in these threads. I agree that GNOs can be dangerous, that they can lead to slippery slopes and escalating risky situations. I agree that some women use them as outlets to get attention or even sexual gratification from men other than their Hs, and that sometimes toxic friends will encourage such bad behavior. I agree that some women who claim to be going on GNOs are outright lying.

The only small but significant disagreement that I have is that I don't think GNOs turn otherwise faithful women into cheaters. Alcohol or no, GNO or no, toxic friends or no, I believe a person either chooses to know their own boundaries and protect their marriage (like SB above) or they choose to allow themselves to start down that slippery slope.

You can throw in all the alcohol you want, all the toxic friends, the "sexually charged" atmosphere, but it all comes down to choice. A woman on a GNO either chooses to mind her moral misgivings each step along the path or she chooses to take that next step toward infidelity. We can talk about alcohol and peer pressure and all that, but my personal belief is that those things don't change what's in people's hearts.

For me personally, if my W would choose to cheat on a GNO, then I don't feel I'd be doing our marriage any favors by decreeing that she absolutely cannot go on a GNO. That's not the kind of marriage that I want for myself anyway; I'm her H, not her father. I want a marriage where I can count on my W to know her boundaries and mind them, where she would say to me, "Ya know, Dave, I'm not going on this GNO bc I feel like I'll skirt the line". That's important to me bc at the end of the day I can't lock her into an ivory tower to keep her from all possible sources of infidelity.

But all of that is just my personal opinion. It's what works for our marriage. But I completely understand that it isn't universally applicable.


----------



## Davelli0331

PHTlump said:


> Rational, intelligent, complex, nuanced thought when discussing feminist topics? It is to laugh.


Hate feminism much?



PHTlump said:


> I'm not arguing extremes. I haven't mentioned going to sex clubs. That was another poster. I'm talking about a very common scenario. Most of the married women I know, when discussing GNO, mean dressing sexy, heading to dance clubs, drinking, and possibly getting a hotel room to save them the trouble/expense of getting home.
> 
> How is an example of GNO that is the common scenario, in my experience, and the experience of ScarletBegonias, a straw man? Shouldn't a straw man be an unrealistic example?


Because that's not _my _personal experience?



PHTlump said:


> Well, that would just be sneaky. I'm just a recently converted feminist out trying to spread the good word.


Hate feminism much?


----------



## BradWesley

My wife and her friends were never into the club scene. Never liked the atmosphere.

Next week they are going out to dinner, then seeing a production of The Nutcracker.

What they really enjoy is the 5-6 weekends a year in Atlantic City.
They stay at the Borgata, and spend Saturday afternoon at the spa
getting pampered. They catch a show on Saturday night, do some gambling. On Sunday they have a brunch, and head home.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

ScarletBegonias said:


> GNO/BNO, we don't do them.We do nights out together just the two of us or with a small group.
> 
> I think GNO/BNO is something that needs to be discussed in great detail before marriage and before even living together. It can be a huge issue if both people don't feel the same about what's acceptable vs unacceptable when it comes to GNO/BNO.
> 
> My husband would fully accept me having a GNO once in a while.I don't do it though.Most of the ladies I know typically go to a bar or a club for their night out and they go wild.I* know my limits as a borderline*. I have to be conscious of potentially slippery boundaries especially when alcohol is involved.
> I couldn't live with myself if I acted on a stupid bpd impulse and hurt him.I'd rather not put myself in a position of challenging my control over myself.I'm not even saying I'd have intercourse or make out with someone.I'm talking about things that happen so easily like dancing with a man or being flirtatious over drinks.
> 
> It's much easier to have a great time and relax with my man there with me so he can soak up all my sexual energy
> 
> Other ladies are better at drinking and maintaining boundaries.So they party and it's ok for them.
> 
> ETA: We are introverted enough to be satisfied with girls night in and boys night in  Those nights are fun. I like having his friends over so I can beat them in kinect sports


have seen many of your posts. You seem like the nicest BPD ever! sure you aren't cured?


----------



## Cletus

Dad&Hubby said:


> I've been hit on by a number of very attractive women, I've also been aware enough to recognize them as being attractive, but I haven't ONCE thought about having sex with them.


Have you had your testosterone checked?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

nuclearnightmare said:


> have seen many of your posts. You seem like the nicest BPD ever! sure you aren't cured?


Thanks...it's something you learn to live with and control. Lots of therapy
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> Hate feminism much?


I used to. I used to argue against feminism with science, statistics, and reason. But I got nowhere fast. You can't use science, statistics, and reason to change feelings. And feelings are what feminism is founded on.

After a while, I became jealous of the feminists I was arguing against. They were so certain of their positions that not even science, statistics, and reason could influence them. I wanted that kind of certainty. So, since I couldn't beat them, I joined them. I became a feminist.

I now know that science, statistics, and reason are misogynistic tools that the patriarchy uses to try to oppress women. What is most important in this world is that women remain true to themselves. And if drunken twerking is what some wives want, then that is what they should have.

If their husbands have a problem with it, then the wives would be better off ridding themselves of such controlling, patriarchal, oppressive zeros and picking up new heroes on their next GNO.



> Because that's not _my _personal experience?


You're saying that, because your wife hasn't gone on drunken twerking nights with her girlfriends, that you're dismissing the possibility that many other wives have? Weren't you the one who wrote about the appreciation for complexity and nuance?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

PHTlump said:


> I used to. I used to argue against feminism with science, statistics, and reason. But I got nowhere fast. You can't use science, statistics, and reason to change feelings. And feelings are what feminism is founded on.
> 
> After a while, I became jealous of the feminists I was arguing against. They were so certain of their positions that not even science, statistics, and reason could influence them. I wanted that kind of certainty. So, since I couldn't beat them, I joined them. I became a feminist.
> 
> I now know that science, statistics, and reason are misogynistic tools that the patriarchy uses to try to oppress women. What is most important in this world is that women remain true to themselves. And if drunken twerking is what some wives want, then that is what they should have.
> 
> If their husbands have a problem with it, then the wives would be better off ridding themselves of such controlling, patriarchal, oppressive zeros and picking up new heroes on their next GNO.


I'm suspecting there's a bit o'sarcasm in this post


----------



## Caribbean Man

PHTlump said:


> You're saying that, because your wife hasn't gone on drunken twerking nights with her girlfriends, that you're dismissing the possibility that many other wives have? Weren't you the one who wrote about the appreciation for complexity and nuance?


:iagree:

In politics, that^^^is called " _Orwellian Logic_ " or
" _Doublespeak_."
In layman terms, sophistry.


----------



## Davelli0331

PHTlump said:


> I used to. I used to argue against feminism with science, statistics, and reason. But I got nowhere fast. You can't use science, statistics, and reason to change feelings. And feelings are what feminism is founded on.
> 
> After a while, I became jealous of the feminists I was arguing against. They were so certain of their positions that not even science, statistics, and reason could influence them. I wanted that kind of certainty. So, since I couldn't beat them, I joined them. I became a feminist.
> 
> I now know that science, statistics, and reason are misogynistic tools that the patriarchy uses to try to oppress women. What is most important in this world is that women remain true to themselves. And if drunken twerking is what some wives want, then that is what they should have.
> 
> If their husbands have a problem with it, then the wives would be better off ridding themselves of such controlling, patriarchal, oppressive zeros and picking up new heroes on their next GNO.


Um, ok.



PHTlump said:


> You're saying that, because your wife hasn't gone on drunken twerking nights with her girlfriends, that you're dismissing the possibility that many other wives have? Weren't you the one who wrote about the appreciation for complexity and nuance?


I can't tell if you're still being ironic or deliberately being obtuse. Regardless, what I'm saying and think I've been pretty clear about is that, for _my_ marriage, GNOs do not involve drunken twerk fests at meat markets. I conduct myself within that context. I've acknowledged several times in this thread that some women do in fact use them for drunken twerk fests.

The point that I've been trying to make in this thread is that, while some women conduct themselves poorly on GNOs and cheat, many others do not. Because I personally know many women who go on GNOs and never cheat, I personally reject the blanket statement, all-or-nothing generalizations that get thrown around on TAM (see also your views on feminism). Instead I prescribe to the view that each marriage is different, with its own nuances and complexity (there's those words again), and that it's up to each couple to decide their thoughts on GNOs, and it's up to each person within the marriage to enforce those agreed-upon boundaries.


----------



## Davelli0331

Caribbean Man said:


> :iagree:
> 
> In politics, that^^^is called " _Orwellian Logic_ " or
> " _Doublespeak_."
> In layman terms, sophistry.


Reading comprehension is hard, isn't it?


----------



## PAgirl

Married but Happy said:


> There is no difference between a GNO and BNO. The only things that's different is the individuals present, their attitudes and maturity. Most are good, responsible people, but of course some groups have one or more "bad apples."
> 
> We have no problem with each other going out with friends, and for most people this is a healthy way to maintain connections with those friends.


:iagree: Nothing wrong with it. As long as the husband and wife has their own date nights together also.


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> I can't tell if you're still being ironic or deliberately being obtuse. Regardless, what I'm saying and think I've been pretty clear about is that, for _my_ marriage, GNOs do not involve drunken twerk fests at meat markets. I conduct myself within that context. I've acknowledged several times in this thread that some women do in fact use them for drunken twerk fests.


Ah. So, you're not interested in discussing GNO, in general. You're only interested in discussing your wife's own, particular brand of GNO? To be fair to me, how could I possibly know your wife's GNO preferences?

Also, I don't particularly think it accomplishes much for one person to state, "This is what my wife does and this is how I feel about it. Obviously, this will either apply in limited fashion, or not at all to other people." No one, on either side of the issue, has any problems with women meeting for dinner and a chick flick. Why waste any time pretending that they do? Why not just deal with controversial subjects that divide the sides of the issue. What some people object to is when wives dress sexy, drink alcohol, and go to dance clubs where people troll for casual sex. That's why I focused my attention on that particular GNO scenario.



> The point that I've been trying to make in this thread is that, while some women conduct themselves poorly on GNOs and cheat, many others do not. Because I personally know many women who go on GNOs and never cheat, I personally reject the blanket statement, all-or-nothing generalizations that get thrown around on TAM (see also your views on feminism). Instead I prescribe to the view that each marriage is different, with its own nuances and complexity (there's those words again), and that it's up to each couple to decide their thoughts on GNOs, and it's up to each person within the marriage to enforce those agreed-upon boundaries.


I have missed all of the statements on this thread that argue that every wife who goes on GNO is guaranteed to cheat. Please quote them for me. I can't believe I was so obtuse.

However, because some women can face temptation and not falter, we can't make the statement that temptation is a dangerous thing? Tell me, does the fact that 5 out of 6 people who play Russian roulette survive mean that we can't say that Russian roulette is a dangerous game? Would you object if your wife wanted to play Russian roulette with her friends? What if she played it a few times and survived? Does that prove that she is invulnerable to the dangers of the game? Would you view a husband who tried to stop his wife from playing Russian roulette as a controlling, oppressive man who doesn't support feminism?


----------



## Davelli0331

PHTlump said:


> Ah. So, you're not interested in discussing GNO, in general. You're only interested in discussing your wife's own, particular brand of GNO? To be fair to me, how could I possibly know your wife's GNO preferences?
> 
> Also, I don't particularly think it accomplishes much for one person to state, "This is what my wife does and this is how I feel about it. Obviously, this will either apply in limited fashion, or not at all to other people." No one, on either side of the issue, has any problems with women meeting for dinner and a chick flick. Why waste any time pretending that they do? Why not just deal with controversial subjects that divide the sides of the issue. What some people object to is when wives dress sexy, drink alcohol, and go to dance clubs where people troll for casual sex. That's why I focused my attention on that particular GNO scenario.


My views on GNO are the sum total of my experiences with them. I come here to discuss marriage issues as they relate to my own marriage and to contribute to other discussions as I have experienced them. I have no personal need to argue what are for me hypotheticals since my W doesn't go on drunk twerk fests. Certainly that doesn't mean they don't exist, and certainly others are free to discuss that form of GNOs. I never said you couldn't. If and/or when my W decides to go on a twerk fest, I give you my word you will be the first TAMmer that I PM for advice.

You seem to be having a really hard time not getting butthurt about how I approach and use this forum. I highly suggest you put me on ignore, I think it will save you much anguish and confusion.



PHTlump said:


> I have missed all of the statements on this thread that argue that every wife who goes on GNO is guaranteed to cheat. Please quote them for me. I can't believe I was so obtuse.


 Me neither, I thought you were trolling us.



PHTlump said:


> However, because some women can face temptation and not falter, we can't make the statement that temptation is a dangerous thing? Tell me, does the fact that 5 out of 6 people who play Russian roulette survive mean that we can't say that Russian roulette is a dangerous game? Would you object if your wife wanted to play Russian roulette with her friends? What if she played it a few times and survived? Does that prove that she is invulnerable to the dangers of the game? Would you view a husband who tried to stop his wife from playing Russian roulette as a controlling, oppressive man who doesn't support feminism?


Wait, I thought you said you weren't going to draw overblown parallels and then use those as platforms for argument?


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> My views on GNO are the sum total of my experiences with them. I come here to discuss marriage issues as they relate to my own marriage and to contribute to other discussions as I have experienced them. I have no personal need to argue what are for me hypotheticals since my W doesn't go on drunk twerk fests.


Your first post in our exchange was to express your disagreement with my portrayal of GNO as wives dressing sexy, getting drunk, and dancing at clubs where people troll for casual sex. If you acknowledge that those GNO scenarios exist, and you have no interest in arguing about them, then why post your disagreement with my portrayal?



> You seem to be having a really hard time not getting butthurt about how I approach and use this forum. I highly suggest you put me on ignore, I think it will save you much anguish and confusion.


Not at all. As a newly converted feminist, I'm not having visceral reactions to anyone who disagrees with me, yet. Maybe in a few months I can react purely out of emotion and claim that anyone who disagrees with me is butthurt. Just have patience.



> Me neither, I thought you were trolling us.


No. I was simply curious whether your disagreement with the blanket condemnation of GNO on TAM had any basis in reality. I scanned back through the thread and couldn't find any of the all or nothing statements that you alluded to. That's why I invited you to post quotes of the statements you took issue with. And I see that you didn't post any.



> Wait, I thought you said you weren't going to draw overblown parallels and then use those as platforms for argument?


Not an overblown parallel. An analogy about risk. Apparently it went over your head, so I'll be explicit. The problem that many men, and some women, have with a typical GNO scenario isn't that wives lose all self-agency when they hit a club. Or that they are guaranteed to cheat on a GNO. It's about risk.

Some people believe the scientific studies that show that alcohol lowers inhibitions and impairs judgment. Some people believe the scientific studies that show that environment affects behavior. And some people believe that wives, even well-intending wives who love their husbands, are capable of making poor choices.

So, to those people, having one's wife lower her inhibitions, impair her judgment, dress to maximize her appeal to men, go to a place where men are trolling for casual sex, and behave in a way that men find seductive, is too much risk for comfort. The wife is likely to be approached for sex in that environment. And the wife will be relying on her inhibitions and judgment, which have both been compromised, to protect her marriage.

That scenario is riskier than a group of wives who avoid some, or all, of the items in that scenario. Drinking wine at a girlfriend's house will impair judgment and lower inhibitions, but there won't be men around looking for casual sex and the environment won't be conducive to hooking up. It's lower risk.


----------



## Anon Pink

It is the assumption that drinking combined with dancing combined with meat market environment combined with being well turned out means sex outside of marriage. It simply does not.

Twerking... Depends on the boundaries within that particular marriage. However it is safe to say a husband so insecure about his wife's behavior while dancing, is learning not going to be okay with her twerking.

Most of the twerking I see on the dance floor is girl on girl anyway. The odd woman seen twerking is generally twerking her own man.

But, I am 51 and the dance clubs we go to are either gay bars or resort clubs, where women our age don't look too absurd dancing and living it up. The clubs in town that draw the younger crowd ...haven't been to one since I was in that age group.

You just can't make a general statement about it and have it fit all relationships and comfort levels. But stopping your wife from going out dancing just because of the environment is...not something I would put up with nor suggest anyone else put up with. Same goes for husbands on BNOs


----------



## Coffee Amore

Anon Pink said:


> You just can't make a general statement about it and have it fit all relationships and comfort levels. But stopping your wife from going out dancing just because of the environment is...not something I would put up with nor suggest anyone else put up with. Same goes for husbands on BNOs


 Anon Pink! :whip: Stop trying to apply logic to broscience. Naked assertions with no sources and logic don't go together.


----------



## PHTlump

Anon Pink said:


> It is the assumption that drinking combined with dancing combined with meat market environment combined with being well turned out means sex outside of marriage. It simply does not.


You must have missed the point of my post, which was about risk. Nobody on this thread has ever stated that behavior X guarantees result Y. The men who object to the club scene for married women simply acknowledge the increased risk of certain behaviors. I'm glad we cleared up that misunderstanding.



> But stopping your wife from going out dancing just because of the environment is...not something I would put up with nor suggest anyone else put up with. Same goes for husbands on BNOs


I'm right there with you. Girl power. I'm simply trying to give you some insight on the unenlightened men in this thread. Some think that risk and temptation are dangerous. And that used to be me. But now I'm a feminist. That's why I recommend Cartman's attitude for wives.


----------



## Davelli0331

PHTlump said:


> Your first post in our exchange was to express your disagreement with my portrayal of GNO as wives dressing sexy, getting drunk, and dancing at clubs where people troll for casual sex. If you acknowledge that those GNO scenarios exist, and you have no interest in arguing about them, then why post your disagreement with my portrayal?


I was just offering another POV. I know those can be scary so I've tried to pad them with lots of humor. To be frank I didn't think you'd get this worked into a froth over the differing opinion of an Internet Stranger.



PHTlump said:


> Not at all. As a newly converted feminist, I'm not having visceral reactions to anyone who disagrees with me, yet. Maybe in a few months I can react purely out of emotion and claim that anyone who disagrees with me is butthurt. Just have patience.


All ribbing and trash talking aside, it's hard taking you seriously when you slip into the "Ironic Secretly Anti-Feminist" persona. I get the commentary you're trying to make and I'm sure your friends think it's very clever, but it's like I'm reading and actually on the cusp of agreeing with you on something and then you slip into that and it just discredits you.



PHTlump said:


> No. I was simply curious whether your disagreement with the blanket condemnation of GNO on TAM had any basis in reality. I scanned back through the thread and couldn't find any of the all or nothing statements that you alluded to. That's why I invited you to post quotes of the statements you took issue with. And I see that you didn't post any.


