# do you think some women force a man to cheat



## 40cal

do any of you think some women want their husbands to cheat as long as they can do it discretely? as long as it yields some positive result, like less arguing, better sex life, etc etc?


----------



## JamesMh

I think some women drive men to cheating, but I dont know about this maybe. I have never heard of this in my years in the relationship game, maybe in a really open couple like a swinger couple.


----------



## SockPuppet

40cal said:


> do any of you think some women want their husbands to cheat as long as they can do it discretely? as long as it yields some positive result, like less arguing, better sex life, etc etc?


My wife told me straight up she was ok with me purchasing porn as long as I kept it hidden from her. She went on to say that if she found it she would be super pissed.

I wouldnt be surprised if some women tried the same stunt with cheating. Although I would never take her up on that. Too much chance she said it as a push-over and it will come back to bite your balls off in the future.


----------



## Grayson

NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat. The one cheating - be it the husband or the wife - CHOOSES to cheat. The loyal spouse may certainly contribute to the state of the relationship that leads the cheater to that choice, but it's still a choice. The loyal spouse may turn a blind eye or be willing to accept that his/her spouse is cheating, but it's still a choice.

If the loyal spouse allows it or just plain doesn't care, that's not cheating...that's an "open" marriage.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 40cal

well Grayson, that's almost quotable that's a good perspective for me to think about things from.


----------



## JamesMh

sounds like a trap to me.


----------



## PBear

As someone who cheated on their spouse, I'd agree with Grayson's post. No matter how bad the marriage is (sexless, checked out, even abusive), a spouse has the option to leave the marriage rather than cheat.

Having said that, I think that in many (definitely not all or even most) a spouse can create an environment where a spouse doesn't feel like they have any other good choices. Like they have to stay together for the kids, for financial reasons, family pressures, etc. And in those cases, having an affair can seem like the best way to hold the relationship together and still have their needs met. I would think, though, that most cheating spouses could look back and wish they'd never made that decision. Even if they didn't get caught.

C
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tm84

Grayson said:


> NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat. The one cheating - be it the husband or the wife - CHOOSES to cheat. The loyal spouse may certainly contribute to the state of the relationship that leads the cheater to that choice, but it's still a choice. The loyal spouse may turn a blind eye or be willing to accept that his/her spouse is cheating, but it's still a choice.
> 
> If the loyal spouse allows it or just plain doesn't care, that's not cheating...that's an "open" marriage.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree::iagree::iagree:

We all make choices in these matters, no matter what the circumstances are.


----------



## Enchantment

Grayson said:


> NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat. The one cheating - be it the husband or the wife - CHOOSES to cheat. The loyal spouse may certainly contribute to the state of the relationship that leads the cheater to that choice, but it's still a choice. The loyal spouse may turn a blind eye or be willing to accept that his/her spouse is cheating, but it's still a choice.
> 
> If the loyal spouse allows it or just plain doesn't care, that's not cheating...that's an "open" marriage.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree:

Nice post. They always say that each spouse is responsible for 50% of the marriage, but that a cheater is responsible for 100% of cheating - indicating that it is a cheater's CHOICE to cheat. Even if your marriage is in a horrible state, you can still do the honourable thing and let your spouse go instead of resorting to cheating. imho


----------



## michzz

Grayson said:


> NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat. The one cheating - be it the husband or the wife - CHOOSES to cheat. The loyal spouse may certainly contribute to the state of the relationship that leads the cheater to that choice, but it's still a choice. The loyal spouse may turn a blind eye or be willing to accept that his/her spouse is cheating, but it's still a choice.
> 
> If the loyal spouse allows it or just plain doesn't care, that's not cheating...that's an "open" marriage.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree:

A person may feel cornered into a bad decision, but it is their decision alone.

"forced" releases all responsibility for one's actions.

Cannot be done.


----------



## maudite

PBear said:


> Having said that, I think that in many (definitely not all or even most) a spouse can create an environment where a spouse doesn't feel like they have any other good choices. Like they have to stay together for the kids, for financial reasons, family pressures, etc. And in those cases, having an affair can seem like the best way to hold the relationship together and still have their needs met. I would think, though, that most cheating spouses could look back and wish they'd never made that decision. Even if they didn't get caught.


I'm in a situation like this. We are living together for the kids. She's in love with someone else, he's not real but... There's no sex or intimacy between us whatsoever. She is actively encouraging me to sleep with other women. She told me yesterday to meet with an old friend who contacted me on facebook and is in the middle of a divorce and to "f the s out of her". I'm conflicted. I want to remain faithful to my wife who loves a man that is not real and has a mental disorder but at the same time I want certain needs met and she is pushing me incredibly hard to do it.


----------



## okeydokie

maudite said:


> I'm in a situation like this. We are living together for the kids. She's in love with someone else, he's not real but... There's no sex or intimacy between us whatsoever. She is actively encouraging me to sleep with other women. She told me yesterday to meet with an old friend who contacted me on facebook and is in the middle of a divorce and to "f the s out of her". I'm conflicted. I want to remain faithful to my *wife who loves a man that is not real* and *has a mental disorder *but at the same time I want certain needs met and she is pushing me incredibly hard to do it.


not real?

mental disorder?


----------



## alphaomega

SockPuppet said:


> My wife told me straight up she was ok with me purchasing porn as long as I kept it hidden from her. She went on to say that if she found it she would be super pissed.
> 
> I wouldnt be surprised if some women tried the same stunt with cheating. Although I would never take her up on that. Too much chance she said it as a push-over and it will come back to bite your balls off in the future.



Fitness test.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

40cal said:


> do any of you think some women want their husbands to cheat as long as they can do it discretely? as long as it yields some positive result, like less arguing, better sex life, etc etc?


No. I don't. Most women would not want their husbands to cheat. Just as most men don't want their wives cheating.

Nobody "forces" anyone to do anything. That is absurd.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

You live in a different state and have stated in a different post that your marriage is crap and you want out.
Are you looking for validation to cheat rather than leave your marriage?


----------



## Zzyzx

If she's mentally pushing you out the door, that isn't the point to have an affair, that's the point to separate from her and possibly divorce her.

Consider: marriage goes bad because of her, then you cheat. then divorce happens, whose fault is it? Always going to be yours, even if she "pushed" you into it with her actions.

Consider better scenario: marriage goes bad because of her, then you file for legal separation or file for divorce. No affair. In which case, the break is clean unless there are children involved and people close to you know the story.

I had one opportunity to cheat on my ex and as bad as my marriage was at the time, I refused to pursue it because I wanted to be able to say I kept my vows to the end even if there was no working it out with the ex. I'd do it that way again: if a relationship or marriage is bad enough to make me seriously look over her shoulder, it's bad enough that I need to consider leaving if she's not going to meet me halfway.