I weighed the time it would have taken to copy and paste all that against the likelihood that it would lead to intelligent discourse and opted to spend my time more wisely.



PHTlump said:


> Not an overblown parallel. An analogy about risk. Apparently it went over your head, so I'll be explicit. The problem that many men, and some women, have with a typical GNO scenario isn't that wives lose all self-agency when they hit a club. Or that they are guaranteed to cheat on a GNO. It's about risk.
> 
> Some people believe the scientific studies that show that alcohol lowers inhibitions and impairs judgment. Some people believe the scientific studies that show that environment affects behavior. And some people believe that wives, even well-intending wives who love their husbands, are capable of making poor choices.
> 
> So, to those people, having one's wife lower her inhibitions, impair her judgment, dress to maximize her appeal to men, go to a place where men are trolling for casual sex, and behave in a way that men find seductive, is too much risk for comfort. The wife is likely to be approached for sex in that environment. And the wife will be relying on her inhibitions and judgment, which have both been compromised, to protect her marriage.
> 
> That scenario is riskier than a group of wives who avoid some, or all, of the items in that scenario. Drinking wine at a girlfriend's house will impair judgment and lower inhibitions, but there won't be men around looking for casual sex and the environment won't be conducive to hooking up. It's lower risk.


OMG NO ONE'S EVER PUT IT THAT WAY I'VE BEEN SO BLIND

Ha ha just kidding. You know, the funny thing is, for the most part, I don't disagree with you. In fact, allow me to quote myself from this very thread:



Davelli0331 said:


> I actually agree with most of what is said in these threads. I agree that GNOs can be dangerous, that they can lead to slippery slopes and escalating risky situations. I agree that some women use them as outlets to get attention or even sexual gratification from men other than their Hs, and that sometimes toxic friends will encourage such bad behavior. I agree that some women who claim to be going on GNOs are outright lying.
> 
> The only small but significant disagreement that I have is that I don't think GNOs turn otherwise faithful women into cheaters. Alcohol or no, GNO or no, toxic friends or no, I believe a person either chooses to know their own boundaries and protect their marriage (like SB above) or they choose to allow themselves to start down that slippery slope.
> 
> You can throw in all the alcohol you want, all the toxic friends, the "sexually charged" atmosphere, but it all comes down to choice. A woman on a GNO either chooses to mind her moral misgivings each step along the path or she chooses to take that next step toward infidelity. *We can talk about alcohol and peer pressure and all that, but my personal belief is that those things don't change what's in people's hearts.*


My guess is the bolded is why people get so butthurt about this issue, because I'm sure some people read that as some kind of commentary that a H who doesn't allow his W to go on GNOs must secretly be insecure and scared she'll cheat, or that it's some other kind of commentary on the H that implies weakness.

Is that the driver behind your "Ironic Secretly Anti-Feminist" nitwitticisms? You think I'm a super pinko commie Feminist who acts "purely on emotion" and that's why I think GNOs are the sh!t and all Ws should have 5 or 6 a month?

Not at all, or at least not IMO. It's actually a reverse application (science words!) of a core boundary for me: I do not allow my W to tell me what I can and can't do. I make my own decisions and then we talk them over if there's disagreement. We prefer a more egalitarian marriage, and thus she expects the same latitude from me: I do not tell her what she can and can't do, including GNOs. Though as you effectively pointed out there is risk involved, I am willing to assume that risk so as to not violate either of our core boundaries. 

Although we have lots of joint decisions, too. GNOs/BNOs (which I do go on regularly) are just one of those things we sometimes do individually.

I understand that may not be your glass of bourbon, and rest assured that's not a commentary on any other form of marriage, including those that prefer less risk or more traditional gender roles. The screwball thing about all this is that I completely accept your views _as they apply to your marriage_.

Although I guess to you that sort of relativism does sound all New Age commie.


----------



## treyvion

Coffee Amore said:


> Anon Pink! :whip: Stop trying to apply logic to broscience. Naked assertions with no sources and logic don't go together.


Some where just saying these environments have been trouble for committed relationships for 100's and 100's of years. It's nothing new. Should a married go into hedonistic set and seek that type of attention? Because whether they want it, they will get it, unless they make themself extremely homely.


----------



## PHTlump

Davelli0331 said:


> I was just offering another POV. I know those can be scary so I've tried to pad them with lots of humor.


Humor? Hokay...



> To be frank I didn't think you'd get this worked into a froth over the differing opinion of an Internet Stranger.


Sorry to disappoint. I'm not all that worked up over you. I'm a fairly laid back guy. I mean, I can try to get angry, if it will make you happy. But it's going to be hard to work up any genuine emotion from a guy who makes a point, backs away from it, claims not to want to debate, and then accuses me of being butthurt about it. Yawn.



> I weighed the time it would have taken to copy and paste all that against the likelihood that it would lead to intelligent discourse and opted to spend my time more wisely.


I hear you. Debating against concrete statements is much more difficult and time consuming than using unsubstantiated claims as easy straw men. I don't blame you.



> OMG NO ONE'S EVER PUT IT THAT WAY I'VE BEEN SO BLIND


No problem. I'm sorry the Russian roulette analogy was too complex. It only took a little extra time to type it out explicitly.



> Ha ha just kidding. You know, the funny thing is, for the most part, I don't disagree with you. In fact, allow me to quote myself from this very thread:


Not surprisingly, your post was inconsistent. You acknowledge that GNO can be risky. Then, you dismiss the risk by claiming that faithful women can't be tempted into being unfaithful. I can certainly say that I disagree with one of your positions.



> My guess is the bolded is why people get so butthurt about this issue, because I'm sure some people read that as some kind of commentary that a H who doesn't allow his W to go on GNOs must secretly be insecure and scared she'll cheat, or that it's some other kind of commentary on the H that implies weakness.


I think a good many husbands who aren't in favor of GNO are insecure. They believe that their wives are morally fallible people who are capable of making mistakes. They believe that good people are capable of doing bad things. They believe that temptation can get the better of most people and, the greater the temptation, the greater the risk for making a mistake. I wouldn't classify those men as butthurt. Pragmatic, perhaps?



> Is that the driver behind your "Ironic Secretly Anti-Feminist" nitwitticisms? You think I'm a super pinko commie Feminist who acts "purely on emotion" and that's why I think GNOs are the sh!t and all Ws should have 5 or 6 a month?


There is nothing anti-feminist in my posts. My feminist recommendations can all be seen in the posts of accepted feminists on these boards with a longer track record than mine. My recommendations have been about letting women do whatever they want and damn the consequences. Is that what you call anti-feminist? If so, more feminists than me will have a bone to pick with you.



> Not at all, or at least not IMO. It's actually a reverse application (science words!) of a core boundary for me: I do not allow my W to tell me what I can and can't do. I make my own decisions and then we talk them over if there's disagreement. We prefer a more egalitarian marriage, and thus she expects the same latitude from me: I do not tell her what she can and can't do, including GNOs. Though as you effectively pointed out there is risk involved, I am willing to assume that risk so as to not violate either of our core boundaries.


That's fine with me. Only you can decide what risks you're willing to bear in your marriage. That's appropriate. Whether you want your wife to engage in low-risk behaviors, or high-risk behaviors has little direct impact on me. Whatever risk tolerance you're comfortable with, I hope things work out for you.


----------



## ScarletBegonias




----------



## hopelessromantic1

ScarletBegonias said:


>


:iagree::iagree::iagree:


----------



## Davelli0331

Dang, just when the repartee was getting good, too. I was quite enjoying giving and receiving such snark. Although I'm quite proud we kept it going this long without the thread being closed or one of us getting banned.

Obviously we disagree on a fundamental level about various things. This is an age-old TAM debate that I've seen play out a hundred times if I've seen it once, and it always comes down roughly the same two camps. It's an interesting debate, to be sure.


----------



## BradWesley

treyvion said:


> Some where just saying these environments have been trouble for committed relationships for 100's and 100's of years. It's nothing new. Should a married go into hedonistic set and seek that type of attention? Because whether they want it, they will get it, unless they make themself extremely homely.


Well I guess based om this rationale, we need to blame those g*d damn Romans for all these dance clubs, and bars. 

Those lousy bastards!


----------



## treyvion

BradWesley said:


> Well I guess based om this rationale, we need to blame those g*d damn Romans for all these dance clubs, and bars.
> 
> Those lousy bastards!


It was probably going on well before that, even to the caveman days.

You see, you may believe that monogomy is completely a socialized construct. Well many men get possessive of the woman who has great sex connection with him, he will not want others to have her, he will take care of her and put his life on the line. No one has to tell men to be like this, it's in their DNA. Not to say that man might not want to poke others occasionally, he probably does, but his favorite one(s) he will not allow another male close to her. If he saw one copulating, he would try to kill him.

But back into the caveman days, if the spouse got too far away from the caveman and a rival did a planet of the apes on her it would be about the same thing.


----------



## BradWesley

treyvion said:


> It was probably going on well before that, even to the caveman days.
> 
> You see, you may believe that monogomy is completely a socialized construct. Well many men get possessive of the woman who has great sex connection with him, he will not want others to have her, he will take care of her and put his life on the line. No one has to tell men to be like this, it's in their DNA. Not to say that man might not want to poke others occasionally, he probably does, but his favorite one(s) he will not allow another male close to her. If he saw one copulating, he would try to kill him.
> 
> But back into the caveman days, if the spouse got too far away from the caveman and a rival did a planet of the apes on her it would be about the same thing.


The cavemen reference, gave me a great idea. I'll need to contact Steven Spielberg, so that we can discuss his producing and directing a new feature film.

The movie will be titled " Jurassic Pr*ck".

PS - Turn on your sarcasm detector


----------



## treyvion

BradWesley said:


> The cavemen reference, gave me a great idea. I'll need to contact Steven Spielberg, so that we can discuss his producing and directing a new feature film.
> 
> The movie will be titled " Jurassic Pr*ck".
> 
> PS - Turn on your sarcasm detector


Nice


----------



## always_alone

treyvion said:


> But back into the caveman days, if the spouse got too far away from the caveman and a rival did a planet of the apes on her it would be about the same thing.


For the record, your portrayal of historical humans is entirely inaccurate. 

I know some men just love the idea that they are "programmed" to "poke" many women while demanding fidelity from all of them, but the truth is that'4 an utterly baseless fantasy and double standard.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> It is the assumption that drinking combined with dancing combined with meat market environment combined with being well turned out means sex outside of marriage. It simply does not.
> 
> Twerking... Depends on the boundaries within that particular marriage. However it is safe to say a husband so insecure about his wife's behavior while dancing, is learning not going to be okay with her twerking.
> 
> Most of the twerking I see on the dance floor is girl on girl anyway. The odd woman seen twerking is generally twerking her own man.
> 
> But, I am 51 and the dance clubs we go to are either gay bars or resort clubs, where women our age don't look too absurd dancing and living it up. The clubs in town that draw the younger crowd ...haven't been to one since I was in that age group.
> 
> You just can't make a general statement about it and have it fit all relationships and comfort levels. But stopping your wife from going out dancing just because of the environment is...not something I would put up with nor suggest anyone else put up with. Same goes for husbands on BNOs


Hypothetical here....if my wife wanted to go out with her friends to one of these places I'd tell her something like "sorry don't think so no way." Ultimately I couldn't stop her. But if she went anyway I think my response would be to take one of her boundaries (for me) and deliberately violate it.


----------



## Anon Pink

nuclearnightmare said:


> Hypothetical here....if my wife wanted to go out with her friends to one of these places I'd tell her something like "sorry don't think so no way." Ultimately I couldn't stop her. But if she went anyway I think my response would be to take one of her boundaries (for me) and deliberately violate it.


Okay, let's follow that logic.

What boundary violation would you feel most closely mirrors going to a night club and dancing?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Let me debunk this false logic that alcohol cannot make a faithful spouse into an unfaithful spouse.

1]Faithfulness is not a quantitative numerical value like volume , mass, speed,or length but a qualitative value. 

2] Faithfulness can only be measured by the decisions you make and your actions , based on those decisions, hence it is proportional and relative. A spouse could desire another person whilst being sexually " faithful" to their spouse,and without even meeting or speaking to the object of their desire.

3]Hence, it can be said that faithfulness can be affected by internal stimuli, such a personal boundaries. 

4]Personal boundaries can be also be affected by external stimuli because personal boundaries are derived from sources external to us. No man is an island.

5]It is a well documented, scientific fact that alcohol usage affects the different regions of the brain in different ways.

a]*Cerebral cortex*: In this region, where thought processing and consciousness are centered, alcohol depresses the behavioral inhibitory centers, making the person less inhibited; *it slows down the processing of information from the eyes, ears, mouth and other senses; and it inhibits the thought processes, making it difficult to think clearly.*

b]*Cerebellum*: Alcohol affects this center of movement and balance, resulting in the staggering, off-balance swagger we associate with the so-called "falling-down drunk."

c] *Hypothalamus and pituitary*: The hypothalamus and pituitary coordinate automatic brain functions and hormone release.* Alcohol depresses nerve centers in the hypothalamus that control sexual arousal and performance. Although sexual urge may increase,* sexual performance decreases.*
~FRONTAL LOBE CHANGES IN ALCOHOLISM: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE - Oxford Journals > Medicne> Alcohol & Alcoholism > Volume #36 , Issue 5 > P 357 - 368.

6]Since alcohol affects brain functions, it can affect a faithful person's boundaries whether or not they want it to. Alcohol , being a substance cannot not differentiate whether or not a person is a faithful or unfaithful spouse. Cognitive ability is increasingly suppressed proportionate to alcohol intake.

8]faithfulness is not a fixed asset.A person could have been faithful for 20 years , and one bad choice would lead to an act of unfaithfulness. 

7]Hence, a faithful person can , under the influence of alcohol , commit an act of unfaithfulness.


It doesn't matter if you're a cheater with loose boundaries or a faithful spouse with solid boundaries. Alcohol severely inhibits the reasoning ability of the brain even if you don't want it to. Whilst your reaction might be different to the next person, fact is it does affect your ability to reason, and your behaviour becomes less predictable.

Can alcohol make a faithful person become unfaithful?
The answer is a resounding ,Yes.
Also noteworthy , is that alcohol usage can and does affect relationships, negatively.


----------



## Davelli0331

I definitely agree that alcohol impairs judgment, and that it can lead to a series of bad decisions. In this thread (and others) when I've said "alcohol doesn't make faithful people cheat", I can see now that I was using poor and indirect verbiage to make my point. What I'm really trying to say is, "A person should know how they act under the influence and set boundaries accordingly." IOW if a person knows that they get frisky while drinking, then either their spouse must be OK with that or that person should avoid alcohol. That holds true whether at a GNO, work function, or what have you.

For me it's a question of "Where does the onus fall, on the alcohol for skewing the thought process or on the person for imbibing to that point?" You might say, "Well, she started drinking with good intentions, but then as her judgment became ever more impaired she made subsequently poorer decisions."

However, there are many people who drink responsibly. They know their limits, they know how to pace themselves, and they know when it's time to stop. And they don't end up in bed with strange people (or least strange people that they're not married to).

For me, it's a question of personal responsibility, of knowing your boundaries and your limits. If you know your boundaries start slipping after X number of drinks (or any alcohol at all), then don't drink to that point.

All of this comes from very personal experience. When I found out about my W's cheating (you can find my thread on here), she blameshifted much of her cheating to alcohol. I do not accept that. Irrespective of the effects of alcohol on her inhibitions and judgment, she made the choice to begin down that path in the first place. People have to own that, or else you're just another person buying into the victim mentality that nothing we do is our fault.


----------



## Anon Pink

Caribbean Man said:


> Let me debunk this false logic that alcohol *cannot* make a faithful spouse into an unfaithful spouse.


If anyone stated "cannot" they misspoke.

The true statement is that alcohol *"does not"*make a faithful spouse into an unfaithful spouse.

Furthermore, it is not simply the presence of alcohol, and or the environment that would turn a faithful spouse to an unfaithful spouse.

Get me all liquored up and give me a gun and I'm still not gonna shoot it! Get me all liquored up and intice me to rob a convenience store and I'm still not gonna do it!


----------



## treyvion

always_alone said:


> For the record, your portrayal of historical humans is entirely inaccurate.
> 
> I know some men just love the idea that they are "programmed" to "poke" many women while demanding fidelity from all of them, but the truth is that'4 an utterly baseless fantasy and double standard.


You sound like a female. An unprogrammed male mind is not going to want to share the object of his desire, he will want to kill and hurt the guy who penetrates her. A male mind is going to want to protect and provide for her. He is not going to tolerate another male getting to close and physical is completely out of the question. The intensity of fury would be similar if to if a man was sodomizing his daughter!

You shouldn't fight a man's natural instincts, but work with them and support them. You don't need to control a man. Take care of your man and he will take care of you. Almost like a machine.


----------



## treyvion

Anon Pink said:


> If anyone stated "cannot" they misspoke.
> 
> The true statement is that alcohol *"does not"*make a faithful spouse into an unfaithful spouse.
> 
> Furthermore, it is not simply the presence of alcohol, and or the environment that would turn a faithful spouse to an unfaithful spouse.
> 
> Get me all liquored up and give me a gun and I'm still not gonna shoot it! Get me all liquored up and intice me to rob a convenience store and I'm still not gonna do it!


Get you all liquored up and you wouldn't run over a pedestrian sober but you do it drunk.

People do alot of stupid and illogical $hit while drunk and high on drugs. They are much more suggestible.

Like someone said, there are thoughts that they would have never ever acted upon, but the alcohol removes the inhibitions and now they are doing $hit they wouldn't normally do.

Alcohol fuels anger, and causes fighting where there may have not been any either.

It also would encourage someone participating in a hedonistic set, where before they would have known better.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

treyvion said:


> Get you all liquored up and you wouldn't run over a pedestrian sober but you do it drunk.


What do impaired motor skills have to do with cheating on your spouse/partner?


----------



## Anon Pink

treyvion said:


> Get you all liquored up and you wouldn't run over a pedestrian sober but you do it drunk.
> 
> People do alot of stupid and illogical $hit while drunk and high on drugs. They are much more suggestible.
> 
> Like someone said, there are thoughts that they would have never ever acted upon, but the alcohol removes the inhibitions and now they are doing $hit they wouldn't normally do.
> 
> Alcohol fuels anger, and causes fighting where there may have not been any either.
> 
> It also would encourage someone participating in a hedonistic set, where before they would have known better.


People drive after drinking because it is an extension of a normal behavior. People argue and become violent after drinking because it is an extension of their normal thought patterns minus the inhibition. 

Inhibition comes in a range from slight to severe or absolute. If a person has a severe inhibition to swimming, you won't find them in a pool after drinking. If a person has an absolute inhibition to shooting a gun, being drunk won't take that inhibition away.

I am well aware of the neurological effects of drug an alcohol use, thank you.


----------



## treyvion

Anon Pink said:


> People drive after drinking because it is an extension of a normal behavior. People argue and become violent after drinking because it is an extension of their normal thought patterns minus the inhibition.
> 
> Inhibition comes in a range from slight to severe or absolute. If a person has a severe inhibition to swimming, you won't find them in a pool after drinking. If a person has an absolute inhibition to shooting a gun, being drunk won't take that inhibition away.
> 
> I am well aware of the neurological effects of drug an alcohol use, thank you.


All people have thoughts they would never act upon. Inhibitions are there for a reason.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Anon Pink said:


> If anyone stated "cannot" they misspoke.
> 
> The true statement is that alcohol *"does not"*make a faithful spouse into an unfaithful spouse.
> 
> Furthermore, it is not simply the presence of alcohol, and or the environment that would turn a faithful spouse to an unfaithful spouse.
> 
> Get me all liquored up and give me a gun and I'm still not gonna shoot it! Get me all liquored up and intice me to rob a convenience store and I'm still not gonna do it!


And you don't _know_ that for sure.

The dad who goes to the bar with his buddies , has one drink too much and still takes the steering wheel , never intended to crash, killing two of his buddies and paralysing himself from the waist down.
In fact, he when sober would have said that he will never drive whilst drunk because he was aware of it's consequences.

That's the problem with getting drunk.
You never know what you're going to do. In fact , you don't even know that you're doing it.

That's why I think it's immoral for a sober man to have sex with a drunk woman he just met. I personally think it's no different to rape.

That's why in the said scenario we're discussing, having good boundaries cannot negate the effects of excess blood alcohol levels.
But having a good group of friends who respect themselves, respect your marriage , could help.


----------



## Anon Pink

That's right, inhibitions are there for a reason. Alcohol LOWERS inhibition but doesn't eradicate them altogether.


----------



## treyvion

Caribbean Man said:


> And you don't _know_ that for sure.
> 
> The dad who goes to the bar with his buddies , has one drink too much and still takes the steering wheel , never intended to crash, killing two of his buddies and paralysing himself from the waist down.
> 
> That's the problem with getting drunk.
> You never know what you're going to do. In fact , you don't even know that you're doing it.
> 
> That's why I think it's immoral for a sober man to have sex with a drunk woman he just met. I personally think it's no different to rape.
> 
> That's why in the said scenario we're discussing, having good boundaries cannot negate the effects of excess blood alcohol levels.
> But having a good group of friends who respect themselves, respect your marriage , could help.


I never blame the alcohol when it bridged them over from a non-cheater to a cheater. I blame them on being in the wrong place. You keep going into the wrong environment, trying to fit in that environment, you are going to start doing what they do. Maybe not all people, but alot of people who don't respect how easy it is to stray.

GNO's and doing single people things OFTEN while married has been a precursor to trouble since back to Christ.


----------



## Caribbean Man

treyvion said:


> All people have thoughts they would never act upon. Inhibitions are there for a reason.


Inhibitions are a learnt, built in safety mechanism , without them , we would take unnecessary risks without proper analysis.


----------



## Anon Pink

Caribbean Man said:


> And you don't _know_ that for sure.
> 
> The dad who goes to the bar with his buddies , has one drink too much and still takes the steering wheel , never intended to crash, killing two of his buddies and paralysing himself from the waist down.
> In fact, he when sober would have said that he will never drive whilst drunk because he was aware of it's consequences.
> 
> That's the problem with getting drunk.
> You never know what you're going to do. In fact , you don't even know that you're doing it.
> 
> That's why I think it's immoral for a sober man to have sex with a drunk woman he just met. I personally think it's no different to rape.
> 
> That's why in the said scenario we're discussing, having good boundaries cannot negate the effects of excess blood alcohol levels.
> But having a good group of friends who respect themselves, respect your marriage , could help.


That dad who drove after drinking already had lowered inhibitions about drinking and driving. THATS the problem. If you have a personal absolute inhibition about drinking and driving, no amount of booze will convince you that you're okay to drive.


----------



## treyvion

Anon Pink said:


> That's right, inhibitions are there for a reason. Alcohol LOWERS inhibition but doesn't eradicate them altogether.


It removes some. There are people who would never dance, but do it drunk. They don't even like it that much, but alcohol flips their polarity and they want to have fun. I didn't say dancing was inherently bad either, just pointing an example.


----------



## BradWesley

WOW - some guys just don't understand that the "one size fits all " rebuttal doesn't work, and you need to put down the broad brushes!


----------



## PHTlump

hopelessromantic1 said:


> What do impaired motor skills have to do with cheating on your spouse/partner?


You think that alcohol only affects the part of your brain that controls motor skills?


----------



## treyvion

BradWesley said:


> WOW - some guys just don't understand that the "one size fits all " rebuttal doesn't work, and you need to put down the broad brushes!


The argument that alcohol never bridged someone to cheat is a weak one. Because we all know it has bridged a good percentage. I also accept there are people who respect the danger of cheating enough won't be bridged by it nor under the influence of almost any drug.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

PHTlump said:


> You think that alcohol only affects the part of your brain that controls motor skills?


No, you've taken that out of context. I said you can't equate the physical impairment which alcohol causes (eg: inability to drive in a straight line) to drinking=cheating.

Having sex outside your marriage is not a direct physical action that is caused by putting alcohol into your body. Period.


----------



## BradWesley

treyvion said:


> The argument that alcohol never bridged someone to cheat is a weak one. Because we all know it has bridged a good percentage. I also accept there are people who respect the danger of cheating enough won't be bridged by it nor under the influence of almost any drug.


Please point out to me where I ever mentioned that alcohol never bridged someone to cheat. Of course it has, and as far as a " good percentage", I don't know, but if you do, please post a link to a credible source.


----------



## samyeagar

Anon Pink said:


> That dad who drove after drinking already had lowered inhibitions about drinking and driving. THATS the problem. *If you have a personal absolute inhibition about drinking and driving, no amount of booze will convince you that you're okay to drive*.


And you would not put yourself in a position where it was even a remote possibility...


----------



## hopelessromantic1

BradWesley said:


> WOW - some guys just don't understand that the "one size fits all " rebuttal doesn't work, and you need to put down the broad brushes!


Exactly, you cannot lump the general population into one category. I mean, you can, but people are going to react negatively because smart people know they are their own person with completely different inhibitions, morals, etc from the guy sitting next to them. 

I've been near blackout drunk more than a time or two and still maintain a moral compass, some people just cannot and obviously refuse to try to understand that some people are wired this way.


----------



## Anon Pink

samyeagar said:


> And you would not put yourself in a position where it was even a remote possibility...


Me personally, not a chance! I'm a terrible driver sober! Hate driving so I take every opportunity to NOT drive. I keep asking my kids if I'm old enough to give up my license yet. It's a family joke due to all the heartache we went through to take away my mothers keys.


----------



## Caribbean Man

BradWesley said:


> Please point out to me where I ever mentioned that alcohol never bridged someone to cheat. Of course it has, and as far as a " good percentage", I don't know, but if you do, please post a link to a credible source.


Well maybe you could post a link to a credible source that gives the stats on how many married people cheat?

And if you can't , then on what basis are you objecting to his statement ?


----------



## Caribbean Man

LMAO!
What's next?


Human beings are not " wired " to be faithful or anything.
We are wired to have sex and reproduce.
If anything, science leans more to the idea of people NOT being wired to be faithful.
Hence " _forced monogamy_," aka marriage.

One does not have to be " wired " in order to cheat, just like one does not have to be " wired " in order to tell a lie.

Given the right circumstances,sh!t happens.
In comes the concept of forgiveness and reconciliation.


----------



## treyvion

hopelessromantic1 said:


> Exactly, you cannot lump the general population into one category. I mean, you can, but people are going to react negatively because smart people know they are their own person with completely different inhibitions, morals, etc from the guy sitting next to them.
> 
> I've been near blackout drunk more than a time or two and still maintain a moral compass, some people just cannot and obviously refuse to try to understand that some people are wired this way.


Everyones not like that. Many people have a completely different personality that comes alive with alcohol and in the party environment.


----------



## BradWesley

Caribbean Man said:


> Well maybe you could post a link to a credible source that gives the stats on how many married people cheat?
> 
> And if you can't , then on what basis are you objecting to his statement ?


I already answered that I don't know. However the other poster, when he mentioned a "good percentage", is implying that he may know what the percentage is, and if so, post a link to a credible source.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

treyvion said:


> Everyones not like that. Many people have a completely different personality that comes alive with alcohol and in the party environment.


OMG that's exactly what I've been saying. YES, some will cheat, some won't. The point is that so many men on here say that given opportunity and circumstances, anyone can cheat, and that's not true.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

Caribbean Man said:


> LMAO!
> What's next?
> 
> 
> Human beings are not " wired " to be faithful or anything.
> We are wired to have sex and reproduce.
> If anything, science leans more to the idea of people NOT being wired to be faithful.
> Hence " _forced monogamy_," aka marriage.
> 
> One does not have to be " wired " in order to cheat, just like one does not have to be " wired " in order to tell a lie.
> 
> Given the right circumstances,sh!t happens.
> In comes the concept of forgiveness and reconciliation.


Whatever, I defer to your almighty knowledge. If you must take what everyone says and twist it to mean that they are saying something else, there is no talking to you anyway.


----------



## Caribbean Man

BradWesley said:


> I already answered that I don't know. However the other poster, when he mentioned a "good percentage", is implying that he may know what the percentage is, and if so, post a link to a credible source.


I think we're using semantics here.

What good is statistics to someone whose relationship has be damaged by infidelity linked to a spouses alcohol use?

The question is can alcohol be ruled out as a factor in infidelity?
The answer is NO.

Can trolling dating sites or Craigslist be ruled out as a contributing factor in infidelity?
The answer is NO.

Going to a club and dancing with members of the opposite sex does in no way automatically mean that one would have sex or cheat with then , in the same way that drinking excessive alcohol and getting drunk in the same environment does not automatically mean that a person will have sex with someone else than their husband.

Yet some people draw their boundary right there.
They have big problems with their spouse dancing with a member of the opposite sex.
Is there any data available from credible sources to show that , this boundary poses a greater risk than alcohol?
The answer is NO

Knowing and understanding what constitutes a threat to our marriage, helps us form good , solid boundaries. These boundaries would vary from person to person based on their experience

Not being able to recognize a threat = POOR BOUNDARIES.


----------



## PHTlump

hopelessromantic1 said:


> No, you've taken that out of context. I said you can't equate the physical impairment which alcohol causes (eg: inability to drive in a straight line) to drinking=cheating.
> 
> Having sex outside your marriage is not a direct physical action that is caused by putting alcohol into your body. Period.


No, I understand your context. I just disagree with your premise.

You seem to believe that alcohol will affect the part of your brain that controls motor skills, which is why you can't drive as well after you've been drinking. You would make physical mistakes that you wouldn't normally make.

And yet, you also believe that alcohol will not affect the parts of your brain that control your inhibitions and decision-making processes. So, being drunk, you won't end up making a decision that you wouldn't ordinarily make.

I disagree. I think, no I know, that alcohol affects the portions of your brain that control both motor skills AND decision making and inhibitions. That's why many tales of infidelity involve alcohol.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

PHTlump said:


> No, I understand your context. I just disagree with your premise.
> 
> You seem to believe that alcohol will affect the part of your brain that controls motor skills, which is why you can't drive as well after you've been drinking. You would make physical mistakes that you wouldn't normally make.
> 
> And yet, you also believe that alcohol will not affect the parts of your brain that control your inhibitions and decision-making processes. So, being drunk, you won't end up making a decision that you wouldn't ordinarily make.
> 
> I disagree. I think, no I know, that alcohol affects the portions of your brain that control both motor skills AND decision making and inhibitions. That's why many tales of infidelity involve alcohol.


If you're drunk and you get behind the wheel of a car, you ARE going to swerve, drive poorly, etc...if you're drunk enough, you cannot physically drive straight. If you're drunk and you are in a place where there are people of the opposite sex, it is NOT an absolute that everyone would cheat, or break any marriage boundaries. 

According to your logic, we can agree then that I am a superhero? Because during the MANY years that I went to Mardi Gras with only the girls, for an entire weekend, so drunk I couldn't walk a straight line, and never ONCE did it tempt me to do anything outside my marriage. (Showing my boobs was allowed, so that doesn't count, and YES I would do that sober.) Not to mention all the other time's I've been drinking without my husband. (Oy, I'm starting to sound like an alcoholic, promise I'm not.) 

All I'm trying to say here is that for some folks, it really doesn't matter how much they drink. It's just not going to happen. I hated my ex husband, despised him because he was an abuser. But I never did the things the other girls on my trip did, went to hotel rooms with men, kissed random strangers, cheated on their husbands....some of us just won't do that no matter how drunk. 


I'm so over trying to explain that, either you can see that point of view or you can't.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Hmmmmmm.:scratchhead:


----------



## Faithful Wife

CM said: "Hence " forced monogamy," aka marriage."


Mmm....*forced* monogamy. That's when he grabs me by the neck and forces me down on the bed, right?


----------



## Caribbean Man

Faithful Wife said:


> CM said: "Hence " forced monogamy," aka marriage."
> 
> 
> Mmm....*forced* monogamy. That's when he grabs me by the neck and forces me down on the bed, right?


lol,
I know you're probably saying that tongue in cheek, so in your case, the answer is yes!

But actually I was referring to the way an alternate construct called polyamory views monogamous marriage.

They refer to it as " _forced monogamy_" because human beings aren't " wired " to be monogamous.
Their theory is , remove monogamy as the legally accepted construct and problem of infidelity would be non existent.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

Caribbean Man said:


> lol,
> I know you're probably saying that tongue in cheek, so in your case, the answer is yes!
> 
> But actually I was referring to the way an alternate construct called polyamory views monogamous marriage.
> 
> They refer to it as " _forced monogamy_" because human beings aren't " wired " to be monogamous.
> Their theory is , remove monogamy as the legally accepted construct and problem of infidelity would be non existent.


Here's an honest question for you, are those of us who never think about cheating, or what it would be like, or wish we could have an affair just WEIRD? LOL...because this is me.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> Okay, let's follow that logic.
> 
> What boundary violation would you feel most closely mirrors going to a night club and dancing?


Anon P;
yep....interesting question. Continuiing the hypothetical......I would think hard on what boundary to mess with. Going to same type of place on BNO probably wouldn't work since she would probably be OK with it (for consistency sake if nothing else). If she went to this kind of place I imagine she would follow the Frenchfry rules and shut off any "hitting on", no one buys anything for her, she only dances with her friends etc. However she doesn't drink. I don't drink either, which is important to her (our religious code). so I would probably inform her that I plan to get a drinking buddy (male) and head out to a bar or pub and do just that, that I plan to get drunk, in fact. 

So in my case that would make my point. If that wasn't an option, the next time I travel overseas I might seek out and attend some kind of sex show (watching only), then tell her all about it when I get back. I'd want to be careful because crossing a spouse's 'boundary' is not the same as cheating or of anywhere near the same magnitude. so I would want to avoid situations where I think I would be too vulnerable.

so does this all make sense to you?


----------



## norajane

> If that wasn't an option, the next time I travel overseas I might seek out and attend some kind of sex show (watching only), then tell her all about it when I get back.


What is a sex show? Strippers in a strip club? People actually having sex?

And you think this is equivalent to a dance club? There is no nudity and people having sex in front of everyone in dance clubs that I've been to.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Thing is a boundary is just that, a boundary , an " line in the sand."

One person's boundary would be different from another.
In marriage relationship, if two people cannot agree on marital boundaries , then the marriage cannot work.

If your partner doesn't like the club scene , and you knew that from the beginning but still decided to marry that person, it is useless calling him a 
" control freak " when you decide that you want to go and he has problems with it.
If your partner was against porn and the strip club culture before marriage, then it doesn't matter if EVERYONE ON TAM , or the couple next door sees no problem with porn or strip clubs. What matters is what you and your wife agreed to. 

Hence trying to paint a bunch of anonymous internet posters as anything because they have their own boundaries based on their own experience makes absolutely no sense.

Like I said before, my wife doesn't like the club environment, so I no longer go. I met her like that and that is what I agreed to ,when I said " I do."


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> What is a sex show? Strippers in a strip club? People actually having sex?
> 
> And you think this is equivalent to a dance club? There is no nudity and people having sex in front of everyone in dance clubs that I've been to.


And right there is where the " tit for tat" passive aggressive dynamic creeps in and resentments in the marriage begin to build.

Not a healthy dynamic at all.

Before it reaches to that, simply sit and discuss boundaries, and stop the childish entitled behaviour .
You are not entitled to go to a dance club
You are not entitled to go to a strip joint or sex show.

If two married people can't do that with either one or both of then not getting upset and throwing a tantrum, then they immature and have no business being married.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> And right there is where the " tit for tat" passive aggressive dynamic creeps in and resentments in the marriage begin to build.
> 
> Not a healthy dynamic at all.
> 
> Before it reaches to that, simply sit and discuss boundaries, and stop the childish entitled behaviour .
> You are not entitled to go to a dance club
> You are not entitled to go to a strip joint or sex show.
> 
> If two married people can't do that with either one or both of then not getting upset and throwing a tantrum, then they immature and have no business being married.


I have no idea what you're trying to say. I was asking whether nuclearnightmare really believes that dance clubs are like whatever "sex shows" are because I have never seen any sex shows in dance clubs.


----------



## hopelessromantic1

Caribbean Man said:


> And right there is where the " tit for tat" passive aggressive dynamic creeps in and resentments in the marriage begin to build.
> 
> Not a healthy dynamic at all.
> 
> Before it reaches to that, simply sit and discuss boundaries, and stop the childish entitled behaviour .
> You are not entitled to go to a dance club
> You are not entitled to go to a strip joint or sex show.
> 
> If two married people can't do that with either one or both of then not getting upset and throwing a tantrum, then they immature and have no business being married.


:iagree:
Wouldn't it be great if immature people knew better and just didn't get married? I think that's such a big problem in the world today.


----------



## PHTlump

hopelessromantic1 said:


> If you're drunk and you get behind the wheel of a car, you ARE going to swerve, drive poorly, etc...if you're drunk enough, you cannot physically drive straight. If you're drunk and you are in a place where there are people of the opposite sex, it is NOT an absolute that everyone would cheat, or break any marriage boundaries.