----------



## okeydokie

my next door neighbor and i went fishing alot. you hear alot of things about peoples life when your on a boat together all day. they are quite religious and it is against their religion to divorce for any reason other than infidelity. he told me that his wife was trying to freeze him out, trying to get him to have an affair so she would have grounds for divorcing him. she actually said it in a counseling session in front of him.

he steadfastly refused to have an affair, said he wouldnt give into her or break the "laws" of his religion. he got transferred to another state a few years back, she and the daughters still live next door. i rarely see him at home anymore. she got what she wanted more or less as im guessing he doesnt come home because its just too stressful around the house.


----------



## chillymorn

do you think some men force there women to have emocional affairs?


nobody is forced BUT when someone man or women are in a situation where they have tried to comunicate maybe for years about their needs not being met adiqutely. the indifference could set them up to be week and if a situations comes around where someone else seems to want to meet their needs (weather physical or emitional) then infedility is a real consern or maybe even unstoppable.


if you want to keep your dog out of the garbage then its best to keep him/her well fed.


it amazes






me how many people neglect their spouce and then wonder why they strayed.


don't get me wrong theres always the kind of person who cheats just because their morals/charachter is flawed.

but it seems to me the majority of people on this particular furm are here because they tried everything in the book to comunicate their needs and it all fall on deaf ears. so I can certanily understand someone in a week state of mind falling to temptation. espically after starving for a long time.


----------



## Jellybeans

Chilly, you are spot on. A lot of times people will try to their partner that something is wrong and said partner keeps blowing them off. It happened in my marriage. Can't tell you how many times I asked him to go to MC with me and he refused vehemently. I would literally cry sometimes in front of him saying something needed to change and he'd look at me and just walk away. 

Ridiculous.


----------



## Grayson

While I can agree with the spirit of your statement, chilly, it still comes down to the cheating spouse making a choice to cheat. They could have chosen to end the marriage after that extended period of their needs not being met and pleas for change falling on deaf ears. Cheating wasn't the only available option...simply the one they opted for.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## HappyAtLast

Yes, there are some women that drive their husbands up a wall, but that still does not give them a green light to cheat. I think that some men marry women just for their looks or out of desperation...not really getting to know them well at all before marriage, and then they wonder why their marriage didn't work out. 
If your marriage isn't working, then end it the right way...not by cheating.


----------



## chillymorn

Grayson said:


> While I can agree with the spirit of your statement, chilly, it still comes down to the cheating spouse making a choice to cheat. They could have chosen to end the marriage after that extended period of their needs not being met and pleas for change falling on deaf ears. Cheating wasn't the only available option...simply the one they opted for.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


agreed they decided in a weakened state after years of neglect.


the people on here that say..........

Well you should have just divorced before you cheated. are missing the boat so to speak. 

there are a ton of reason someone decides to stay in a poor marriage.

1.kids at least I think children are better off with 2 parents living together in a stable inviroment and keeping their standard of living the same as oposed to divorce which oftern creats a finanical short fall. (stable enviorment if there is strife of any sort then disregard)
2.after you have a lot invested not all people have the courage and or strength to pick up and leave. not being a part of you kids life EVERYDAY and seeing how it effects them would be much more difficult too many parents.
3.remember they might not have had plans to actually cheat they might have thought they would be able to fend off any advances from the oppisite sex..
4.they might be ever hopfull that things will eventually turn around and get better.


and then in your weakend state of mind after all your comunicating and efforts were ignored. a situation that you did not plan happens and someone gives you some attention that you have needed and it kinda happens.


and then the spouce that was cheated on say I can't belive they cheated on me .

I think most affares happen this way.and it amazes me that the spouce that neglected or ignored is suprised by it.



one size dosn't fit all.


----------



## chillymorn

HappyAtLast said:


> Yes, there are some women that drive their husbands up a wall, but that still does not give them a green light to cheat. I think that some men marry women just for their looks or out of desperation...not really getting to know them well at all before marriage, and then they wonder why their marriage didn't work out.
> If your marriage isn't working, then end it the right way...not by cheating.


in a perfect world this would be best.

lot of people change after marriage. men and women alike can sometimes not show their true idenity while they are n't married yet.


----------



## MEM2020

*different and simpler view*

Sexual deceit is likely the most common type of blatant chronic deception/lying in modern American marriages. 

I really had no idea exactly where my W was mentally/emotionally the night she said to me "out of the blue", that and this is a direct quote: "she could not imagine having to have sex with me for another 15-20 years". 

I thought she liked having sex with me. Really. And we have always had what "for me" was a good/great sex life. So I was astonished by her remarks. I slept on it for a night and then in the interest of fairness I was totally honest with her. Told her celibacy was a non-starter for me. Preserving the marriage was my primary goal. Pressuring her for sex was not acceptable to me either. So I told her I would find a playmate and remove all pressure for her to have sex with me. 

I have a whole long thread on this. The summary of this "event" was that she realized her desire for me to NOT have sexual contact with another woman was FAR greater than her desire NOT to have sex with me. But that was her decision to make, not mine. 

This was neither easy nor painless for either of us. Then again I have a very simple view of this. It is not acceptable for either person to say "I don't want you but no one else can have you".






PBear said:


> As someone who cheated on their spouse, I'd agree with Grayson's post. No matter how bad the marriage is (sexless, checked out, even abusive), a spouse has the option to leave the marriage rather than cheat.
> 
> Having said that, I think that in many (definitely not all or even most) a spouse can create an environment where a spouse doesn't feel like they have any other good choices. Like they have to stay together for the kids, for financial reasons, family pressures, etc. And in those cases, having an affair can seem like the best way to hold the relationship together and still have their needs met. I would think, though, that most cheating spouses could look back and wish they'd never made that decision. Even if they didn't get caught.
> 
> C
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

*Re: different and simpler view*



MEM11363 said:


> Sexual deceit is likely the most common type of blatant chronic deception/lying in modern American marriages.
> 
> I really had no idea exactly where my W was mentally/emotionally the night she said to me "out of the blue", that and this is a direct quote: "she could not imagine having to have sex with me for another 15-20 years".
> 
> I thought she liked having sex with me. Really. And we have always had what "for me" was a good/great sex life. So I was astonished by her remarks. I slept on it for a night and then in the interest of fairness I was totally honest with her. Told her celibacy was a non-starter for me. Preserving the marriage was my primary goal. Pressuring her for sex was not acceptable to me either. So I told her I would find a playmate and remove all pressure for her to have sex with me.
> 
> I have a whole long thread on this. The summary of this "event" was that she realized her desire for me to NOT have sexual contact with another woman was FAR greater than her desire NOT to have sex with me. But that was her decision to make, not mine.
> 
> This was neither easy nor painless for either of us. Then again I have a very simple view of this. It is not acceptable for either person to say "I don't want you but no one else can have you".


I don't get preserving the marriage at all costs. She doesn't want sex? Divorce. I know I should have done it years ago instead of "preserving" my marriage.
Worst mistake I ever made. Well that and saying I do.
I think people get so wrapped up in keeping the family together that they fail to notice that the kids aren't fools and know what is going on.


----------



## MEM2020

*Re: different and simpler view*

Bright,
I happen to agree with you. I said my "primary" goal was preserving the marriage not my "sole" goal was preservation. 