You're trying to connect the dots on only one side of your analogy. Sure, if you're drunk, you'll drive poorly. But that doesn't mean that you'll crash your car. I've driven drunk several times. I've never crashed. Because I've never crashed and hurt someone, I can't conclude that I'm impervious to the effects of alcohol.

Similarly, if you're drunk, you ARE going to make choices that you wouldn't make sober. Perhaps it's eating dessert, or too many carbs. Perhaps it's calling an ex when you broke up three weeks ago. Perhaps it's making out with a random guy when you're married. If you've never done something stupid and out of character when you're drunk, then you've never been drunk.



> I'm so over trying to explain that, either you can see that point of view or you can't.


I understand your point of view. I just don't necessarily agree with it. I think that relatively few people who cheat on their spouses plan to, or would have admitted, years before, that they might just cheat on their spouses. I think most of those people believed that they were above such temptations and could never, under any circumstances, be influenced to behave contrary to their moral code. That's why they felt comfortable putting themselves in environments where they would be tempted. But they were fooling themselves.

People can make mistakes. They can be influenced. Most people are convinced that something as innocuous as a commercial, billboard, or print ad can't influence them. But advertisers will spend $171 billion in the U.S. this year because those people are wrong. They CAN be influenced. Environment DOES influence behavior. It's nothing more than arrogance to believe otherwise.


----------



## alexm

I really don't have a problem with BNO/GNO's. My wife and I rarely get out on our own as it is, but every now and again, I get together with the guys, and vice versa. She likes to dance, I hate it. I like the pub thing, sit around and shoot the **** and have a few, she doesn't. I can't drag her to a pub, she can't drag me to a dance club. So we get it out of our system once, maybe twice a year, no big deal.

Of course we trust each other. Yes, alcohol can impair your judgement, but if you're too drunk to think straight, you're too drunk to... well... just like the song.

If you're drunk, but not drunk enough to do something with somebody outside of your marriage, then you're still in control. Alcohol is the great equalizer. What goes on in our heads is often controlled by sobriety. We KNOW something is wrong, but we don't do it. After a few drinks, we are still in control of our brains, but it allows us to do things we are WILLING to do, but wouldn't under normal circumstances. It makes us more honest.

I've always believed the "drunk" excuse is a sham. It only removes the (very) thin veneer separating "willing" and "able".

So if my wife, god forbid, ever slipped up while on a GNO, I wouldn't blame the alcohol. She wouldn't have gone out that night PLANNING to do something, but it's something that clearly was in her brain already. It just took a push to do it.

So by not allowing your spouse to do these types of things shows great distrust, not just in them, but in your marriage. And if they do do something bad, then it was only a matter of time.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

norajane said:


> What is a sex show? Strippers in a strip club? People actually having sex?
> 
> And you think this is equivalent to a dance club? There is no nudity and people having sex in front of everyone in dance clubs that I've been to.


I think they are just different variaties of female nudity.....dancing, stripping etc. I don't know for sure because I have never atended one. I believe in many cases they are warm-up acts for customers that plan to visit prostitutes on the premises, including some of the performers.

Assuming I had discussed with her at length how bad it makes me feel when she goes to these dance clubs with her girlfriends - she then chooses to go anyway - I would not be inclined to engage with her on whether what I did was worse than what she did......which boundary is equivalent to which other. I'd just ask her how it feels to be disrespected, to have me set aside her strong feelings about me going certain places, even if I don't do anything wrong while I'm there.


----------



## BradWesley

norajane said:


> What is a sex show? Strippers in a strip club? People actually having sex?
> 
> And you think this is equivalent to a dance club? There is no nudity and people having sex in front of everyone in dance clubs that I've been to.


Years ago, one of my Asian agents decided to take me to one in 
Bangkok. We weren't in there 5 minutes when I demanded to leave.

VERY DISTURBING!


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> So by not allowing your spouse to do these types of things shows great distrust, not just in them, but in your marriage. And if they do do something bad, then it was only a matter of time.


The same logic can applied to hanging out with ex lovers and opposite sex " friends" ,chatting hours online with them. After all, he / she is usually "_just a friend_," and the spouse is accused of being " _controlling_ "
In fact ," _you don't trust me_" is one of the first defensive lines a betrayed spouse hears from a wayward spouse when they are confronted.


----------



## sh987

alexm said:


> I've always believed the "drunk" excuse is a sham. It only removes the (very) thin veneer separating "willing" and "able".


Yup. It's like most other excuses in the world: doesn't wash.

The moment a person chooses to start drinking and then continues to do it to the point of intoxication, they accept responsibility for any actions they undertake while drunk. Period.


----------



## Anon Pink

nuclearnightmare said:


> Anon P;
> yep....interesting question. Continuiing the hypothetical......I would think hard on what boundary to mess with. Going to same type of place on *BNO probably wouldn't work since she would probably be OK with it* (for consistency sake if nothing else). If she went to this kind of place I imagine she would follow the Frenchfry rules and shut off any "hitting on", no one buys anything for her, she only dances with her friends etc. However she doesn't drink. I don't drink either, which is important to her (our religious code). so I would probably inform her that I plan to get a drinking buddy (male) and head out to a bar or pub and do just that, that I plan to get drunk, in fact.
> 
> So in my case that would make my point. If that wasn't an option, the next time I travel overseas I might seek out and attend some kind of sex show (watching only), then tell her all about it when I get back. I'd want to be careful because crossing a spouse's 'boundary' is not the same as cheating or of anywhere near the same magnitude. so I would want to avoid situations where I think I would be too vulnerable.
> 
> so does this all make sense to you?


Your wife is okay with you going to a dance club on a BNO, but you're not okay with her doing the same? This is the unequal double standard. She trusts you to behave, but you don't trust her to behave?

And a sex show does not compare to going out dancing.

My boundaries are not as tight as yours because if my H went to see a sex show, I would want to hear all about it!:smthumbup:


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> Your wife is okay with you going to a dance club on a BNO, but you're not okay with her doing the same? This is the unequal double standard. She trusts you to behave, but you don't trust her to behave?
> 
> And a sex show does not compare to going out dancing.
> 
> My boundaries are not as tight as yours because if my H went to see a sex show, I would want to hear all about it!:smthumbup:


remember this is a hypothetical, my wife has never had interest in these kinds of clubs. I was just saying that if she was, then she'd probably think it OK for me to do as well. Then in my 'tit for tat' hypothetical I'd have to do something else.....in order to show her how it feels.

and yes, sounds like you would be a tough one to get even with! probably have to do something that would land me in prison


----------



## SolidSnake

I don't think GNOs or BNOs are a good idea, assuming we are talking about going out drinking, clubbing or partying. I don't think there is a double standard and somehow GNOs are more innocuous. Its not a good idea to go out drinking and partying without your spouse regardless of gender. 

Going out to dinner, a friends house, or a movie, etc. for GNO or BNO is probably ok as long as its not excessive. 

I realize everyone is different, but I have zero desire to go to clubs and bars now that I am married. I don't want to, and I feel like its a singles scene. There is nothing meaningful to be gained from it for me. An occasional dinner or brunch with a friend, or couples nights out, are all I need socially.


----------



## Anon Pink

My husband doesn't like to dance and I do. A few times a year dancing is all I get. 

For husbands who have wives who like to dance, you either learn to dance and have fun with her, or you learn to be okay with her going dancing on a GNO.

Simple as that.


----------



## 12345Person

To be honest I'd probably cheat if really drunk.

Which is why I don't get drunk when hubby is not around.


----------



## Caribbean Man

To be honest , nobody knows what they would do when they're really drunk , because alcohol affects every single part of your brain in different ways when you're drunk.
So it's best to be brutally honest with yourself ,and know your limit 
When using alcohol.

The problem start when we fool ourselves into thinking that "_it cannot happen to me."_


----------



## ReformedHubby

Anonymous Person said:


> To be honest I'd probably cheat if really drunk.
> 
> Which is why I don't get drunk when hubby is not around.


Thanks for being honest. I'm the same way. I'd rather have a spouse who is aware and honest with themselves.

On TAM people always talk about how anyone would cheat if the "perfect storm" occurs. I somewhat agree with this, but I think that the criteria for the so called perfect storm is a lot lower than most people on here are willing to admit to. I can't speak for anybody else but my perfect storm would be a lot of drinks followed by being hit on by a woman with a sex rank of six or above. This can pretty much happen anywhere at anytime. 

This is why I don't drink when I'm not in the presence of my wife. I got myself into a lot of trouble playing wingman to my single buddies when I first got married. There is big difference between working with females on a daily basis, and being in the middle of a night club with your single buddies. I couldn't handle it. I don't think I'm alone in this. I just think most folks aren't honest with themselves.


----------



## alexm

Caribbean Man said:


> The same logic can applied to hanging out with ex lovers and opposite sex " friends" ,chatting hours online with them. After all, he / she is usually "_just a friend_," and the spouse is accused of being " _controlling_ "
> In fact ," _you don't trust me_" is one of the first defensive lines a betrayed spouse hears from a wayward spouse when they are confronted.


Apples and oranges.

Going out with the girls is an entirely different thing than spending copious amounts of time with someone you've been in a sexual relationship with, or who is a friend of the opposite sex, who is not your current partner.

I'd trust my partner to go out and have fun with her friends. I wouldn't trust her if she was spending tons of time online, or in person, with somebody of the opposite sex who is "just a friend".


----------



## alexm

Caribbean Man said:


> To be honest , nobody knows what they would do when they're really drunk , because alcohol affects every single part of your brain in different ways when you're drunk.
> So it's best to be brutally honest with yourself ,and know your limit
> When using alcohol.
> 
> The problem start when we fool ourselves into thinking that "_it cannot happen to me."_


My point was that if you're too drunk to think straight, you're too drunk to really DO anything, if you know what I mean.

If you're capable of having sex with somebody, your brain isn't all that fogged up. Yes, it impairs judgement, but my point is that those thoughts are already there, to a certain extent.

People do dumb things when they're drunk, true. But they tend to be the things we WANT to do, but don't, when we're sober. Alcohol really brings out somebody's true personality. We lose our inhibitions, we're more honest, we act like the person we really are, or who we WANT to be.

The definition of "inhibition" is: Conscious or unconscious restraint of a behavioral process, a desire, or an impulse.

This means that inhibitions are things that we restrain ourselves from doing, but otherwise would, or will do. Alcohol has a tendency to remove these inhibitions, allowing ourselves to do things we WOULD do, but our (sober) brains tell us not to.

What I'm saying is, if there's no deep-down desire to sleep with other people when sober, there's no desire to sleep with other people when drunk, either. Alcohol gives people the push to do things they generally have enough wits to not to when sober.

I feel bad for anyone who accepts the drunk excuse for things like this. There are much deeper-rooted issues with that person if they resort to blaming alcohol for their transgressions.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> My point was that if you're too drunk to think straight, you're too drunk to really DO anything, if you know what I mean.
> 
> If you're capable of having sex with somebody, your brain isn't all that fogged up. Yes, it impairs judgement, but my point is that those thoughts are already there, to a certain extent.
> 
> People do dumb things when they're drunk, true. But they tend to be the things we WANT to do, but don't, when we're sober. Alcohol really brings out somebody's true personality. We lose our inhibitions, we're more honest, we act like the person we really are, or who we WANT to be.
> 
> The definition of "inhibition" is: Conscious or unconscious restraint of a behavioral process, a desire, or an impulse.
> 
> *This means that inhibitions are things that we restrain ourselves from doing, but otherwise would, or will do. Alcohol has a tendency to remove these inhibitions, allowing ourselves to do things we WOULD do, but our (sober) brains tell us not to.
> 
> What I'm saying is, if there's no deep-down desire to sleep with other people when sober, there's no desire to sleep with other people when drunk, either. Alcohol gives people the push to do things they generally have enough wits to not to when sober.*
> 
> I feel bad for anyone who accepts the drunk excuse for things like this. There are much deeper-rooted issues with that person if they resort to blaming alcohol for their transgressions.


Alex,
I wish I could agree with you and a couple others there with your assumptions about alcohol's effect on the brain, but science doesn't, and I simply,can't.
Maybe if you could at least post a link to the research to support your theory , that would help.

Here's what research says:

"Alcohol affects brain chemistry by altering levels of neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters are chemical messengers that transmit the signals throughout the body that control thought processes, behavior and emotion. Neurotransmitters are either excitatory, meaning that they stimulate brain electrical activity, or inhibitory, meaning that they decrease brain electrical activity. Alcohol increases the effects of the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA in the brain. GABA causes the sluggish movements and slurred speech that often occur in alcoholics. At the same time, alcohol inhibits the excitatory neurotransmitter glutamate. Suppressing this stimulant results in a similar type of physiological slowdown. *In addition to increasing the GABA and decreasing the glutamate in the brain, alcohol increases the amount of the chemical dopamine in the brain's reward center, which creates the feeling of pleasure that occurs when someone takes a drink."*

Fact: _Women respond faster to alcohol than men.
Women have less dehydrogenase, a liver enzyme that breaks down alcohol. So a woman's body will break down alcohol more slowly than a man's._

In this region,Cerebral cortex, where thought processing and consciousness are centered, alcohol depresses the behavioral inhibitory centers, *making the person less inhibited;it slows down the processing of information from the eyes, ears, mouth and other senses; and it inhibits the thought processes, making it difficult to think clearly.*

I don't see how you can argue against scientific research, and that's only the tip of the iceberg.

There's a reason the legal limit of breathalyzer readings for functioning on a motor vehicle is 0.08 percent alcohol (80 mg/dl). That's the equivalent of about two drinks, and the reason is based sound,scientific research on how alcohol affects the brain
Also, That perimeter limits only to drivers over 21 years of age *while those under 21 are not allowed to have any alcohol detected in their systems.*Take a wild guess why.

BTW, Alcohol is also classified as a drug.


I don't think anyone is saying that we should blame alcohol. If a person decided to drink excessively, there is absolutely no research to support the theory that they can either predict what they would or wouldn't do.
However, they are still responsible for their actions post alcohol , because they decided to take that first drink and continue, That is the assumption used and accepted by law.

If you have that information, then please, share it.

PS; If you challenge me, I would post my sources.


----------



## norajane

The reason I don't screw other men is not because I am inhibited, nor because of reason and logic. It's because I have no _desire _to screw other men, period. Becoming less inhibited by alcohol doesn't change my lack of desire to screw other men.


----------



## ReformedHubby

alexm said:


> My point was that if you're too drunk to think straight, you're too drunk to really DO anything, if you know what I mean.
> 
> If you're capable of having sex with somebody, your brain isn't all that fogged up. Yes, it impairs judgement, but my point is that those thoughts are already there, to a certain extent.
> 
> People do dumb things when they're drunk, true. But they tend to be the things we WANT to do, but don't, when we're sober. Alcohol really brings out somebody's true personality. We lose our inhibitions, we're more honest, we act like the person we really are, or who we WANT to be.
> 
> The definition of "inhibition" is: Conscious or unconscious restraint of a behavioral process, a desire, or an impulse.
> 
> This means that inhibitions are things that we restrain ourselves from doing, but otherwise would, or will do. Alcohol has a tendency to remove these inhibitions, allowing ourselves to do things we WOULD do, but our (sober) brains tell us not to.
> 
> What I'm saying is, if there's no deep-down desire to sleep with other people when sober, there's no desire to sleep with other people when drunk, either. Alcohol gives people the push to do things they generally have enough wits to not to when sober.
> 
> I feel bad for anyone who accepts the drunk excuse for things like this. There are much deeper-rooted issues with that person if they resort to blaming alcohol for their transgressions.


I think your logic assumes we all react to substances the same way. Drunk me and sober me are completely different people. I know others that are this way as well. I have zero desire to flirt with others when sober.

By your logic one would assume that an intoxicated person does everything deliberately. If this were the case I don't think so many people would have regrets the day after drinking too much. I think most social drinkers have done or said something they regret at some point in their life when they were intoxicated. A lot of times these things are out of character for that person. There are also lots of people in prison for crimes committed during drunken rages that wouldn't hurt a fly when sober.

When I used myself as an example in the earlier post I didn't mean that being intoxicated meant I would try to nail anything that moved. Its more complicated than that. What it meant was if a women flirted with me when drunk I was a lot more likely to flirt back. A lot of times flirtation was where it ended but sometimes that wasn't the case. 

We are all bio chemically different, even cold medicine off the shelf effects us differently. So of course there would be variances when intoxicated. I think we've all heard the terms "mean drunk", or "friendly drunk". I think we should also acknowledge that there are some of us who are "horny drunk".


----------



## Anon Pink

norajane said:


> The reason I don't screw other men is not because I am inhibited, nor because of reason and logic. It's because I have no _desire _to screw other men, period. Becoming less inhibited by alcohol doesn't change my lack of desire to screw other men.


But what if he was a smooth player? No?
But what if he danced really well? No?
But what if he bought you a drink and gave you compliments? Still no? Damn you must be frigid or something...:scratchhead:


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> The reason I don't screw other men is not because I am inhibited, nor because of reason and logic. It's because I have no _desire _to screw other men, period. Becoming less inhibited by alcohol doesn't change my lack of desire to screw other men.


Based on your logic, people who do stupid things when they're drunk do so because they're stupid when they're sober.

Alcohol's effect on the brain is not dependent on whether or not to have a
" _desire_ " to do something, or what you " _desired_" before you got drunk.

The average abused woman whose husband is an alcoholic, will tell you that he's the most loving husband, when he's sober.

I don't know how again to say it, but when you get drunk, you gradually loose control of your cognitive function or the ability to reason. That's why people generally act stupid and out of character when they're drunk. Not because they're stupid when they are sober.

The reason people get drunk is that alcohol raises the dopamine levels in the brain so that the more you drink, the better you 
" feel." 
Nobody desires to defecate and piss on themselves in public, but I've seen piss drunk people do that and wake up the next day ,denying that they ever did that.


----------



## Caribbean Man

FrenchFry said:


> I _highly_ recommend *excellent* girlfriends.


:iagree:
It's as simple as that.

" _Friends don't let friend drink and drive._."


----------



## ReformedHubby

FrenchFry said:


> The drunker I get, the more misanthropic I get...totally frigid. :rofl:
> 
> My #1 rule for going out is:* have excellent friends. * Excellent friends are your drug dogs, your police, your bodyguards and your relationship counselors. If you don't think that your friends would stop you from cheating on your spouse using all means possible, don't go out with them. Even when they are drunk as well.
> 
> I'm not a horny drunk but I used to have quite the penchant for wanting to argue with people while drinking. Gave me some hilarious nicknames and got me in a few physical altercations when my _excellent_ girlfriends weren't there. When they are there though and they get the slightest notion that I'm being deliberately provocative to a stranger they totally remove me from the situation go so far as to pick me up and take me away or get a bouncer to take me out or get a beat police guy to get me away. Excellent girlfriends don't let you get away with anything that would damage your life, your reputation or your relationship.
> 
> I _highly_ recommend *excellent* girlfriends.


You are so right. I had horrible "friends". If people were pulling me back instead of cheering me on and/or hoping to benefit from my exploits I wouldn't have gotten into trouble. I no longer hang out with any of that circle. Who you're with is so important. How could guys that were at my wedding actually let me be an idiot? I take responsibility, but at the same time I don't see them as true friends. They should have reeled me in instead of encouraging me. i have a lot of bitterness over it.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Anon Pink said:


> My husband doesn't like to dance and I do. A few times a year dancing is all I get.
> 
> For husbands who have wives who like to dance, you either learn to dance and have fun with her, or you learn to be okay with her going dancing on a GNO.
> 
> Simple as that.


True. Going dancing with her, if she puts that out as an option, is a pretty good solution.


----------



## Caribbean Man

FrenchFry said:


> Yuck, ReformedHubby. I definitely have friends that I don't think have the skills needed to be useful in a bad situation but to actively cheer me on would be a sore spot for me as well.
> 
> My husband has slowly ditched the people who would cheer him on in bad spots as well. Those people really do suck out loud.


I ditched all of my so called hanging out buddies too, years ago, basically for the same reason.
And my incident happened in a club, and yes, drinking was involved.
And no, it wasn't the first time that a woman had come on to me, I was accustomed refusing and thought I was infallible,until the " perfect storm" came in the form a beautiful Columbian woman.And my so calle " peeps" cheered me on.
I don't blame them nor the alcohol, I blame myself for choosing to be there with my so called " friends" instead of being home or somewhere else my wife would have enjoyed.
I am too ashamed to even talk about it , and it hurt my wife very much. Luckily, I was able to come to my sense in the nick of time and pulled myself away.


----------



## The Cro-Magnon

Married but Happy said:


> There is no difference between a GNO and BNO.


Yes there is.

Who could get sex from a stranger quicker. A man, or a woman?

IOW, to which gender is sex more freely available?


----------



## Anon Pink

The Cro-Magnon said:


> Yes there is.
> 
> Who could get sex from a stranger quicker. A man, or a woman?
> 
> IOW, to which gender is sex more freely available?


It's true, a woman could walk into any bar and walk out with something on her arm, if she wanted to. In fact, she could probably walk into a bank and walk out with something as well, if she was absolutely determined. Sex is very available to any woman who ...

1. Really really wants it.
2. Has very low standards.
3. Is not risk averse.

So if your woman really wants sex and has low standards and likes risks, I suggest a burka and handcuffs.

Otherwise you're just going to have to deal with the fact that she could get sex anywhere with very little effort and realize that just because she can doesn't mean she will.


----------



## The Cro-Magnon

*inb4nawalt*



Anon Pink said:


> It's true, a woman could walk into any bar and walk out with something on her arm, if she wanted to. In fact, she could probably walk into a bank and walk out with something as well, if she was absolutely determined. Sex is very available to any woman who ...
> 
> 1. Really really wants it.
> 2. Has very low standards.
> 3. Is not risk averse.
> 
> So if your woman really wants sex and has low standards and likes risks, I suggest a burka and handcuffs.
> 
> Otherwise you're just going to have to deal with the fact that she could get sex anywhere with very little effort and realize that just because she can doesn't mean she will.


The point was that the implied equivalence between BNO and GNO is not true, as the average female has sex freely available to them, should they merely choose, whereas the average male does not, hence the phrase "get lucky".

I'm glad to see you agree.

So which poses the greater statistical risk to a marriage taking this into consideration, the GNO or the BNO?


----------



## PHTlump

alexm said:


> What I'm saying is, if there's no deep-down desire to sleep with other people when sober, there's no desire to sleep with other people when drunk, either. Alcohol gives people the push to do things they generally have enough wits to not to when sober.
> 
> I feel bad for anyone who accepts the drunk excuse for things like this. There are much deeper-rooted issues with that person if they resort to blaming alcohol for their transgressions.


I guess I'm just more cynical than most of you are. I don't think that most of us are natural-born saints and, in order to sin, we must become so impaired that we lose all ability to maintain cognitive thought and/or motor skills.

I think that most of us have inappropriate thoughts and impulses that we normally refuse to act on. And alcohol and/or environment can reduce our ability to suppress these harmful urges.


----------



## PHTlump

norajane said:


> The reason I don't screw other men is not because I am inhibited, nor because of reason and logic. It's because I have no _desire _to screw other men, period. Becoming less inhibited by alcohol doesn't change my lack of desire to screw other men.


I think you are unusual. In fact, you may be entirely unique.

The reason I don't screw women besides my wife is not because my wife is the only woman on Earth whom I find sexually appealing. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting a woman I find sexually appealing. The reason I don't screw other women is because I vowed not to. I don't want to hurt my wife. I don't want to break my vow to God. I don't want to hurt my children. I know that screwing another woman will probably make my life worse, not better.

It's this ability to anticipate the consequences of my actions that prevents me from cheating on my wife. Because of my fear of consequences, I try to avoid temptation. I don't go to singles bars. I don't get drunk, regardless of where I am. I don't spend much time with single women, at all.

I understand that, because I am a human being, I am morally fallible. I can make mistakes. I can be tempted. If I were to be drunk, at a singles bar, without my wife, and an attractive woman approached me and argued that I could have sex with her without any consequences, I might be tempted. Because of that temptation, and my reduced capacity to suppress my baser urges, I might falter and do something I regret.

I'm thankful that I'm not so arrogant that I dismiss any possibility that I have the capacity to sin. Because of that, I'm hopeful that I will continue to be faithful to my wife and continue to raise my children in an intact, nuclear family.


----------



## treyvion

Caribbean Man said:


> I ditched all of my so called hanging out buddies too, years ago, basically for the same reason.
> And my incident happened in a club, and yes, drinking was involved.
> And no, it wasn't the first time that a woman had come on to me, I was accustomed refusing and thought I was infallible,until the " perfect storm" came in the form a beautiful Columbian woman.And my so calle " peeps" cheered me on.
> I don't blame them nor the alcohol, I blame myself for choosing to be there with my so called " friends" instead of being home or somewhere else my wife would have enjoyed.
> I am too ashamed to even talk about it , and it hurt my wife very much. Luckily, I was able to come to my sense in the nick of time and pulled myself away.


I call those "party friends". They do serve a purpose, in that they will support all the hedonistic wild actions. And many of these characters will exploit your slip ups too.


----------



## Pault

Caribbean Man said:


> Inhibitions are a learnt, built in safety mechanism , without them , we would take unnecessary risks without proper analysis.



:iagree: Yep I think you absolutley right CM. When we are young the morals and likfe skills passed down to us from our family unit help develop practices which should see use live a in a manner as you describe above.

If you give your word, take a vow etc then you should be able to follow that through. IN the state of marridge and yes in long term marridge style relationships you are asked for "forsake all others and be true to the one and one only".

There are time when the relationship breaks down and you have to part. When people go out with friends they should feel relaxed and enjoy the company and the time they are out. They should however always be mindful of the circumstances that develop. My old mother frequently stated "if he put his hand in the fire, whou you?". The same goes for people one GNO and BNO events. No one makes us cheat or act in a manner that would hurt our loved ones. Its only WE who can say no and walk away.

If your on a night out and there is impropriety but members of your group then you have the walk away button, just hit it and go. Or if you cannot leave at that time then dont go with a group who have these peope in on the next occasion and then be honest with your partner and tell them why youve not joined in on the nights out. That in its;ef will give the partner something positive to think about.

Choices - we all have them. It just takes a bigger person to walk away from a peer pressure situation or one that might hurt a partner.


----------



## Anon Pink

*Re: inb4nawalt*



The Cro-Magnon said:


> The point was that the implied equivalence between BNO and GNO is not true, as the average female has sex freely available to them, should they merely choose, whereas the average male does not, hence the phrase "get lucky".
> 
> I'm glad to see you agree.
> 
> So which poses the greater statistical risk to a marriage taking this into consideration, the GNO or the BNO?



Hmmmm, based on the fact that a woman could get sex anywhere, just about, it seems the greater threat, statistically speaking, would always be when a man turns his back for just a few minutes.

But when taking into account how often a woman is in close proximity to any man while her husbands back is turned, yet she doesn't have sex, wouldn't that skew the numbers really far in the other direction?

IDK, when compiling statistics are you supposed to take into account opportunities NOT pursued, or just completed opportunities?


----------



## ReformedHubby

I think a lot of this controversy is also based at least somewhat on the age of the couple. When I was in my 20s there was no way you were going to drag me out of the club. At this point most of my buds were still single and its just what we did. We'd go to a cheap hole in wall bar to drink cheaply for a few hours then head to the club and act a damn fool. 

If you had told me that I would have zero desire to be in a club ten years later I would have laughed out loud at you. But lo and behold that's what happened. Once you have kids two things happen. First of all you don't want to be chasing a toddler around while nursing a hangover. Secondly, you actually prefer to spend the time with your loved ones instead of a bunch of strangers. After ten plus years of clubbing I got tired of the over priced watered down drinks and being challenged by suicidal napoleon sized insecure dudes that for some reason get liquid courage when they drink.

Perhaps a big part of the GNO/BNO controversy is that the spouse that is left at home wonders why they aren't enough to keep you home. Speaking for myself these days I'd much rather spend the evening with the wife than with the fellas. My true friends are also the same way. We kind of all just evolved. We like to do stuff but its guys stuff. You really can't catch up and conversate in a loud club/bar anyway.


----------



## norajane

PHTlump said:


> I think you are unusual. In fact, you may be entirely unique.
> 
> The reason I don't screw women besides my wife is not because my wife is the only woman on Earth whom I find sexually appealing. I can't swing a dead cat without hitting a woman I find sexually appealing. *The reason I don't screw other women is because I vowed not to. *I don't want to hurt my wife. I don't want to break my vow to God. I don't want to hurt my children. I know that screwing another woman will probably make my life worse, not better.
> 
> It's this ability to anticipate the consequences of my actions that prevents me from cheating on my wife. Because of my fear of consequences, I try to avoid temptation. I don't go to singles bars. I don't get drunk, regardless of where I am. I don't spend much time with single women, at all.
> 
> I understand that, because I am a human being, I am morally fallible. I can make mistakes. I can be tempted. If I were to be drunk, at a singles bar, without my wife, and an attractive woman approached me and argued that I could have sex with her without any consequences, I might be tempted. Because of that temptation, and my reduced capacity to suppress my baser urges, I might falter and do something I regret.
> 
> I'm thankful that I'm not so arrogant that I dismiss any possibility that I have the capacity to sin. Because of that, I'm hopeful that I will continue to be faithful to my wife and continue to raise my children in an intact, nuclear family.


I don't think I'm unique at all. I think there are a lot of people who are happy with their partners and aren't interesting in hooking up with other people.

It sounds pretty sad to me that vows are the only thing keeping some people from cheating.


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> I don't think I'm unique at all. I think there are a lot of people who are happy with their partners and aren't interesting in hooking up with other people.
> 
> *It sounds pretty sad to me that vows are the only thing keeping some people from cheating.*


lol,
Are you saying that some people who happened to cheat on their partners, maybe even in a drunken ons, don't love their partners?

French Fry said her husband cheated on her. Didn't he love her?
I stated that I almost cheated on mine. Didn't I love mine?
Reformed Hubby also cheated on his. Didn't he love her?

Sounds pretty harsh to me.


FYI, sometimes things get rough and people's marriages get into a bad place. Sometimes boundaries are loose,Vows are what keeps them, Morals keeps them, Religion keeps them, when the love and attraction just ain't there, or things fall apart.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> lol,
> Are you saying that some people who happened to cheat on their partners, maybe even in a drunken ons, don't love their partners?
> 
> Sounds pretty harsh to me.


I'm saying that they were open to cheating before any drinking or whatever was involved.

Some people aren't open to cheating so no matter how much alcohol is involved, they aren't going to cheat.

Really, "happened to cheat on their partners"? As though the circumstances were beyond their control? Cheating is always a *choice*, always.


----------



## ReformedHubby

norajane said:


> *I'm saying that they were open to cheating before any drinking or whatever was involved.*
> 
> Some people aren't open to cheating so no matter how much alcohol is involved, they aren't going to cheat.
> 
> Really, "happened to cheat on their partners"? As though the circumstances were beyond their control? Cheating is always a *choice*, always.


I disagree with that part. I know myself very well. If I am sober I have zero desire to wander, in fact I actually notice the women around me a lot less than most other men do. If I am drinking to excess you could put a very plain women in my presence and if the circumstances are right I might just falter. For me it really is that simple. Me plus alcohol without the wife around is just a bad idea.

Yes, its always a choice. But alcohol greatly influences the choice, and when most people drink too much they make bad ones.


----------



## PHTlump

norajane said:


> I don't think I'm unique at all. I think there are a lot of people who are happy with their partners and aren't interesting in hooking up with other people.


I believe that there are a good number in that camp as well. I just differ from you in that I think there are many reasons for people to be in that camp. I think that people who insist that their spouses are the only people on Earth whom they find sexually appealing are lying. Certainly to us. Perhaps to themselves.



> It sounds pretty sad to me that vows are the only thing keeping some people from cheating.


It's not the only thing keeping me from cheating. But if you're suggesting that physical attraction is sufficient to build a lifetime, monogamous relationship on, then I think you're likely to be surprised.

At some point in the future, you are likely to meet a man you find attractive. At that point, you will have lost your reason for remaining faithful to your husband. If you can avoid ever meeting a man you find attractive, your danger isn't over. At some point in the future, you are likely to lose your sex drive. At that point, you will have lost your reason for remaining faithful to your husband.

Suggesting that animal instinct based on attraction is sufficient to avoid marital temptation forever just sounds like the naive wishings and hopings of a young girl talking about her, eventual Mr. Right. Real marriage usually doesn't happen that way.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Norah,

When two people are really in love that type of dynamic does not exist.
The pulling and tugging, power play , accusations of being controlling ,
" covert threats" about looking insecure and loosing attraction ,and the feelings of entitlement simply does not exist , or are amicably worked out.

My wife doesn't like clubbing, I love my wife and respect her, so I simply don't go clubbing.
There are things I don't like which she has willingly given up.
There is no politics in love.

I am not entitled to go clubbing with my guy friends, neither is my wife supposed to learn to dance or whatever, so that we can go clubbing together.

When people are in love, they learn how to compromise, and give each other what it takes to make each other feel safe and protect the marriage.

During times when things are low , their promise to each other is what keeps them.


----------



## 12345Person

Caribbean Man said:


> Norah,
> 
> When two people are really in love that type of dynamic does not exist.
> The pulling and tugging, power play , accusations of being controlling ,
> " covert threats" about looking insecure and loosing attraction ,and the feelings of entitlement simply does not exist , or are amicably worked out.
> 
> My wife doesn't like clubbing, I love my wife and respect her, so I simply don't go clubbing.
> There are things I don't like which she has willingly given up.
> There is no politics in love.
> 
> I am not entitled to go clubbing with my guy friends, neither is my wife supposed to learn to dance or whatever, so that we can go clubbing together.
> 
> When people are in love, they learn how to compromise, and give each other what it takes to make each other feel safe and protect the marriage.
> 
> During times when things are low , their promise to each other is what keeps them.


Love your posts in this thread.

Marriage should be about compromise and respect. Too many entitled people today.


----------



## norajane

PHTlump said:


> I believe that there are a good number in that camp as well. I just differ from you in that I think there are many reasons for people to be in that camp. I think that people who insist that their spouses are the only people on Earth whom they find sexually appealing are lying. Certainly to us. Perhaps to themselves.
> 
> 
> It's not the only thing keeping me from cheating. But if you're suggesting that physical attraction is sufficient to build a lifetime, monogamous relationship on, then I think you're likely to be surprised.
> 
> At some point in the future, you are likely to meet a man you find attractive. At that point, you will have lost your reason for remaining faithful to your husband. If you can avoid ever meeting a man you find attractive, your danger isn't over. At some point in the future, you are likely to lose your sex drive. At that point, you will have lost your reason for remaining faithful to your husband.
> 
> Suggesting that animal instinct based on attraction is sufficient to avoid marital temptation forever just sounds like the naive wishings and hopings of a young girl talking about her, eventual Mr. Right. Real marriage usually doesn't happen that way.


I am not saying that my partner is the only man in the whole world I would ever find physically attractive. There are a lot of attractive people out there. I just don't want to have sex with any of them because I'm happy in my relationship. 

And physical attractiveness is the last thing that I would base a lifetime relationship on. It's precisely because there is a lot more to a good relationship than looks - and I already have a relationship with that is based on so much more at home and value it more than anything - that meeting some hot guy in a bar or anywhere wouldn't interest me in the least.

I'm 46 - been around the block a few times.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> Norah,
> 
> When two people are really in love that type of dynamic does not exist.
> The pulling and tugging, power play , accusations of being controlling ,
> " covert threats" about looking insecure and loosing attraction ,and the feelings of entitlement simply does not exist , or are amicably worked out.
> 
> My wife doesn't like clubbing, I love my wife and respect her, so I simply don't go clubbing.
> There are things I don't like which she has willingly given up.
> There is no politics in love.
> 
> I am not entitled to go clubbing with my guy friends, neither is my wife supposed to learn to dance or whatever, so that we can go clubbing together.
> 
> When people are in love, they learn how to compromise, and give each other what it takes to make each other feel safe and protect the marriage.
> 
> During times when things are low , their promise to each other is what keeps them.


All I'm saying is that it's not any kind of compromise for some people, because they don't have issues with GNO and BNO.

I don't have a problem with my partner going out with the boys, and he doesn't have a problem with me going out with the girls (or business travel, or conferences in Vegas, or networking events, or having opposite sex friends). It's a non-issue for us, so no compromise is needed.

If a couple disagrees on the issue, that's where the problems are. They need to work out what's acceptable for them. I'm not proscribing that my way of doing things is the best for everyone.

But saying everyone who goes out without their spouses is itching to cheat or could cheat if they lose their mind on alcohol and a hot person shows up...I don't agree with that. There is no one-size-fits-all.