And what I really meant by that was I was willing to have a sexless marriage (at least temporarily) but I was not willing to be sexless. 

I think the HUGE mistake people make is they decide to "give their partner time by sitting around suffering while their partner ignores how rejected they feel". Typically the refuser in that scenario never changes. Why should they. Their partner is accepting the situation.





Therealbrighteyes said:


> I don't get preserving the marriage at all costs. She doesn't want sex? Divorce. I know I should have done it years ago instead of "preserving" my marriage.
> Worst mistake I ever made. Well that and saying I do.
> I think people get so wrapped up in keeping the family together that they fail to notice that the kids aren't fools and know what is going on.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

*Re: different and simpler view*



MEM11363 said:


> Typically the refuser in that scenario never changes. Why should they. Their partner is accepting the situation.


Exactly or in my case he has changed (NOW) but I am fresh out of give a sh!t and the struggle to care is overwhelming some days.


----------



## Jellybeans

MEM11363 said:


> I think the HUGE mistake people make is they decide to "give their partner time by sitting around suffering while their partner ignores how rejected they feel".


I agree though this is applicable to more than sex...same thing can happen with emotional needs being rejected and etc.


----------



## Grayson

chillymorn said:


> agreed they decided in a weakened state after years of neglect.
> 
> 
> the people on here that say..........
> 
> Well you should have just divorced before you cheated. are missing the boat so to speak.
> 
> there are a ton of reason someone decides to stay in a poor marriage.


Agreed, there are. None of them require cheating.



> 1.kids at least I think children are better off with 2 parents living together in a stable inviroment and keeping their standard of living the same as oposed to divorce which oftern creats a finanical short fall. (stable enviorment if there is strife of any sort then disregard)


I would say that a life of cheating and lying does create strife and tension, and certainly does not make for a stable environment, nor does it provide a good example to lead the children's development by.



> 2.after you have a lot invested not all people have the courage and or strength to pick up and leave. not being a part of you kids life EVERYDAY and seeing how it effects them would be much more difficult too many parents.


Completely understandable. Still doesn't require cheating.



> 3.remember they might not have had plans to actually cheat they might have thought they would be able to fend off any advances from the oppisite sex..


I'll get back to this in a moment, as it ties in to a later statement you made.



> 4.they might be ever hopfull that things will eventually turn around and get better.


Which, again, does not require cheating.



> and then in your weakend state of mind after all your comunicating and efforts were ignored. a situation that you did not plan happens and someone gives you some attention that you have needed and it kinda happens.


And here's where I'll pick up on point 3 above, as well.

I can, to a point, understand how a situation can spiral out of control into an EA (although only to a point), but I steadfastly refuse to buy into the "it just kinda happens" excuse, particularly where it applies to a PA. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that you kiss someone. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that you take your clothes off. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that a male organ is inserted into a female organ. That's quite far afield of the somewhat understandable snowball effect of an EA. Those are all conscious decisions that the cheater makes. They may be influenced by the situation at home, by raging hormones, or anything else, but it's still a choice that they make.



> and then the spouce that was cheated on say I can't belive they cheated on me .


Without a doubt, some betrayed spouses can be oblivious to the state of the relationship that led the cheating spouse to their decision, but that doesn't excuse the cheating, nor does it equate to them "forcing" their spouse to cheat.



> one size dosn't fit all.


True, all relationships are not identical. And, both partners generally play a role in the condition of the relationship. But the betrayed spouse bears zero responsibility for their spouse's decision to cheat.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

Cheating is never ok. And neglecting your spouse isn't conducive to producing a healthy marriage either.

The decision to cheat lays squarely on the shoulders of the disloyal. 100%. If one spouse has been neglectful, that blame lays squarely with them. Especially if the other person has told them repeatedly what is not ok with them/what they need/that the marriage needs help.


----------



## morituri

Jelly 'forced' me to cheat on my diet by showing her jellybeans avatar. It's all your fault Jelly!!:rofl:


----------



## Jellybeans

Hehe. I have that effect on people.  I love the coconut jellybeans.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## chillymorn

Grayson said:


> Agreed, there are. None of them require cheating.
> 
> 
> 
> I would say that a life of cheating and lying does create strife and tension, and certainly does not make for a stable environment, nor does it provide a good example to lead the children's development by.
> 
> 
> 
> Completely understandable. Still doesn't require cheating.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll get back to this in a moment, as it ties in to a later statement you made.
> 
> 
> 
> Which, again, does not require cheating.
> 
> 
> And here's where I'll pick up on point 3 above, as well.
> 
> I can, to a point, understand how a situation can spiral out of control into an EA (although only to a point), but I steadfastly refuse to buy into the "it just kinda happens" excuse, particularly where it applies to a PA. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that you kiss someone. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that you take your clothes off. It doesn't "just kinda happen" that a male organ is inserted into a female organ. That's quite far afield of the somewhat understandable snowball effect of an EA. Those are all conscious decisions that the cheater makes. They may be influenced by the situation at home, by raging hormones, or anything else, but it's still a choice that they make.
> 
> 
> 
> Without a doubt, some betrayed spouses can be oblivious to the state of the relationship that led the cheating spouse to their decision, but that doesn't excuse the cheating, nor does it equate to them "forcing" their spouse to cheat.
> 
> 
> 
> True, all relationships are not identical. And, both partners generally play a role in the condition of the relationship. But the betrayed spouse bears zero responsibility for their spouse's decision to cheat.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I guess the point I was trying to make was that most spouces in this type of situation do not go out and willfully look for someone to cheat with it kinda happens as a progression the situation is ripe for it to happen and the spouce who neglects/ignors their pleas dose in my mind bare a bit of the responsibility.

you can disagree but the world in my eyes has more gray than strictly black and white.

I might even go as far as the betrayed spouce broke their wedding vowles by neglecting/ignoring their duty to try to meet each others needs.

I would also say the spouce who fell to temptation usually sees the light and then the marriage most likley will be over sooner than later.

I am not excusing cheating. I'm just saying I can understand how it could happen and that in the situation as described the spouce who neglects/ignors dose in my mind share some of the blame.

cause and effect type of thing.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

morituri said:


> Jelly 'forced' me to cheat on my diet by showing her jellybeans avatar. It's all your fault Jelly!!:rofl:


Jelly forced me to murder my neighbor because I saw her avatar, ate too many and in my sugar high, I attacked my neighbor. 
Hey Jelly, it's YOUR FAULT I am being hauled off in cuffs. I'm not to blame at all. IT JUST HAPPENED.


----------



## chillymorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Jelly forced me to murder my neighbor because I saw her avatar, ate too many and in my sugar high, I attacked my neighbor.
> Hey Jelly, it's YOUR FAULT I am being hauled off in cuffs. I'm not to blame at all. IT JUST HAPPENED.


of course you cheated with the neighbor before the murder


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

chillymorn said:


> of course you cheated with the neighbor before the murder


Yeah, she is pretty hot.