----------



## 12345Person

norajane said:


> All I'm saying is that it's not any kind of compromise for some people, because they don't have issues with GNO and BNO.
> 
> I don't have a problem with my partner going out with the boys, and he doesn't have a problem with me going out with the girls (or business travel, or conferences in Vegas, or networking events, or having opposite sex friends). It's a non-issue for us, so no compromise is needed.
> 
> If a couple disagrees on the issue, that's where the problems are. They need to work out what's acceptable for them. I'm not proscribing that my way of doing things is the best for everyone.
> 
> But saying everyone who goes out without their spouses is itching to cheat or could cheat if they lose their mind on alcohol and a hot person shows up...I don't agree with that. There is no one-size-fits-all.


Nobody is saying "everyone", however, most in your situation would cheat.


----------



## ReformedHubby

FrenchFry said:


> I have a toddler who has a alcohol detector, it's hilarious. The days after mommy and daddy have been drinking are the days he puts on the super rambunctious suit and jumps on us ALL DAY LONG.


They all do this, must be a kid thing. They also seem to get up earlier on those mornings too, for no reason at all. When we head into the city for date night we just leave them with the grandparents over night and get a hotel. That way we aren't zombies for a whole day.


----------



## always_alone

Caribbean Man said:


> Are you saying that some people who happened to cheat on their partners, maybe even in a drunken ons, don't love their partners?


Harsh or not, if my SO cheated on me, I would no longer believe that he loved me. How could I, since he seemingly cares so little for my feelings. Even if he *almost* cheated on me, I would assume that his eye is out for someone better, and would probably leave him for that, too. 

But I have no problem with him going out on BNOs. 

If he's tempted, it's always an option.


----------



## Faithful Wife

FrenchFry said:


> Snooki and Jwoww is on TV right now and the conflict of the episode is Snooki kissing Jwoww and Ryder while they were at the club. My husband said to me "Why is he freaking out? I wouldn't have a problem if you kissed your friends while you were out."
> 
> I fistpumped... and he said "You have clearance. Go and kiss them."
> 
> I just married the right person for me.


My husband would be more worried about this than about me kissing a random man.


----------



## sinnister

I come under fire for my views on this a lot here. I am in no way a chauvinist, sexists or mysoginyst. I was raised by a single mother and have nothing but the utmost respect and adoration for the better half of the human race.

Now that that's out of the way, a GNO is not acceptable. It's just not a good idea. Its not that I don't trust women, its that I dont trust man and woman in that atmosphere. I don't trust the ladies that push for these get togthers so often either. You don't NEED a group to be with you to have fun. And if you do there are less sexually charged places for this.

Nobody is saying you need your husband with you all the time, but he should be there if there are going to be drunk horny dudes trying to get in your pants.


----------



## AnnieAsh

Not very many men pontificating on the dangers of BNO. Interesting.


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> All I'm saying is that it's not any kind of compromise for some people, because they don't have issues with GNO and BNO.
> 
> I don't have a problem with my partner going out with the boys, and he doesn't have a problem with me going out with the girls (or business travel, or conferences in Vegas, or networking events, or having opposite sex friends). It's a non-issue for us, so no compromise is needed.
> 
> If a couple disagrees on the issue, that's where the problems are. They need to work out what's acceptable for them. I'm not proscribing that my way of doing things is the best for everyone.
> 
> But saying everyone who goes out without their spouses is itching to cheat or could cheat if they lose their mind on alcohol and a hot person shows up...I don't agree with that. There is no one-size-fits-all.


Nobody's saying that one size fits all. 
In fact in my last few posts , I highlighted the fact that there is no one size fits all solution.

But the approach to this problem when one partner has a issues , can make it snowball and the passive aggressive begins with deep resentments building.

If two people agree on clubbing, then how under heavens can alcohol or cheating even be an issue?
The issue simply ,does not arise.

When there's serious disagreements over clubbing ,or a relationship is in a bad place, and conflict develops, then alcohol, friends , and cheating would be highly possible outcomes.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> Nobody's saying that one size fits all.


That's not true. This was on the first page of this thread:



The Middleman said:


> There's no room for GNO's or BNO's in a marriage. Period. No good can ever come from them.


I'm not going to re-read a 17 page thread to point out more examples, but s/he isn't the only person on TAM to say this.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous Person said:


> Nobody is saying "everyone", however, most in your situation would cheat.


Based on what? 

You can't make quantitative statements like that without some real numbers to back them up. Your anecdotal experience or gut feeling is insufficient.


----------



## 12345Person

Cletus said:


> Based on what?
> 
> You can't make quantitative statements like that without some real numbers to back them up. Your anecdotal experience or gut feeling is insufficient.


In a 20 year marriage where both partners go alone on trips to Vegas, parties, vacations, etc.

Infidelity statistics are already high as it is. Add in ALL^ of that and you're just asking for a mess.

Not saying there aren't exceptions, but I would not advise anyone to take that risk.


----------



## ReformedHubby

AnnieAsh said:


> Not very many men pontificating on the dangers of BNO. Interesting.


I was honest about it. I can't speak for all men but based on my experience it is rare that a male friend would intervene when his buddy gets a little bit out of control with the ladies on a night out. They may not encourage it like the guys I used to hang with, but at the same time they will often remain silent. Even if they do think you are behaving like a pig. They will also cover for you if your wife asks about your whereabouts. Maybe the crew I ran with was morally bankrupt, but I was under the impression we were just normal guys.


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous Person said:


> In a 20 year marriage where both partners go alone on trips to Vegas, parties, vacations, etc.
> 
> Infidelity statistics are already high as it is. Add in ALL^ of that and you're just asking for a mess.
> 
> Not saying there aren't exceptions, but I would not advise anyone to take that risk.


Ok, that's all well and good, but you made a specific statement:



> Nobody is saying "everyone", however, most in your situation would cheat.


----------



## 12345Person

Cletus said:


> Ok, that's all well and good, but you made a specific statement:


I do believe that most would.

Perhaps I'm being cynical, but I stand by it.

I'm not saying 100% would cheat, but I'd bet my life that 20 years of that lifestyle and you're looking at much higher divorce rates and infidelity.

Or perhaps I'm being cynical..


----------



## Caribbean Man

Know what?

Logic tells me that if this is a website that aims to help people in troubled marriages, there would be quite a lot of people here who are or have been having troubles in their marriages.

Logic also tells me that despite what just a few people here say, a very high number of people here are against married partners getting drunk and clubbing either by themselves or with toxic friends, because they've been burnt by it , or they know some who've been burnt by it.

If that is true, then logically, the status quo on TAM would be that drunk clubbing without your spouse is not good for your marriage.

And if that is the status quo , then those who say that it's harmless are in the minority , and _they_ would be the ones pontificating to the majority.

I think that we can find out how people on TAM really feel about this issue ,by running a simple, anonymous, poll.


----------



## treyvion

Caribbean Man said:


> Know what?
> 
> Logic tells me that if this is a website that aims to help people in troubled marriages, there would be quite a lot of people here who are or have been having troubles in their marriages.
> 
> Logic also tells me that despite what just a few people here say, a very high number of people here are against married partners getting drunk and clubbing either by themselves or with toxic friends, because they've been burnt by it , or they know some who've been burnt by it.


Those "toxic" friends, may just be "fun" and happening to the party world. But yes to a dedicated and committed relationship are complete poison.




Carribean Man said:


> If that is true, then logically, the status quo on TAM would be that drunk clubbing without your spouse is not good for your marriage.
> 
> And if that is the status quo , then those who say that it's harmless are in the minority , and _they_ would be the ones pontificating to the majority.


My point of view is it's a ticking time bomb if you keep doing it without your partner. If you are going in there for that type of attention that goes on in there, eventually you will take it a step further. And this goes for a great majority who don't understand that each step in there, each lowering of a boundary, each new fun thing walks them more and more into the direction of a completely single individual.



Carribean Man said:


> I think that we can find out how people on TAM really feel about this issue ,by running a simple, anonymous, poll.


Well we both know there are some hardened characters on TAM who believe that their morals and integrity are so superior that they can keep going in there, with all single friends on the prowl and nothing will ever happen, because they would never cheat.


----------



## treyvion

Davelli0331 said:


> These threads certainly never paint women in any kind of favorable light. Either a) the instant a woman goes out her door to meet friends she becomes a conniving, evil, and disrespectful tart trolling for strange or b) she's so dumb that she's incapable of spotting, avoiding, and falling for the predatory machinations of single men.
> 
> Certainly there are women who fall into those descriptions but not nearly so many as TAM anecdotes would have you believe.


Some of em don't accept that in those environments most of the interaction is centered around bridging someone over to the sex.

Women are predatory too, they aren't innocent little angles in there.


----------



## treyvion

treyvion said:


> Some of em don't accept that in those environments most of the interaction is centered around bridging someone over to the sex.
> 
> Women are predatory too, they aren't innocent little angles in there.


Rememer the girl that thought she was setting up "Jack Reacher" on the moview "Jack Reacher"? She had 5 of her guys jump Jack, but Jack single handedly asserted his dominance over these characters... "This is not supposed to happen"

There's alot of "girls" like that out there in the world.

Theres good too. But alot of bad, entrapment, manipulation, getting guys to do things, seting guys up for her entertainment, etc.


----------



## AnnieAsh

ReformedHubby said:


> I was honest about it. I can't speak for all men but based on my experience it is rare that a male friend would intervene when his buddy gets a little bit out of control with the ladies on a night out. They may not encourage it like the guys I used to hang with, but at the same time they will often remain silent. Even if they do think you are behaving like a pig. They will also cover for you if your wife asks about your whereabouts. Maybe the crew I ran with was morally bankrupt, but I was under the impression we were just normal guys.


You were straight up. It is much appreciated. And I agree! I've seen tons of men do things because their friends are just as toxic as some of the so-called toxic girlfriends described here. 

But it seems like a lot of men want to pretend that BNO are more righteous and GOOD. 

Someone actually said GNO are more dangerous because women find sex more easily than men. A married on the prowl is bad. Period. Regardless of the readily available supply of strange.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Soooo,
I just went through every page on this thread, all 17.

There are 40 posters on this thread.

*17 ,including myself ,mentioned that both BNO's and GNO's are out of / bad for their marriage.
*
30 , including that 17 mentioned that GNO's were bad. ie:[ 13 focused on GNO's alone]

I think 4 people , including myself said that BOTH GNO's & BNO's can be dangerous , but ok ,if good friends and boundaries are there.

That means LESSER than 10 out of 40 posters on this thread believe they are harmless...

Do we really need to continue arguing whether BNO's / GNO's are a necessary component in a marriage?

Shouldn't we be discussing how to make our own BNO's / GNO's more marriage friendly for those who like to party , drink and dance the night away?

Or maybe some prefer the old elementary school playground 
" _boys vs girls_ " scenario?

I'm now fine tuning the questions for my GNO / BNO poll.


----------



## Cletus

Caribbean Man said:


> Soooo,
> I just went through every page on this thread, all 17.
> 
> There are 40 posters on this thread.
> *17 ,including myself ,mentioned that both BNO's and GNO's are out of / bad for their marriage.
> *
> 30 , including that 17 mentioned that GNO's were bad. ie: 13 focused on GNO's alone]
> 
> I think 4 people , including myself said that BOTH GNO's & BNO's can be dangerous , but ok ,if good friends and boundaries are there.
> 
> That means LESSER than 10 out of 40 posters on this thread believe they are harmless...
> 
> I'm now fine tuning the questions for my GNO / BNO poll.


For whatever definition of GNO/BNO you're using, I guess.

I doubt anyone on this thread would take issue with what constitutes a GNO/BNO in my marriage. It's typically at most a pint or two and a meal with a handful of close friends that does not include spouses at the local pub. 

You're specifically objecting to clubbing. That's a narrow definition of the word being used here to reasonably object to behavior possibly unbecoming a marriage. It is most decidedly NOT what most of the people in my circle demographic consider when you use the term.


----------



## Caribbean Man

In reality, nobody can take issue with anything that goes on in another person's marriage.
Its been said ad nauseam on this thread that each person has to make their own boundaries.

Hence in the poll , what I'm focusing on is what we have been discussing on in this thread.

Drunk clubbing without spouse and within the company of toxic friends vs clubbing with either spouse or friends who are friends of your marriage.


----------



## Caribbean Man

FrenchFry said:


> tbh, I probably won't get into that one unless you want me to lay down some tips in there. I have to wrap presents sometime.


Well I was kinda counting on you and the few of us who said that it's quite possible with proper friends & boundaries.

Experience _is_ the best teacher.
.
.
.
.
.
PS; Haven't done any *wrapping* or shopping as yet, I usually wait till Christmas eve.

Hint:
_ I no longer wrap gifts, I put them in decorative gift bags, wrapped in coloured , textured tissue sheets._


----------



## ReformedHubby

Caribbean Man said:


> Soooo,
> I just went through every page on this thread, all 17.
> 
> There are 40 posters on this thread.
> 
> *17 ,including myself ,mentioned that both BNO's and GNO's are out of / bad for their marriage.
> *
> 30 , including that 17 mentioned that GNO's were bad. ie:[ 13 focused on GNO's alone]
> 
> I think 4 people , including myself said that BOTH GNO's & BNO's can be dangerous , but ok ,if good friends and boundaries are there.
> 
> That means LESSER than 10 out of 40 posters on this thread believe they are harmless...
> 
> Do we really need to continue arguing whether BNO's / GNO's are a necessary component in a marriage?
> 
> Shouldn't we be discussing how to make our own BNO's / GNO's more marriage friendly for those who like to party , drink and dance the night away?
> 
> Or maybe some prefer the old elementary school playground
> " _boys vs girls_ " scenario?
> 
> I'm now fine tuning the questions for my GNO / BNO poll.


I fear your poll will put an end to the GNO/BNO threads. What will I do now when I'm bored in the office? The endless back and forth is the definition of insanity but I just can't stay away. At least this thread doesn't have an OP that was seeking advice about their spouse. Those always end up with the OP leaving the thread they started and people arguing over the topic for days.


----------



## PHTlump

norajane said:


> I am not saying that my partner is the only man in the whole world I would ever find physically attractive. There are a lot of attractive people out there. I just don't want to have sex with any of them because I'm happy in my relationship.
> 
> And physical attractiveness is the last thing that I would base a lifetime relationship on. It's precisely because there is a lot more to a good relationship than looks - and I already have a relationship with that is based on so much more at home and value it more than anything - that meeting some hot guy in a bar or anywhere wouldn't interest me in the least.
> 
> I'm 46 - been around the block a few times.


Fair enough. I misunderstood your statement about avoiding affairs because your husband was the one and only man for you as one based on physical attraction. My mistake.

However, I still don't think that happiness with one's marriage, however defined, is a sufficient reason to avoid affairs. In a long-term marriage, happiness waxes and wanes. What remains constant during the peaks and valleys of a marriage is one's commitment, or promise, to remain faithful.

Absent that commitment, keeping one's eyes open for an upgrade is always an option. And that's no way to live.


----------



## Created2Write

I've been plastered twice in my life, and there was only one thing I wanted to do...it was an urge so strong I, really, couldn't control it...I tried so hard to put it in the back of mind, to ignore it, but the desire just kept pestering me...so eventually I gave in. 








All I wanted to do, an spent the whole night doing, was puking into the toilet. I had absolutely not thought whatsoever for sleeping with someone. I couldn't stand up straight! I was more likely to notice a ladies awesome shoes than hit on a guy. 

People who want to cheat will do so, regardless of whether they're drunk or not.


----------



## northernlights

I didn't read all 17 pages of the thread, but surely I can't be the only small-town woman on here for whom GNOs are a glass of wine and appetizers at one of our houses? Or is that specifically a "moms' night out," not to be confused with a "girls'" night out? There is one bar in town, and we've done Karaoke there before, but something tells me that's not what you guys are talking about either... especially because we usually bring along our moms/moms-in-law. 

I think I need to participate in one of these clubbing nights out to really weigh in on the discussion. Someone invite me out!


----------



## PHTlump

northernlights said:


> I didn't read all 17 pages of the thread, but surely I can't be the only small-town woman on here for whom GNOs are a glass of wine and appetizers at one of our houses? Or is that specifically a "moms' night out," not to be confused with a "girls'" night out? There is one bar in town, and we've done Karaoke there before, but something tells me that's not what you guys are talking about either... especially because we usually bring along our moms/moms-in-law.
> 
> I think I need to participate in one of these clubbing nights out to really weigh in on the discussion. Someone invite me out!


No, you're not the only wife to have tame GNO. But, nobody really objects to those. What generates the most controversy is drunken clubbing in singles joints. Some people think that it's not appropriate. Some people think a spouse who expects only appropriate behavior is too controlling. Some people think that behavior, such as cheating, is predestined and can't be influenced by environment, or alcohol. Some people think that most people can make mistakes and do bad things.


----------



## northernlights

PHTlump said:


> However, I still don't think that happiness with one's marriage, however defined, is a sufficient reason to avoid affairs. In a long-term marriage, happiness waxes and wanes. What remains constant during the peaks and valleys of a marriage is one's commitment, or promise, to remain faithful.


I've read that there's research showing that male cheating happens independently of happiness in a marriage, while female cheating tends to occur when the marriage is unhappy. So it's interesting that a man is stating as a fact that happiness is not a reliable deterrent to affairs. It really could be a Venus/Mars thing.


----------



## northernlights

PHTlump said:


> No, you're not the only wife to have tame GNO. But, nobody really objects to those. What generates the most controversy is drunken clubbing in singles joints. Some people think that it's not appropriate. Some people think a spouse who expects only appropriate behavior is too controlling. Some people think that behavior, such as cheating, is predestined and can't be influenced by environment, or alcohol. Some people think that most people can make mistakes and do bad things.


Well, I'm a fan of the old saying, "if you don't want to slip, don't go where it's slippery." However, my boundaries are for myself only; my husband gets to determine his. I don't go out drinking at bars with members of the opposite sex. He does. So far no affairs on either of our parts (that I'm aware of anyway!), so my final vote will have to be, to each their own.


----------



## alexm

We all have to recognize that there is FAR more cynicism on subjects like this at a place like TAM. More than enough to skew a poll on the subject. MORE than enough.

The general population of TAM is made up of people who have little trust (for good reason), have been burned, have been cheated on, and (like me) think too much. Among many, many other little, or big, things that will completely skew the results of a poll.

It's not much different than when a multi-billion dollar company pays to have their own "research" done on the benefits of their product. Of course it's going to come out in their favor.

That doesn't mean that those who are against it are wrong, or those who are okay with it are right. It does mean, however, that the results will be leaning to one side, so you can't really make the TAM populations replies be the be-all, end-all of this subject.



Caribbean Man said:


> Know what?
> 
> Logic tells me that if this is a website that aims to help people in troubled marriages, there would be quite a lot of people here who are or have been having troubles in their marriages.
> 
> Logic also tells me that despite what just a few people here say, a very high number of people here are against married partners getting drunk and clubbing either by themselves or with toxic friends, because they've been burnt by it , or they know some who've been burnt by it.
> 
> If that is true, then logically, the status quo on TAM would be that drunk clubbing without your spouse is not good for your marriage.
> 
> And if that is the status quo , then those who say that it's harmless are in the minority , and _they_ would be the ones pontificating to the majority.
> 
> I think that we can find out how people on TAM really feel about this issue ,by running a simple, anonymous, poll.





Caribbean Man said:


> Soooo,
> I just went through every page on this thread, all 17.
> 
> There are 40 posters on this thread.
> 
> 17 ,including myself ,mentioned that both BNO's and GNO's are out of / bad for their marriage.
> 
> 30 , including that 17 mentioned that GNO's were bad. ie:[ 13 focused on GNO's alone]
> 
> I think 4 people , including myself said that BOTH GNO's & BNO's can be dangerous , but ok ,if good friends and boundaries are there.
> 
> That means LESSER than 10 out of 40 posters on this thread believe they are harmless...
> 
> Do we really need to continue arguing whether BNO's / GNO's are a necessary component in a marriage?
> 
> Shouldn't we be discussing how to make our own BNO's / GNO's more marriage friendly for those who like to party , drink and dance the night away?
> 
> Or maybe some prefer the old elementary school playground
> " boys vs girls " scenario?
> 
> I'm now fine tuning the questions for my GNO / BNO poll.


----------



## alexm

AnnieAsh said:


> Not very many men pontificating on the dangers of BNO. Interesting.


Well, my reasoning behind that is that the BNO isn't generally the same type of thing as the GNO.

When us guys get together, it usually doesn't involve a club with thumping music, laser shows, sweaty people dancing, and people (men and women) looking to hook up. The sexually charged places, in other words.

Men's BNO's typically involve some sort of sporting event, and a pub. We don't typically go out with our boys to re-live our youth by dancing and picking up chicks. We go out with our boys to shoot the ****, burp, fart and swear and talk about sports. Do the things we can't do in front of our wives or children. We also don't get all dressed up and smelling nice before we leave. We might brush our teeth, that's about it. 

Women's GNO's, on the other hand, typically involve much planning, getting ready, dressing nice, smelling nice, doing your hair, and then going out somewhere to dance. It's an event. Whereas we guys just go out for a pint and watch the game and get bbq sauce on our shirts.

Even if we end up at a nudie bar, there really isn't much opportunity to get lucky there. It's 95% men in the place, and the women are being paid to perform. If anything, it'll make us jump our wives when we get home. I'd venture to say, if I were a woman, that a strip club is a "safer" alternative to a dance club for my husband.


----------



## alexm

I genuinely feel that so many people are against GNO's (and BNO's) because they don't like it when their partners are at places without them, in which they could potentially be hit on.

I think a few of you don't quite trust your SO, and that's fine. You may have a reason not to. Often, though, those reasons are a reflection on what you think YOU may do, not necessarily what your SO would, or could do. I can see it in a few replies here.

For me, I am "okay" with my wife going out. I'm not thrilled, I'm just "okay". I trust her. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. My point in my previous replies here, are that if somebody is going to cheat, they're going to cheat. Going out to a dance club can definitely increase the odds that it'll happen that night, but I honestly believe that if they are forbidden from going out on GNO's, they will cheat elsewhere, eventually.

All we can do as spouses is to either hope we married a non-cheater, or make sure we don't ever give them a reason to. Otherwise, people are going to do what people are going to do, and that's on them.

For me, a lot of people have a hard time in terms of control. Having your SO go out with his/her friends puts you in a position of no control. You also can't control how others will react towards him/her. You can't control somebody hitting on your SO when you're not there.

However, we can control how our SO will react in those situations, simply by being the partner we think or know they want. As long as we each do our utmost to make our partners happy and fulfilled, no amount of alcohol will make them do something they'd regret. That, I believe.

And even if we do our damndest to avoid these things, sometimes there's just nothing we can do. Some people will just do it anyway, no matter how green the grass is at home. That is their OWN morals and ethics that are broken, not yours.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> We all have to recognize that there is FAR more cynicism on subjects like this at a place like TAM. More than enough to skew a poll on the subject. MORE than enough.
> 
> The general population of TAM is made up of people who have little trust (for good reason), have been burned, have been cheated on, and (like me) think too much. Among many, many other little, or big, things that will completely skew the results of a poll.
> 
> It's not much different than when a multi-billion dollar company pays to have their own "research" done on the benefits of their product. Of course it's going to come out in their favor.
> 
> That doesn't mean that those who are against it are wrong, or those who are okay with it are right. It does mean, however, that the results will be leaning to one side, so you can't really make the TAM populations replies be the be-all, end-all of this subject.


What I'm saying Alex,
Is that it makes absolutely no sense complaining about the accepted status quo on this matter, on TAM, because most people here who are against it would have either been negatively affected by it or seen it negatively affect someone else's marriage.
Hence framing the argument into a context that paints them as controlling or insecure because they're against it, would be tantamount to riling them up for your own , personal satisfaction.

Whether or not TAM is a true microcosm of the interpersonal relationship dynamics of the wider population, and / or to what extent it is, is debatable . But we cannot simply dismiss what we see here .
The facts are TAM is the place where they come to get advice and it makes no sense telling them the way they feel about an issue that got their marriage in trouble, isn't politically correct.

The fact is, it got them into trouble and the are well within their right not to accept it as part of their current relationship in moving forward or with future ones.

A fundamental tenet in democracy is that in any given situation, it is unethical for any minority, however right they may think they are, to force their views on a majority

Perception is everything.

_" All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth..."_
~ Friedrich Nietzsche
.
.


----------



## AnnieAsh

alexm said:


> Well, my reasoning behind that is that the BNO isn't generally the same type of thing as the GNO.
> 
> When us guys get together, it usually doesn't involve a club with thumping music, laser shows, sweaty people dancing, and people (men and women) looking to hook up. The sexually charged places, in other words.
> 
> Men's BNO's typically involve some sort of sporting event, and a pub. We don't typically go out with our boys to re-live our youth by dancing and picking up chicks. We go out with our boys to shoot the ****, burp, fart and swear and talk about sports. Do the things we can't do in front of our wives or children. We also don't get all dressed up and smelling nice before we leave. We might brush our teeth, that's about it.
> 
> Women's GNO's, on the other hand, typically involve much planning, getting ready, dressing nice, smelling nice, doing your hair, and then going out somewhere to dance. It's an event. Whereas we guys just go out for a pint and watch the game and get bbq sauce on our shirts.
> 
> Even if we end up at a nudie bar, there really isn't much opportunity to get lucky there. It's 95% men in the place, and the women are being paid to perform. If anything, it'll make us jump our wives when we get home. I'd venture to say, if I were a woman, that a strip club is a "safer" alternative to a dance club for my husband.


The sheer and utter hypocrisy of this post astounds me. It really does. Bravo.


----------



## Created2Write

A nudie bar _isn't_ sexually charged?


----------



## ReformedHubby

alexm said:


> Even if we end up at a nudie bar, there really isn't much opportunity to get lucky there. It's 95% men in the place, and the women are being paid to perform. If anything, it'll make us jump our wives when we get home. I'd venture to say, if I were a woman, that a strip club is a "safer" alternative to a dance club for my husband.


You really killed your argument with that statement. Yes, there is sex in the vip area of a lot of strip clubs. Yes, the customers can and do hook up with the women. These women are experts at separating men from their money and are very good at up-selling their services beyond the table/lap dance. It is in no way safer than a dance club for a husband.


----------



## MrK

Created2Write said:


> A nudie bar _isn't_ sexually charged?


Believe it or not, no.


----------



## AnnieAsh

Having been to strip clubs (of the female variety) I'm gonna call bull on that. To be able to negotiate sexual gratification for money IS sexual and sexually charged. On the part of the john. He ain't paying for conversation and to peer into her soul.


----------



## ReformedHubby

MrK said:


> Believe it or not, no.


C'mon man do you know how ridiculous it sounds to say that an environment where females are dancing nude isn't sexually charged? Are you using sarcasm or something to support your previous posts?


----------



## Caribbean Man

ReformedHubby said:


> C'mon man do you know how ridiculous it sounds to say that an environment where females are dancing nude isn't sexually charged? Are you using sarcasm or something to support your previous posts?


Strip clubs = BNO
Clubbing = GNO.


----------



## MrK

AnnieAsh said:


> Having been to strip clubs (*of the female variety*) I'm gonna call bull on that. To be able to negotiate sexual gratification for money IS sexual and sexually charged. On the part of the john. He ain't paying for conversation and to peer into her soul.


Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by that? Female patrons or female strippers? I've seen videos of men stripping for the gals. That's not even CLOSE to what goes on in strip clubs with female strippers. Most strip clubs have a FIRM hands-off policy.

Some strip clubs have VIP rooms. And didn't Chris Rock have a song called "there is no sex in the champaign room", or something close? I've had A LOT of money taken and VERY little in return in those rooms.

If strip clubs are "sexually charged", it is the dullest, most disinfected sexual charge I've ever seen.

As opposed to bumping and grinding on a loud, pumping dance floor with alcohol and hundreds of people sweating up against each other and trying to get into each others pants?

Not even close. Most female strippers are robots, only with less emotion.


----------



## MrK

Caribbean Man said:


> Strip clubs = BNO
> Clubbing = GNO.


I've read almost none of these posts. But I HOPE that top one is not correct. If you all have been concentrating only on strip clubs for the boys, you have REALLY been missing the mark. All of those players that troll for strange at regular bars every weekend want to thank you for the misdirection.


----------



## AnnieAsh

MrK said:


> Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by that? Female patrons or female strippers? I've seen videos of men stripping for the gals. That's not even CLOSE to what goes on in strip clubs with female strippers.
> 
> Some strip clubs have VIP rooms. And didn't Chris Rock have a song called "there is no sex in the champaign room", or something close? I've had A LOT of money taken and VERY little in return in those rooms.
> 
> If strip clubs are "sexually charged", it is the dullest, most disinfected sexual charge I've ever seen.
> 
> As opposed to bumping and grinding on a loud, pumping dance floor with alcohol and hundreds of people all trying to get into each others pants?
> 
> Not even close. Most female strippers are robots, only with less emotion.


I've been to female strip clubs, as in performers are female. 

And yes. There is sex in the champagne room. If you want to pay for it. But feeling up a nude stripper is not sexual because she's a robot. Lord. My eyes just rolled right out of my head.


----------



## MrK

No Sex in the Champagne Room (Sam Riley Remix) - Chris Rock - YouTube


----------



## MrK

AnnieAsh said:


> I've been to female strip clubs, as in performers are female.
> 
> And yes. There is sex in the champagne room. If you want to pay for it. But feeling up a nude stripper is not sexual because she's a robot. Lord. My eyes just rolled right out of my head.


I bow to the greater authority. You've actually been in a champagne room and saw sex take place. I never have. I stand corrected.


----------



## ReformedHubby

MrK said:


> Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by that? Female patrons or female strippers? I've seen videos of men stripping for the gals. That's not even CLOSE to what goes on in strip clubs with female strippers. Most strip clubs have a FIRM hands-off policy.
> 
> Some strip clubs have VIP rooms. And didn't Chris Rock have a song called "there is no sex in the champaign room", or something close? I've had A LOT of money taken and VERY little in return in those rooms.
> 
> If strip clubs are "sexually charged", it is the dullest, most disinfected sexual charge I've ever seen.
> 
> As opposed to bumping and grinding on a loud, pumping dance floor with alcohol and hundreds of people sweating up against each other and trying to get into each others pants?
> 
> Not even close. Most female strippers are robots, only with less emotion.


What?!?!?!? Strip clubs are a dull environment to you? They are very exciting to me. The reason I haven't gone in years is specifically because there is sex in the champagne room and lots of it. I've seen champagne rooms from Miami to Vegas and sex is always option. 

Disagree with the whole robot thing too. Nothing appealing about a robot. They are very good at making them think that you are special to them.


----------



## alexm

Caribbean Man said:


> What I'm saying Alex,
> Is that it makes absolutely no sense complaining about the accepted status quo on this matter, on TAM, because most people here who are against it would have either been negatively affected by it or seen it negatively affect someone else's marriage.
> 
> *That's precisely what I'm saying  Therefore any sort of "poll" would only serve to have statistics based on the people who come here, many of us broken in certain ways.*
> 
> 
> Hence framing the argument into a context that paints them as controlling or insecure because they're against it, would be tantamount to riling them up for your own , personal satisfaction.
> 
> 
> *I'm... not...??? *
> 
> Whether or not TAM is a true microcosm of the interpersonal relationship dynamics of the wider population, and / or to what extent it is, is debatable . But we cannot simply dismiss what we see here .
> The facts are TAM is the place where they come to get advice and it makes no sense telling them the way they feel about an issue that got their marriage in trouble, isn't politically correct.
> 
> *I didn't. *
> 
> The fact is, it got them into trouble and the are well within their right not to accept it as part of their current relationship in moving forward or with future ones.
> 
> *I didn't say they couldn't. I did say that having a poll on this subject likely wouldn't be accurate as to the rest of the general, non-TAM, population.*
> 
> A fundamental tenet in democracy is that in any given situation, it is unethical for any minority, however right they may think they are, to force their views on a majority
> 
> *I'm not. I'm also not a fascist.
> 
> It is my opinion, just as those who oppose the subject have an opinion. Their opinions are probably stronger in the negative than mine are in the positive. I do what works in my marriage, and that includes not forbidding my wife from doing things she likes to do. It also includes trusting my wife to do the right thing. She's an adult, and she doesn't belong to me. We are married, but that doesn't make either of us a possession to the other.*
> 
> Perception is everything.
> 
> _" All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth..."_
> ~ Friedrich Nietzsche
> .
> .


----------



## alexm

AnnieAsh said:


> The sheer and utter hypocrisy of this post astounds me. It really does. Bravo.


Good attitude and response. Golf clap. You really burned me there. Instead of trying to make yourself look really really cool, why don't you qualify what you're saying to me?

Your response is the internet equivalent of a 3 year old going to his room and giving me a raspberry before slamming the door.

So... to me, MY typical BNO (which are rare) include all of the above scenarios that I mentioned. Sure, any one of us COULD try to pick up a lady if we really wanted to, but we can do that at Wal-Mart, or the library. We are generally not looking our best, nor do we care what we look like, when we go out with the boys. We eat, drink, eat some more, talk about guy stuff and watch sports. Some of you go fishing or golfing (also involving drinking, usually).

IF we end up at a nudie bar, at least with the guys I know, and have known, we are there for a little entertainment. My wife is OKAY with me going to places like this. Lots of wives are. Lots of wives aren't. However, when I have gone to these places in the past, it's always with a group of guys. I have never (and would never) go with just one dude, or by myself. The "ambience" and eye candy is part of the male bonding experience, to use a very unmanly term.

A nudie bar can be as sexually charged as you want it to be. So can a dance bar. My wife trusts me to be at a place like this and keep my hands (and other appendages) to myself. I trust my wife to be at a dance bar, and do the same. Case closed.

If some of you can't handle a nudie bar, or know what can go on behind closed doors, then that's your issue. How you know these things happen is on you. I always assumed they did, but I've never been in the position to find out, thankyouverymuch.

So to sum up:

- the typical BNO does not include bumping and grinding and getting dressed up and thumping music with sexual overtones and makeup and hairdo's and being surrounded by all the singles in your city.

- the typical (TYPICAL) BNO includes beer, sports, food, dirty jokes and men being the slobs they aren't allowed to be at home. The majority of BNO's do not include nudie bars, despite what some of you may think. If they do, you are hanging out with the wrong group of guys, and you may need to find married men to be your friends, or non-scumbags.

- nudie bars are ENTIRELY what YOU make of them, just as dance clubs are.

- your response was uncalled for, particularly because we are only having a difference of opinion on a subject. I thought this was more of a debate than an argument. We are both clearly coming from different areas on this, and that is OKAY. I never see the need to get mean when someone doesn't agree with you, ESPECIALLY a stranger on the internet.


----------



## love=pain

I must say this thread has legs.

My opinion boys or girls can go out and have a good time but it's the where that counts.

If me and some buddies are going to a bar to watch a game, or golf, fishing etc then that is fine.
If we are going out to a bar/club just to drink and dance then whats the point of being married because I am putting myself in a place to make bad choices.
Yeah I have read the arguments here about "I am not that way, I am faithful, it's just for fun etc" but there a just too many stories of those nights turning into bad decisions.
Flirting with the devil usually gets you burned no matter how strong of a person you claim to be.

Now of course after my wife's infidelity she isn't allowed to go out like that at all and I follow the same course. If I expect her to live to a standard then I should be prepared to do the same.


----------



## Cletus

MrK said:


> I bow to the greater authority. You've actually been in a champagne room and saw sex take place. I never have. I stand corrected.


Nor have I. My strip club years are now over two decades behind me, but when I did go, I never saw anyone touched, never saw drug use, nor prostitution, and certainly no sex of any kind on or near the premises. 

The lack of eroticism at the strip clubs I've seen is nothing short of slightly nauseating.


----------



## ReformedHubby

These latest round of posts make me feel like I'm in a parallel universe. People are seriously arguing that a GNO is bad but a strip club is not what it seems? Can you not see the hypocrisy in this? I hope none of you are defense attorneys because you've killed your case. Based on these arguments I'm calling it. The pro GNO folks have won this one. We shall commence arguing again in the next GNO/BNO thread which will probably be posted in five minutes....

BTW, there is sex in the champagne room. Do you guys live in Utah or something???


----------



## Cletus

ReformedHubby said:


> BTW, there is sex in the champagne room. Do you guys live in Utah or something???


I have no reason to doubt your experiences. Strip clubs are a dime a dozen in the state where I live because we have liberal nudity laws. Some of the clubs don't even have a "champagne room". Of the ones that did, neither I nor any of my buddies ever bothered to go in them, as they seemed a great place to part with a lot of money for no particular gain.