----------



## Zzyzx

chillymorn said:


> you can disagree but the world in my eyes has more gray than strictly black and white.
> 
> I might even go as far as the betrayed spouce broke their wedding vowles by neglecting/ignoring their duty to try to meet each others needs.
> 
> I would also say the spouse who fell to temptation usually sees the light and then the marriage most likley will be over sooner than later.
> 
> I am not excusing cheating. I'm just saying I can understand how it could happen and that in the situation as described the spouce who neglects/ignors dose in my mind share some of the blame.
> 
> cause and effect type of thing.


This.

The spouse who cheated is 100% responsible for carrying out the cheating behavior. But ... but ... in the case of the spouse who neglected or refused the partner's needs, that spouse has ALSO BROKEN the marriage vows. Just no two ways about that one.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Zzyzx said:


> This.
> 
> The spouse who cheated is 100% responsible for carrying out the cheating behavior. But ... but ... in the case of the spouse who neglected or refused the partner's needs, that spouse has ALSO BROKEN the marriage vows. Just no two ways about that one.


The difference is that when someone cheats, they take the choice away from the BS. Someone who neglects and refuses does so in plain sight. The choice is then upon the other spouse if they want to stay or go. 
I say this as a wife who has been neglected and refused. I chose to stay. I should have left. Cheating was never an option. Why? Not because he wouldn't have "deserved" it. It was because *I* didn't deserve it. Knowing I broke my word and my moral code wasn't worth it. Ever.


----------



## Runs like Dog

Cheat? Nope. Kill maybe.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> The difference is that when someone cheats, they take the choice away from the BS. Someone who neglects and refuses does so in plain sight. The choice is then upon the other spouse if they want to stay or go.


Spouse neglects and refuses in plain sight and offers choice to other spouse what to do about it. Spouse makes the choice to cheat. Didn't the cheating spouse make the best out of the options the neglecting spouse gave them?

Not trying to glorify cheaters by any stretch but to me cheating and neglect are basically the same - blatant and intentional disregard of a spouse. It just comes in different flavors.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> Spouse neglects and refuses in plain sight and offers choice to other spouse what to do about it. Spouse makes the choice to cheat. Didn't the cheating spouse make the best out of the options the neglecting spouse gave them?
> 
> Not trying to glorify cheaters by any stretch but to me cheating and neglect are basically the same - blatant and intentional disregard of a spouse. It just comes in different flavors.


The best choice is the honorable one, leaving and divorcing. Cheating is not an option. If the marriage is so bad that cheating IS the only option, then just leave. 

Being neglected is soul sucking. It is however out there and open. You know what you are dealing with. You make the choice to stay, for whatever reason. 
Being cheated on cuts you off at the knees and renders you unable to get up. The choice was not given to you, it was kept from you under cloak and dagger. You had no say in the "choice". 
I will agree that both situations show total disregard for the spouse. I don't think both are different flavors of the same food. One is known and the other is not. I'd pick the enemy I know vs. the one I do not.


----------



## Zzyzx

Therealbrighteyes said:


> The difference is that when someone cheats, they take the choice away from the BS. Someone who neglects and refuses does so in plain sight. The choice is then upon the other spouse if they want to stay or go.
> I say this as a wife who has been neglected and refused. I chose to stay. I should have left. Cheating was never an option. Why? Not because he wouldn't have "deserved" it. It was because *I* didn't deserve it. Knowing I broke my word and my moral code wasn't worth it. Ever.


The BS made the choice in the beginning. No matter what happens from there, the BS must still own the responsibility for making that choice. That isn't to excuse the WS at all, that's to say nothing like this happens in a vacuum.


----------



## misstreated

Kind of a ridiculous question, do you know how many diseases are out there these days? I wouldn't touch my man with a ten foot pole if he cheated... at least until he was tested


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Zzyzx said:


> The BS made the choice in the beginning. No matter what happens from there, the BS must still own the responsibility for making that choice. That isn't to excuse the WS at all, that's to say nothing like this happens in a vacuum.


Yes, I firmly believe that in a marriage each party is 50% responsible for their contribution. A cheater on the other hand is 100% responsible for their behavior, regardless of the circumstances. They MAKE their choice. It isn't an accident, it doesn't just happen, they weren't too drunk or they couldn't just help themselves. 
In a sexless marriage at least both parties know what is going on. Both make the decision to stay or leave and another party isn't involved. Adding a third person to the marriage leaves one person in the dark and they are not privy, regardless if you think they should have a "duh" moment or it is "justified".
Nothing excuses cheating, nothing. 
I wish I didn't have this moral code. I would have had a hell of alot of fun for the last 17 years if I didn't.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> The best choice is the honorable one, leaving and divorcing. Cheating is not an option. If the marriage is so bad that cheating IS the only option, then just leave.
> 
> Being neglected is soul sucking. It is however out there and open. You know what you are dealing with. You make the choice to stay, for whatever reason.
> Being cheated on cuts you off at the knees and renders you unable to get up. The choice was not given to you, it was kept from you under cloak and dagger. You had no say in the "choice".
> I will agree that both situations show total disregard for the spouse. I don't think both are different flavors of the same food. One is known and the other is not. I'd pick the enemy I know vs. the one I do not.


Point taken.

The only thing I'd debate in your post is that neglected spouses could easily argue that if the marriage is so bad that a spouse chooses to disregard his/her spouse, *they* should do the honorable thing and leave first, or at least offer. So many posts about a spouse pulling sex off the table in hopes that the other spouse will leave - whatever I may think of this choice, I don't think you can attempt to intentionally hurt a spouse and get mad when they don't react in the way you wanted them to (and cheat instead of leave). It seems like the manned up thing for the neglectful spouse to do would be to leave instead of projecting the decision to end the marriage onto the innocent spouse.

I do think that your outlook is the ideal, but if it gets down to one spouse neglecting and the other cheating, it seems to me neither one of those options are particularly honorable.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> Point taken.
> 
> The only thing I'd debate in your post is that neglected spouses could easily argue that if the marriage is so bad that a spouse chooses to disregard his/her spouse, *they* should do the honorable thing and leave first, or at least offer. So many posts about a spouse pulling sex off the table in hopes that the other spouse will leave - whatever I may think of this choice, I don't think you can attempt to intentionally hurt a spouse and get mad when they don't react in the way you wanted them to (and cheat instead of leave). It seems like the manned up thing for the neglectful spouse to do would be to leave instead of projecting the decision to end the marriage onto the innocent spouse.
> 
> I do think that your outlook is the ideal, but if it gets down to one spouse neglecting and the other cheating, it seems to me neither one of those options are particularly honorable.


.... and in such a way some spouses deserved to be cheated on as they deserved to be left etc. Kind of like karma, like they had it coming to them, they deserved their pain and suffering because of the pain and suffering they caused.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> .... and in such a way some spouses deserved to be cheated on as they deserved to be left etc. Kind of like karma, like they had it coming to them, they deserved their pain and suffering because of the pain and suffering they caused.


I don't think anyone deserves pain, suffering, neglect or cheating. I just don't think one spouse should be surprised when the other emulates their behavior.