So I won't attempt to equate BNO with strip clubs, or claim that they're better than GNO at a club, but I can tell you that, in my personal experience, they were never used as a vehicle to promote infidelity. The girls and the guys never interacted in any way other than the exchange of dollar bills from the stage to the g-string, and even that was done with no touching whatsoever and no quid-pro-quo other than a better view for the payer. 

Which is just another restatement of the position repeated here - infidelity has more to do with the participants than it does with the geography.


----------



## Davelli0331

Because a forum isn't a place for open exchange of ideas but a battlefield where everyone must be divided into winners and losers and one POV declared Right And Correct


----------



## ReformedHubby

Davelli0331 said:


> Because a forum isn't a place for open exchange of ideas but a battlefield where everyone must be divided into winners and losers and one POV declared Right And Correct


LOL, I agree that we should all be able to have differing opinions, but I lost it when more than one man said strip clubs were no big deal. So boobs in your face and coming home with remnants of whatever glitter spray the stripper sprayed on herself on your clothes is somehow more acceptable than a GNO (where everyone is clothed I might add). I tried to give folks an out and ask if it was sarcasm but everyone was serious. I just don't see how one can justify that.


----------



## Davelli0331

Cletus said:


> I have no reason to doubt your experiences. Strip clubs are a dime a dozen in the state where I live because we have liberal nudity laws. Some of the clubs don't even have a "champagne room". Of the ones that did, neither I nor any of my buddies ever bothered to go in them, as they seemed a great place to part with a lot of money for no particular gain.
> 
> So I won't attempt to equate BNO with strip clubs, or claim that they're better than GNO at a club, but I can tell you that, in my personal experience, they were never used as a vehicle to promote infidelity. The girls and the guys never interacted in any way other than the exchange of dollar bills from the stage to the g-string, and even that was done with no touching whatsoever and no quid-pro-quo other than a better view for the payer.
> 
> Which is just another restatement of the position repeated here - infidelity has more to do with the participants than it does with the geography.


I spent a rather unfortunate amount of time and money in many a strip club all over the country as a young fella, and my experiences line up with this. I've heard many, many anecdotes about sex in the VIP and champagne rooms but never actually went to a club where it occurred. Every club I ever went to had bouncers leering over every corner of the place and actively "escorting" anyone out that got too frisky with the girls.

I also _personally_ never found them sexually charged. I can see naked girls dance for free on the Internet, and I can't touch either one. If anything, after a while, they became incredibly lame. The dancers are incredibly pushy about buying drinks and dances to the point that it's not even a casually enjoyable experience. Maybe that's just age and experience speaking, though.

However, I'm obviously not the end all expert on strip clubs, and if so many people claim that they are rampant sex-for-pay establishments, there must be something to it.

I will also say that for me personally if I did not allow my wife to go clubbing I would not feel right going to a strip club, either, even after admitting that I don't get anything sexually out of them.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Davelli0331 said:


> I spent a rather unfortunate amount of time and money in many a strip club all over the country as a young fella, and my experiences line up with this. I've heard many, many anecdotes about sex in the VIP and champagne rooms but never actually went to a club where it occurred. Every club I ever went to had bouncers leering over every corner of the place and actively "escorting" anyone out that got too frisky with the girls.
> 
> I also _personally_ never found them sexually charged. I can see naked girls dance for free on the Internet, and I can't touch either one. If anything, after a while, they became incredibly lame. The dancers are incredibly pushy about buying drinks and dances to the point that it's not even a casually enjoyable experience. Maybe that's just age and experience speaking, though.
> 
> However, I'm obviously not the end all expert on strip clubs, and if so many people claim that they are rampant sex-for-pay establishments, there must be something to it.
> 
> I will also say that for me personally if I did not allow my wife to go clubbing I would not feel right going to a strip club, either, even after admitting that I don't get anything sexually out of them.


I'm starting to feel like I was part of a secret society or something. Not only did me and friends hook up with strippers. Sometimes it was for free. We actually had game specifically for strippers. It worked as follows....

There was the whole ignore the pretty ones and focus all of your attention on the unattractive ones game. There was the I'm not really into whatever race/ethnic group the stripper happens to be game (which for some reason made them want to prove something). Then there was my personal favorite, the I have a bi girlfriend that lives at home with me that would love to hook up with you because you're so beautiful game. Haven't gone to a strip club in forever, but I'd bet those things still work. So glad I'm a good boy now.


----------



## Davelli0331

*Re: Re: GNO or BNO*

I


ReformedHubby said:


> I'm starting to feel like I was part of a secret society or something. Not only did me and friends hook up with strippers. Sometimes it was for free. We actually had game specifically for strippers. It worked as follows....
> 
> There was the whole ignore the pretty ones and focus all of your attention on the unattractive ones game. There was the I'm not really into whatever race/ethnic group the stripper happens to be game (which for some reason made them want to prove something). Then there was my personal favorite, the I have a bi girlfriend that lives at home with me that would love to hook up with you because you're so beautiful game. Haven't gone to a strip club in forever, but I'd bet those things still work. So glad I'm a good boy now.


Ha ha, I will readily admit that a) I make absolutely no claim to having any kind of game, and 2) due to my experiences I never went to a strip club with the intention of picking up a stripper.

For me strip clubs were always a social event with me and my homeboys. We spent a much time drinking and bullsh!tting as we did looking at the girls. And like I said, even that became lame.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Davelli0331 said:


> Ha ha, I will readily admit that a) I make absolutely no claim to having any kind of game, and *2) due to my experiences I never went to a strip club with the intention of picking up a stripper.*


Good call on your part, I wouldn't advise it. I was just a wild guy that was up for anything. Its amazing how a person can change so much over time.


----------



## norajane

ReformedHubby said:


> Good call on your part, I wouldn't advise it. I was just a wild guy that was up for anything. * Its amazing how a person can change so much over time.*


Can you take that thought over to the "*you did it for other men, but not me?" *thread???* *


----------



## ReformedHubby

norajane said:


> Can you take that thought over to the "*you did it for other men, but not me?" *thread???* *


Yikes, I just went over there. Nope, I'm staying far, far, away from that thread.


----------



## MrK

I will propose that any establishment where money is exchanged for sex is a house of prostitution, and I hope we all can agree that (in most marriages) husbands are not allowed in houses of prostitution. But if you want to keep strip clubs in the argument where there is no touching allowed (most, I would argue), feel free. Although I again stress that you are missing the mark, it looks like that is where this went, so I’ll comment. 

I would MUCH rather - much much much much much rather - have my wife sitting quietly, 10-20 feet away from a naked man rolling around on a stage. Than drunk off of drinks purchased by that guy who’s shoulders her arms are currently wrapped around on a sweaty, pumping dance floor packed with partiers in various stages of seduction. A very sexually stimulating atmosphere compared to the almost awkward atmosphere of the “no touch” strip club.

THAT is why I said strip joints are not sexually charged. MOST AREN’T. Many are. If they are, no BNO’s allowed there.

That’s ALL I was saying. Now if you really want to keep this on track, stick to what this should be:

GNO = Clubbing
BNO = night out with the boys (no strip clubs).

Now start over and do it right.


----------



## alexm

ReformedHubby said:


> These latest round of posts make me feel like I'm in a parallel universe. People are seriously arguing that a GNO is bad but a strip club is not what it seems? Can you not see the hypocrisy in this? I hope none of you are defense attorneys because you've killed your case. Based on these arguments I'm calling it. The pro GNO folks have won this one. We shall commence arguing again in the next GNO/BNO thread which will probably be posted in five minutes....
> 
> BTW, there is sex in the champagne room. Do you guys live in Utah or something???


I respect your opinions (which are based on your experiences, which backs them up).

But, as Cletus and Davelli have said, (as have I) our experiences in nudie bars haven't been the same as yours. I don't believe I, or anyone else here, said these things don't happen, just that we haven't witnessed it. We're also not going in there looking for it. Davelli's experiences with strip clubs mirror mine - go with a bunch of guys, pretty much do the same thing you'd do in any bar or pub, but also have some eye-candy around.

Where you're coming from, re: your visits to strip clubs, is that you were LOOKING for a good time, and succeeded.

Any woman can go to a dance club LOOKING for something extra and succeed. But I don't believe this means that the idea of it, if our spouse is happy at home and trustworthy, is deserving of a complete ban by an insecure partner.

Either sex can also just as easily, and probably more commonly, go to either place and just have a good time, and NOT look for anything else. Hell, places like gyms are meat markets for this type of thing. Are we going to forbid our spouses from getting gym memberships as well?

A few of the guys here readily admit that they're not capable of going to places like this without possibly ending up doing something they shouldn't. That's admirable that you recognize this. It doesn't mean that the same thought process should apply to all couples, though. It also doesn't mean that your opinion doesn't matter, and I stress that.

The problem I have with these responses is that they are belittling to those of us who do not have an issue with our partners going to dance clubs and/or strip bars.

Implying that "we won" in a sarcastic manner, or having one-line responses denouncing my hypocrisy, or commenting that you hope some of us aren't lawyers is insulting, and there's no need for that. I don't believe I, or anyone else here insulted you, subversively or otherwise. We even have a mod here adding to the fire, making those of us without 7000 posts feel like our opinions don't matter because we're noobs.

You may not like the way I type my responses, and they may come across as douchey, but I'm not (intending to be) insulting to any of you.

At the risk of getting personal here, the manner in which some of you respond to legitimate and differing opinions speaks volumes about yourselves and how you react when someone offers an alternate experience and/or opinion.

I, personally, never said any of you were wrong and that I am right. I've said all along that other people have different views on this that don't necessarily coincide with your own. Your experiences are not the be-all, end-all, nor are mine. Threads like this are designed for people to see several different thought patterns and decide upon their own. Not to convince others that there is really only one path to follow.


----------



## alexm

MrK said:


> I will propose that any establishment where money is exchanged for sex is a house of prostitution, and I hope we all can agree that (in most marriages) husbands are not allowed in houses of prostitution. But if you want to keep strip clubs in the argument where there is no touching allowed (most, I would argue), feel free. Although I again stress that you are missing the mark, it looks like that is where this went, so I’ll comment.
> 
> I would MUCH rather - much much much much much rather - have my wife sitting quietly, 10-20 feet away from a naked man rolling around on a stage. Than drunk off of drinks purchased by that guy who’s shoulders her arms are currently wrapped around on a sweaty, pumping dance floor packed with partiers in various stages of seduction. A very sexually stimulating atmosphere compared to the almost awkward atmosphere of the “no touch” strip club.
> 
> THAT is why I said strip joints are not sexually charged. MOST AREN’T. Many are. If they are, no BNO’s allowed there.
> 
> That’s ALL I was saying. Now if you really want to keep this on track, stick to what this should be:
> 
> GNO = Clubbing
> BNO = night out with the boys (no strip clubs).
> 
> Now start over and do it right.


Lol, well said!

I am regretting bringing up the nudie bar... 

I meant it originally as a means to convey exactly what you said above. Sweaty drunk men and women, dancing, touching, etc. versus only watching. There IS a difference.

My eyes have been opened to what CAN go on at a nudie bar, but I stand by my comments that many of us are either not aware or not looking for this when we occasionally go there. I do think it's common knowledge that when a group of women go to a sweaty dance bar, that there WILL be guys hitting on them, or trying to dance with them. To me, it's not common knowledge (including to those of us guys who are not looking) that a nudie bar can also include sex or prostitution. My bad, and I stand corrected - to a point. My experiences at these places are not one of expecting to be hit on (other than for money), propositioned, or otherwise. If you are a woman and you do not expect to get hit on at a dance club, you are sheltered or naïve.

It was a bad analogy on my part. Even though a few people saw it my way, many of you did not.

I still take issue with that subject having completely torn apart my opinions and that everything I said up to that point, and afterwards, is now completely useless.


----------



## ReformedHubby

MrK said:


> I would MUCH rather - much much much much much rather - have my wife sitting quietly, 10-20 feet away from a naked man rolling around on a stage. Than drunk off of drinks purchased by that guy who’s shoulders her arms are currently wrapped around on a sweaty, pumping dance floor packed with partiers in various stages of seduction. A very sexually stimulating atmosphere compared to the almost awkward atmosphere of the “no touch” strip club.
> 
> THAT is why I said strip joints are not sexually charged. MOST AREN’T. Many are. If they are, no BNO’s allowed there.
> 
> That’s ALL I was saying. Now if you really want to keep this on track, stick to what this should be:
> 
> GNO = Clubbing
> BNO = night out with the boys (no strip clubs).
> 
> Now start over and do it right.


I'm sorry man, but I still can't fathom how you can say one isn't as bad as the other regarding strip club vs. dance club. There are cons to both as far as relationships are concerned if one isn't careful.

Also it really isn't fair to say that GNOs are club oriented and BNOs are not. I'm done with the club, but a lot of my guy friends aren't. They get dressed up before they go too. 

I get that you think that clubs are bad for married couples, but in my case it was me that couldn't handle it on a BNO not my wife on a GNO. All I'm saying is that men are not immune.


----------



## alexm

ReformedHubby said:


> I'm sorry man, but I still can't fathom how you can say one isn't as bad as the other regarding strip club vs. dance club. There are cons to both as far as relationships are concerned if one isn't careful.
> 
> Also it really isn't fair to say that GNOs are club oriented and BNOs are not. I'm done with the club, but a lot of my guy friends aren't. They get dressed up before they go too.
> 
> I get that you think that clubs are bad for married couples, but in my case it was me that couldn't handle it on a BNO not my wife on a GNO. All I'm saying is that men are not immune.


Out of curiosity, why do Mr. K's responses generate a respectful reply from you, but mine don't? I pretty much said what he just did (though he put it more succinctly).


----------



## MrK

ReformedHubby said:


> Also it really isn't fair to say that GNOs are club oriented and BNOs are not.


You can't put men in a dance club and call it a BNO comparable to a girls night at a club. Women CAN have an "innocent" night at a dance club. Do you really think a group of men will claim that they are going to a dance club to dance with each other? There is ZERO chance that a (straight) man is going to a club just to dance. Men go to clubs to meet women. Need to take THAT out of the equation as well.

The problem with this thread is the same problem liberals have with the NRA. The NRA will continue to fight for their right to purchase machine guns without a background check at gun shows. That keeps the argument far away from the rights that are REALLY threatened.

In other words, clubbing defenders will keep this argument at strip clubs ALL DAY in order to deflect from the REAL discussion (ie; what does my wife actually DO when she's on a hens night at a club?).


----------



## MrK

And I'm not saying men are immune from cheating when they go to a sports bar with their pals. But that's where this conversation should be. Nudie bars are a boundary in your marriage? No problem. That shouldn't even be up for discussion here.

"I'm going dancing with the girls, be back tomorrow morning" and "I'm heading out to Buffalo Wild Wings with the boys, don't wait up" is where this conversation should be.


----------



## ReformedHubby

alexm said:


> Out of curiosity, why do Mr. K's responses generate a respectful reply from you, but mine don't? I pretty much said what he just did (though he put it more succinctly).


I just actually saw your post. I didn't intend for anyone to take it that way. Being honest, on this thread I think its fine to have a little fun with it because the OP isn't looking for advice, just discussion on the topic.


----------



## Davelli0331

I would like to point something out, and I readily admit that I'm just picking a nit at this point.

Also, this isn't an attack or judgment or anything like that, just pointing something out, and not even something with which I necessarily disagree.

ReformedHubby, you're saying that part of the reason you equate strip clubs with dance clubs as far as GNOs/BNOs goes is because of your past experience with them as sex-for-pay establishments.

However, I would like to point out that you also readily admitted that you went to those establishments _looking_ for that sort of thing. I would also point out that your example of running game on a stripper to pick her up is not the same thing as a direct sex-for-pay experience.

That is a different mentality than a woman going to a club with innocent intentions.

Again, I'm nit-picking, and as I said, I agree in the sense that personally I don't go to strip clubs and my wife does not go to dance clubs, so in that sort of way I do find them somewhat equivalent.

DISCLAIMER: Blah blah blah some strip clubs are truly sex-for-pay blah blah blah alcohol lowers inhibitions blah blah blah even people with innocent intentions cheat, both men and women blah blah blah.


----------



## ReformedHubby

Davelli0331 said:


> I would like to point something out, and I readily admit that I'm just picking a nit at this point.
> 
> Also, this isn't an attack or judgment or anything like that, just pointing something out, and not even something with which I necessarily disagree.
> 
> ReformedHubby, you're saying that part of the reason you equate strip clubs with dance clubs as far as GNOs/BNOs goes is because of your past experience with them as sex-for-pay establishments.
> 
> However, I would like to point out that you also readily admitted that you went to those establishments _looking_ for that sort of thing. I would also point out that your example of running game on a stripper to pick her up is not the same thing as a direct sex-for-pay experience.
> 
> That is a different mentality than a woman going to a club with innocent intentions.
> 
> Again, I'm nit-picking, and as I said, I agree in the sense that personally I don't go to strip clubs and my wife does not go to dance clubs, so in that sort of way I do find them somewhat equivalent.
> 
> DISCLAIMER: Blah blah blah some strip clubs are truly sex-for-pay blah blah blah alcohol lowers inhibitions blah blah blah even people with innocent intentions cheat, both men and women blah blah blah.


You are correct that my flaws are what make a BNO at a club or an evening at a strip club a no-go for me. I also concur that it really is all about what works for each person's relationship. I think GNOs and BNOs are okay. But only if one truly knows their limitations/boundaries.


----------



## alexm

ReformedHubby said:


> I just actually saw your post. I didn't intend for anyone to take it that way. Being honest, on this thread I think its fine to have a little fun with it because the OP isn't looking for advice, just discussion on the topic.


Fair enough, I guess.

I didn't ask because I wanted to get in a fight, by the way. I asked because sometimes I don't realize how I'm coming across. I'm a stream of consciousness writer, and I can drag on... I re-read my stuff before I hit submit, but I can see how some things I may say here or on other forums can be misconstrued. I'm taking it that that's how it came across, because a few others are pretty much saying the exact same thing I did, yet they got more polite replies.

I was looking more for feedback, than anything, especially fight-picking.


----------



## 12345Person

If you're doing a GNO with your MIL then you've got your ass covered.


----------



## MrK

Not if she's with MY mom.


----------



## ReformedHubby

An experience from today made me think of this thread. My wife was outside talking to the neighbors and called me over. Apparently the ladies are going out and my wife asked me if she could go with them. I said "sure". She then said she would be sure to make me dinner before she left. I got a few looks from the ladies that I interpreted as disapproving. My wife was just offering to do something nice but it really made me look controlling. Oh well, can't worry about that. Looks like its me the kids and a Christmas movie or two tonight.


----------