I know, I know, I'm still stuck on the fair thing.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> Point taken.
> 
> The only thing I'd debate in your post is that neglected spouses could easily argue that if the marriage is so bad that a spouse chooses to disregard his/her spouse, *they* should do the honorable thing and leave first, or at least offer. So many posts about a spouse pulling sex off the table in hopes that the other spouse will leave - whatever I may think of this choice, I don't think you can attempt to intentionally hurt a spouse and get mad when they don't react in the way you wanted them to (and cheat instead of leave). It seems like the manned up thing for the neglectful spouse to do would be to leave instead of projecting the decision to end the marriage onto the innocent spouse.
> 
> I do think that your outlook is the ideal, but if it gets down to one spouse neglecting and the other cheating, it seems to me neither one of those options are particularly honorable.


There are three common denominators with cheaters. Passive aggressive, conflict avoiders and low self esteem.
With a withholder, they are passive aggressive, conflict avoiders and low self esteem. 
Both are similar but not the same. One is at least known to you.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> I don't think anyone deserves pain, suffering, neglect or cheating. I just don't think one spouse should be surprised when the other emulates their behavior.
> 
> I know, I know, I'm still stuck on the fair thing.


Sometimes it’s the only way they learn. But I’ve seen people suffer immensely, traumatically and still never look to understand their participation that led up to their suffering. These are the Unforgiving People in the world. Some use their suffering, their trauma as a teacher, to teach themselves some of life’s most difficult lessons. These are the Forgiving People of the world because the bitter and resentful person never learns from their mistakes and just keeps on repeating them throughout their life.


----------



## Runs like Dog

I think women are taught from birth to push as many buttons as humanly possible for the thrill of watching men go insane.


----------



## Grayson

chillymorn said:


> I guess the point I was trying to make was that most spouces in this type of situation do not go out and willfully look for someone to cheat with it kinda happens as a progression the situation is ripe for it to happen and the spouce who neglects/ignors their pleas dose in my mind bare a bit of the responsibility.
> 
> you can disagree but the world in my eyes has more gray than strictly black and white.


There's plenty of gray, true. I don't recall saying that everyone that cheats has gone out looking for an affair. A neglectful partner can (and does) most certainly bear responsibility for the state of the marriage. That state of the marriage may have contributed to the cheating spouse's decision, but cheating was the decision of the cheating spouse alone.

To draw an example, let's say my wife is a lousy driver, and every time she drives our car, she brings it back and there's a new dent or other problem in it. It gets so bad that the car barely runs, and would cost a considerable amount to repair. By your logic, if I then decide to remedy the situation by stealing a new car, my wife is responsible for my theft. But, she wouldn't be...she'd be responsible for the state of our existing car, but I'm the one who chose to steal the new one.



> I might even go as far as the betrayed spouce broke their wedding vowles by neglecting/ignoring their duty to try to meet each others needs.


There's a very strong case that can be made for that. That's still a far cry from that spouse "forcing" their partner to cheat.



> I am not excusing cheating. I'm just saying I can understand how it could happen and that in the situation as described the spouce who neglects/ignors dose in my mind share some of the blame.
> 
> cause and effect type of thing.


I can certainly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly plays a part in setting the tone and nature of the marriage that might lead a cheating spouse to cheat...but they don't bear responsibility for the cheating...that's all on the cheater, as he/she could have kept their pants on, but chose to take them off. The betrayed and/or neglectful spouse did not pull their partner's pants off for them.


----------



## chillymorn

Grayson said:


> There's plenty of gray, true. I don't recall saying that everyone that cheats has gone out looking for an affair. A neglectful partner can (and does) most certainly bear responsibility for the state of the marriage. That state of the marriage may have contributed to the cheating spouse's decision, but cheating was the decision of the cheating spouse alone.
> 
> To draw an example, let's say my wife is a lousy driver, and every time she drives our car, she brings it back and there's a new dent or other problem in it. It gets so bad that the car barely runs, and would cost a considerable amount to repair. By your logic, if I then decide to remedy the situation by stealing a new car, my wife is responsible for my theft. But, she wouldn't be...she'd be responsible for the state of our existing car, but I'm the one who chose to steal the new one.
> 
> replace buy with steal.don't think cheating is aginst the law.
> 
> There's a very strong case that can be made for that. That's still a far cry from that spouse "forcing" their partner to cheat.
> 
> you keep beating a dead horse I said bare some of the responsibility. not forced.
> 
> I can certainly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly plays a part in setting the tone and nature of the marriage that might lead a cheating spouse to cheat...but they don't bear responsibility for the cheating...that's all on the cheater, as he/she could have kept their pants on, but chose to take them off. The betrayed and/or neglectful spouse did not pull their partner's pants off for them.


symantics we will have to agree to disagreeon this small point.

again I never said forced was it but I still think neglect/ignor bares some responsibility.

have a great day


----------



## txhunter54

Jellybeans said:


> Cheating is never ok. And neglecting your spouse isn't conducive to producing a healthy marriage either.
> 
> The decision to cheat lays squarely on the shoulders of the disloyal. 100%. If one spouse has been neglectful, that blame lays squarely with them. Especially if the other person has told them repeatedly what is not ok with them/what they need/that the marriage needs help.


:iagree:

Neglecting needs and constant rejection cause a breeding ground for cheating. But, it is still the responsibility of the person being neglected and rejected to not cheat.


----------



## okeydokie

Runs like Dog said:


> I think women are taught from birth to push as many buttons as humanly possible for the thrill of watching men go insane.


hammer meet nail


----------



## Grayson

chillymorn said:


> replace buy with steal.don't think cheating is aginst the law.


"Buying a new car" would, in this example, be equivalent to divorcing and beginning a new relationship. Stealing the car - an illicit act that one tries to keep under wraps as much as possible - is more equivalent to cheating.



> you keep beating a dead horse I said bare some of the responsibility. not forced.


Well, "forced" was the original question of the thread. Let's leave that word out of it, though, and my point still stands: Whatever the betrayed spouse may have done to contribute to the poor state of the marriage, THEY did not choose for their partner to cheat. The cheating spouse made that decision his-/herself. The betrayed spouse bears an appropriate level of responsibility for the choices he/she made that contributed to the state of the marriage, but their spouse cheating was not a choice made by the betrayed spouse.




> symantics we will have to agree to disagreeon this small point.
> 
> again I never said forced was it but I still think neglect/ignor bares some responsibility.


It's not semantics...it's truth.

And again, I never said the betrayed spouse bears no responsibility for the state of the marriage. They do not, however, bear any responsibility for a choice their partner made alone.


----------



## Grayson

Bingo, txhunter.


----------



## Jellybeans

Acorn said:


> I do think that your outlook is the ideal, but if it gets down to one spouse neglecting and the other cheating, it seems to me neither one of those options are particularly honorable.


:iagree:



Grayson said:


> Well, "forced" was the original question of the thread. Let's leave that word out of it, though, and my point still stands: Whatever the betrayed spouse may have done to contribute to the poor state of the marriage, THEY did not choose for their partner to cheat.


Just as a neglected pouse did not choose to be neglected. It was done to them.



Grayson said:


> And again, I never said the betrayed spouse bears no responsibility for the state of the marriage. They do not, however, bear any responsibility for a choice their partner made alone.


I think everyone agrees with this.

Nobody is FORCED to neglect their partner/treat them poorly. Just as no one is FORCED to cheat on their partner. Those are decisions all made by the perpetrator in each situation.


----------



## Grayson

Agreed, jb. Unless I'm misunderstanding what chilly's saying though, it seems that chilly is saying that, if the betrayed spouse is neglectful, they are equally responsible for the cheating spouse's decision to cheat.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

I think Chilly is saying that the neglect definitely creates an environment where bad things can happen, not that it FORCES anyone to cheat. 

And I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. 

Neglect leads to resentment which leads to a lack of respect which leads to withdrawing from your partner.

When those 3 things happen, you have a recipe for disaster.


----------



## chillymorn

Grayson said:


> Agreed, jb. Unless I'm misunderstanding what chilly's saying though, it seems that chilly is saying that, if the betrayed spouse is neglectful, they are equally responsible for the cheating spouse's decision to cheat.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


please reread my posts I never said equally or even hint at that.



I stated bares a bit of the responsibility.or some of the responsibility.

if my writing or lack of it confused you I apoligise. 

but don't put words that I didn't say.


----------



## chillymorn

Jellybeans said:


> I think Chilly is saying that the neglect definitely creates an environment where bad things can happen, not that it FORCES anyone to cheat.
> 
> And I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment.
> 
> Neglect leads to resentment which leads to a lack of respect which leads to withdrawing from your partner.
> 
> When those 3 things happen, you have a recipe for disaster.


you stated it better than I did.



thanks:smthumbup:


----------



## Grayson

chillymorn said:


> please reread my posts I never said equally or even hint at that.
> 
> 
> 
> I stated bares a bit of the responsibility.or some of the responsibility.
> 
> if my writing or lack of it confused you I apoligise.
> 
> but don't put words that I didn't say.


As I've said, I can wholeheartedly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly bears responsibility _for the neglect and the state of the marriage_.

I can't, however, agree that even the most neglectful spouse on the planet bears a single iota of responsibility _for their partner's decision to cheat_.

We're all responsible for our own actions, and while those actions and decisions may be lousy and contribute to someone else making a lousy decision, that second someone is responsible for their own actions. Nothing that requires a conscious decision "just kinda happens." Like in my earlier example, my wife might be responsible for our car becoming a piece of junk, and that might certainly influence me to steal a better car, and I may he hacked off at her for letting our car get that way, but stealing the car is all on me...she's not responsible for my decision, even if she's responsible for the situation that led me to that decision.

And, before I forget, thanks for the clarification. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

Grayson said:


> As I've said, I can wholeheartedly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly bears responsibility _for the neglect and the state of the marriage_.
> 
> I can't, however, agree that even the most neglectful spouse on the planet bears a single iota of responsibility _for their partner's decision to cheat_.


I am pretty sure everyone on here agrees with the fact that a cheater is responsible for cheating.


----------



## chillymorn

Grayson said:


> As I've said, I can wholeheartedly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly bears responsibility _for the neglect and the state of the marriage_.
> 
> I can't, however, agree that even the most neglectful spouse on the planet bears a single iota of responsibility _for their partner's decision to cheat_.
> 
> We're all responsible for our own actions, and while those actions and decisions may be lousy and contribute to someone else making a lousy decision, that second someone is responsible for their own actions. Nothing that requires a conscious decision "just kinda happens." Like in my earlier example, my wife might be responsible for our car becoming a piece of junk, and that might certainly influence me to steal a better car, and I may he hacked off at her for letting our car get that way, but stealing the car is all on me...she's not responsible for my decision, even if she's responsible for the situation that led me to that decision.
> 
> And, before I forget, thanks for the clarification.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


your opinion about this subject is very narrow minded techinacaly you are correct in your statement that the cheater is responsible for their actions.

but if you go over to the coping with infadility board theres an awsome thread about why people cheat.

if you talk to a marriage counsler they will also tell you that the neglector/ignorer dose indead bare some of the responsibility for the events that lead up to someone cheating.

is it wrong to cheat because your spouce is neglecting/ignoring your pleas to make a better effort to their spouces needs. sure it is but you would be foolish to think that it can't happen to you.a lot of the people who cheat never in a million years thought they would.

you never know how your going to act until your in the situation yourself. 

and each situation is different. how many kids do you have,how old are they ,how much money are you going to loss,who get the dog and house ,


its very easy to take the stance that the cheater is always the bad guy. but in my opinion the neglector/ignorer really has there head up their a$$ for not paying attention and realising the it takes 2 for a marriage to work.

some people just ani't strong enough or their fed up enough or at some point they even might hope to get caught so it finally ends their marriage but a wise person would want to know that this happens a lot and to portect yourself from it you should be a good partner or this might happen to you.


its just the way it is and to burry your head in the sand and say they should have divorced first is just not realistic thinking satisticaly. 


but hey if it works for you then great I'm more of a realist and know that it happens and will keep that in the back of my mind as a reminder to try my best to comunicate my needs and to listen to my wifes needs to try to insulate something like this happening in my marriage.


----------



## AFEH

There are mitigating circumstances for some who commit adultery. And these mitigating circumstances should be taken into account when punishment is administered by the loyal spouse and most certainly during the time of reconciliation if indeed that happens. It’s the mitigating circumstances that the loyal spouse should learn most from and do something about should they wish to remain in the marriage.


----------



## okeydokie

i just cannot believe that any married person who basically creates the sexless scenario would be so stupid as to not know what the potential consequences are. do people who go off sex really believe that their partner is ok with that and can adjust from what was to what is? is it a game, i think in many cases it is, has to be.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> As I've said, I can wholeheartedly agree that a neglectful spouse certainly bears responsibility _for the neglect and the state of the marriage_.
> 
> I can't, however, agree that even the most neglectful spouse on the planet bears a single iota of responsibility _for their partner's decision to cheat_.


Grayson, to me a less biased version of this is written as this:

A neglectful spouse bears responsibility _for the neglect and its effects on the marriage_.

A cheating, neglected spouse bears responsibility _for the cheating and its effects on the marriage_.

The neglectful spouse is entirely responsible for the neglect, and setting up fertile grounds for the cheating to occur. The cheating spouse is entirely responsible for the cheating.

And if you want to be ever more fair, you'd probably have to consider that the neglectful spouse may have been emotionally abandoned, which caused her to withdraw. Maybe she let herself go physically, which was important to the husband and therefore caused him to drift emotionally from her. Maybe she let herself go because... etc.


----------



## okeydokie

Acorn said:


> And if you want to be ever more fair, you'd probably have to consider that the neglectful spouse may have been emotionally abandoned, which caused her to withdraw. Maybe she let herself go physically, which was important to the husband and therefore caused him to drift emotionally from her. Maybe she let herself go because... etc.


i agree, there are infinite scenarios that could be at play. i certainly understand that there are valid reasons for any spouse to stop intimacy with the other. i guess i sometimes assume that in general the HD spouse hasnt really done anything traumatic to affect things (abuse, substance, ect)


----------



## AFEH

okeydokie said:


> i just cannot believe that any married person who basically creates the sexless scenario would be so stupid as to not know what the potential consequences are. do people who go off sex really believe that their partner is ok with that and can adjust from what was to what is? is it a game, i think in many cases it is, has to be.


I think in many cases the game is called Passive Aggression. It’s kind of “Revenge By Withholding.”

And then surprise surprise after a few or maybe many years, the marriage collapses because the things being withheld are what the spouse needed to actually feel loved whereas it turns out they’ve actually been deliberately neglected. And if the spouse discovers that it’s all been calculated, deliberate then all hell is let lose and the marriage is blown apart never to recover.


----------



## Aquarious 1

OOOK now you'll hear from an old Fart . DONT ,she'll nail your ass to the wall . If theres children theyll become colladeral damage. If shes looking to get out thats just what shell want to do . Like ive said they know men are crazy for sex so the first thing they do is a BJ to lock your butt in . Been there done that 
i wont let her have that card ,then your the bad guy . NOT Geo


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

AFEH said:


> I think in many cases the game is called Passive Aggression. It’s kind of “Revenge By Withholding.”
> 
> And then surprise surprise after a few or maybe many years, the marriage collapses because the things being withheld are what the spouse needed to actually feel loved whereas it turns out they’ve actually been deliberately neglected. And if the spouse discovers that it’s all been calculated, deliberate then all hell is let lose and the marriage is blown apart never to recover.


You summed up my marriage with this paragraph. Still never cheated though.


----------



## okeydokie

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You summed up my marriage with this paragraph. Still never cheated though.


mine too, me neither


----------



## AFEH

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You summed up my marriage with this paragraph. Still never cheated though.


I find it very very sad. Two people in love with one another and yet there’s one consciously and deliberately hurting the other by withholding what the other needs to feel loved. By knowingly neglecting their spouse, their chosen lifetime partner, they get their revenge for things that happened in the past.

And then there’s their partner, always by their side trying to love them and trying to get love back in return. But the love doesn’t deepen and grow, instead it becomes brittle and breaks, smashes.

And all for the sake of not forgiving. That’s all it takes, forgiveness, for love to blossom, grow and mature in the way it should do, in the way things were meant to be between two people who have selected one another as their lifetime partners, until death us do part and all that.

But some people will never ever forgive. I pity those people and the people who love them.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

AFEH said:


> And then there’s their partner, always by their side trying to love them and trying to get love back in return. But the love doesn’t deepen and grow, instead it becomes brittle and breaks, smashes..


After being rejected countless times, that love turns to ambivalence.

And you are correct, it is very very sad. Soul crushing.

I gave him the wrong finger, that's for sure.


----------



## Jellybeans

okeydokie said:


> i just cannot believe that any married person who basically creates the sexless scenario would be so stupid as to not know what the potential consequences are.


I agree with this also when a spouse emotionally neglects their spouse.



Acorn said:


> A neglectful spouse bears responsibility _for the neglect and its effects on the marriage_.
> 
> A cheating, neglected spouse bears responsibility _for the cheating and its effects on the marriage_.


Excellent summary! 



AFEH said:


> And then there’s their partner, always by their side trying to love them and trying to get love back in return. But the love doesn’t deepen and grow, instead it becomes brittle and breaks, smashes.
> 
> But some people will never ever forgive. I pity those people and the people who love them.


ITA. This sums up my marriage. I had an affair. He was gone emotionally. I felt like I was in a relationship all by myself. I hated coming home from work, I'd delay as much as I could. He refused MC the 100x I offered it, he refused to talk about problems "talking isn't going to help," he refused me the human basic decency of speaking words to me for sometimes, days/weeks at time. I would literally be crying in front of him, and he'd walk right by me. That is no way to live. Was it right to have an affair? No. Was I starved for any sort of affection/emotional connection? Yes. The day I moved out, he had not spoken a word to be in 1.5 month. Imagine a house full of silence. The silence was defeaning. 

I will always regret my A. And I am not perfect either. I could have been a better wife. I could done a lot of things differently. I was always willing to meet him halfway. He was not. He cheated as well. But to this day, nothing he did hurt me more than his deliberate stonewalling/silence. It cut me like a knife in the middle of my heart. 

Whoa. I just got really dramatic. LOL.


----------



## Zzyzx

okeydokie said:


> i just cannot believe that any married person who basically creates the sexless scenario would be so stupid as to not know what the potential consequences are. do people who go off sex really believe that their partner is ok with that and can adjust from what was to what is? is it a game, i think in many cases it is, has to be.


You'd be surprised how many withholding wives have tunnel vision around this. I've known friends in this situation: when the wife doesn't feel it's her problem, it's like talking to a wall. No acknowledgement of his need at all. At that point, all the guy can do is work on himself and hope. Or get out.

Athol has an excellent post at his blog today about the dilemma of choosing between morality and misery.


----------



## Aquarious 1

Jellybeans said:


> I agree with this also when a spouse emotionally neglects their spouse.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent summary!
> 
> 
> 
> ITA. This sums up my marriage. I had an affair. He was gone emotionally. I felt like I was in a relationship all by myself. I hated coming home from work, I'd delay as much as I could. He refused MC the 100x I offered it, he refused to talk about problems "talking isn't going to help," he refused me the human basic decency of speaking words to me for sometimes, days/weeks at time. I would literally be crying in front of him, and he'd walk right by me. That is no way to live. Was it right to have an affair? No. Was I starved for any sort of affection/emotional connection? Yes. The day I moved out, he had not spoken a word to be in 1.5 month. Imagine a house full of silence. The silence was defeaning.
> 
> I will always regret my A. And I am not perfect either. I could have been a better wife. I could done a lot of things differently. I was always willing to meet him halfway. He was not. He cheated as well. But to this day, nothing he did hurt me more than his deliberate stonewalling/silence. It cut me like a knife in the middle of my heart.
> 
> Whoa. I just got really dramatic. LOL.


Yes Some People have no conscience no heart . Goes back to where they started in life ,a famly that also had no conscience
or abuse . This is why i say Children are always Colladeral Damage. They have Damage their whole life unless they realize what their doing and try and change it.Geo


----------



## Grayson

chillymorn said:


> your opinion about this subject is very narrow minded techinacaly you are correct in your statement that the cheater is responsible for their actions.
> 
> but if you go over to the coping with infadility board theres an awsome thread about why people cheat.
> 
> if you talk to a marriage counsler they will also tell you that the neglector/ignorer dose indead bare some of the responsibility *for the events that lead up to someone cheating.*


I've bolded for emphasis, but that's exactly what I've been saying all along, chilly. We're fully on the same page here. That doesn't equate to the neglectful spouse being responsible _for the cheating spouse's decision to cheat_, however.



> is it wrong to cheat because your spouce is neglecting/ignoring your pleas to make a better effort to their spouces needs. sure it is but you would be foolish to think that it can't happen to you.a lot of the people who cheat never in a million years thought they would.


Nothing I've sai is at odds with this, either. In fact, I've specifically stated that, undoubtedly, some who've cheated didn't set out specifically looking fir an affair. EA's, in particular, can have a slow build, but the very moment that someone makes a conscious decision to keep something from their spouse, that's a decision that's their responsibility, and theirs alone. And when we move into a realm of a PA, there's no way that any variation of "it just kinda happened" can stick, as all of the acts of a PA require a conscious decision on the cheater's part.



> you never know how your going to act until your in the situation yourself.


That's a fair statement. Wouldn't you also agree that it's a fair statement to say that how you CHOOSE to act in that situation is your responsibility and yours alone? Someone else may have contributed to an environment that leads you to that turning point, but choosing how to react is on you, not anyone else.



> its very easy to take the stance that the cheater is always the bad guy. but in my opinion the neglector/ignorer really has there head up their a$$ for not paying attention and realising the it takes 2 for a marriage to work.


Please note that I've never ascribed roles remotely like "bad guy" or "good guy" to either party in this discussion. No one is being absolved of responsibility for their own actions that contribute to the state of the relationship. Quite the opposite, in fact, as I'm holding individuals responsible for their own choices. I'd hoped that was clear when I said specifically that the most neglectful spouse on the planet is responsible for that neglect...but is not, resultantly, responsible for their partner's choice to respond to that neglect through cheating.



> its just the way it is and to burry your head in the sand and say they should have divorced first is just not realistic thinking satisticaly.


Of course, people make had decisions all the time. That's what we're talking about right now, after all. Because many people make a bad decision, it doesn't stop being a bad decision...it's just a sadly all too common bad decision.



> but hey if it works for you then great I'm more of a realist and know that it happens and will keep that in the back of my mind as a reminder to try my best to comunicate my needs and to listen to my wifes needs to try to insulate something like this happening in my marriage.


Did I say or even imply that such things don't happen? No. I merely disagreed with the notion that, if Spouse A is neglectful, which leads Spouse B to cheat, that Spouse A is directly responsible for Spouse B's decision. Spouse A is definitely responsible (to varying degrees, based on the specifics of the relationship in question) for the state of the marriage. Spouse A made his/her choices in that regard, and Spouse B is not responsible for those choices. Likewise, when Spouse B chooses to get those needs met by someone else, that's not Spouse A's decision, and thus, not Spouse A's responsibility. They both have to own their own individual actions.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

Aquarious 1 said:


> Yes Some People have no conscience no heart . Goes back to where they started in life ,a famly that also had no conscience
> or abuse . This is why i say Children are always Colladeral Damage. They have Damage their whole life unless they realize what their doing and try and change it.Geo


I don't understand who you are talking about? The ones without a conscience? Explain.


----------



## Trenton

enangtj said:


> NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat.


I don't know. There's probably a sicko somewhere forcing someone to cheat.


----------



## 40cal

Just got back from visiting with the family, I haven't seen them for about three months. when we were together it felt great going about our lives like its just normal. because were in the same place and the need for her to choice to be with me here is removed. Now im back and before I went back home I felt like I had a better hold on things. I bought some new clothes started working out a little. Even started to spoon feed myself a little more confidence. While I was there I casually brought up being forced to cheat, and she said no one is forced its a choice. The same as all of you are saying. Its hard to for me to swallow another year of telephone conversations. while I watch all my friends have relationships and while I want a relationship. Its hard to have to rely on friends to help me when I married someone who should be able to help me with something other then a good pep talk. It makes me feel like a doormat honestly because I cant make things go in the direction that I want them to go in. I told her I love her, I like her and I want to be with her, but I don't want this relationship any more. If you have ever gone thru this when you got to the point where you couldn't take being alone any more but you didn't want a divorce what did you do.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

There is alot of talk about the Cheating not being known, it is the HIDING, the cheated on spouse's being "in the dark", unable to make a choice- the unfairness of this. I agree! Secrets OF THIS TYPE have NO place in a marital union, even if it is in the gutter at the time. When one starts sliding down the secrecy slide in a marriage, only TROUBLE comes from it. 

Even if being brutally honest causes terribly HURT feelings and Emotional FIGHTS to overcome with the need of heart wrenching forgiveness, it is more commendable & should be used. I would point to MEM's example, I have no problem with how he handles his marriage & sex life & what he says to his wife- after her words to him. They put it out there -they allow each other to make thier own decisions ....



> *Sexual deceit is likely the most common type of blatant chronic deception/lying in modern American marriages*.
> 
> I really had no idea exactly where my W was mentally/emotionally the night she said to me "out of the blue", that and this is a direct quote: "she could not imagine having to have sex with me for another 15-20 years".
> 
> I thought she liked having sex with me. Really. And we have always had what "for me" was a good/great sex life. So I was astonished by her remarks. I slept on it for a night and then in the interest of fairness I was totally honest with her. Told her celibacy was a non-starter for me. Preserving the marriage was my primary goal. Pressuring her for sex was not acceptable to me either. So I told her I would find a playmate and remove all pressure for her to have sex with me.
> 
> I have a whole long thread on this. The summary of this "event" was that she realized her desire for me to NOT have sexual contact with another woman was FAR greater than her desire NOT to have sex with me. But that was her decision to make, not mine.
> 
> This was neither easy nor painless for either of us. Then again I have a very simple view of this. It is not acceptable for either person to say "I don't want you but no one else can have you".


Tough but HONORABLE none the less. 

But really, when you get down to it , are these unknowing unwilling to open the legs spouses that stupid-- I am with OkeyDokie when he said this


> I just cannot believe that any married person who basically creates the sexless scenario would be so stupid as to not know what the potential consequences are. do people who go off sex really believe that their partner is ok with that


 Yes, they are stupid, foolish and blind if they think so. I will teach my daughter this well -long before she gets married. To please her man or if she takes this for granted --to NOT be freaked when he is looking elsewhere, cause IT HAPPENS, and she is NOT immune -no matter how beautiful she is or a good mother-- to be repulsed by his touch is to destroy her marraige. Too many, unfortunetely, fall into hiding/affairs fearing what will be lost in a divorce. 

We need to all *be taught *outright before we marry how utterly devestating, emotionally crushing it is to withhold, reject, trample our Lovers desires, never showing we need them, want them, if we start treating affection like a plague.....

.....and what THIS does to the others psyche whom they vowed to love & cherish till death..... how it infact renders these men (& women) near hopeless, WEAK, depressive, left only to fantasize what once was -or could be, lonliness grows to such a degree, some would welcome ending it all -would be easier, others become NUMB to life...

left yearning desperately for touch, it will get to the point of anyone's touch, a man thirsting in the desert, in need of some validation he is worth something-cause he isn't worth sh** at home, then throw in the allure of the opposite sex hottie at work showing some kindness, listening to his pain , attention that brightens his day, something he has been missing in months , 2 cravers meet, hanging by a thread - after all we ARE only HUMAN .........Ok so you resist, you are above human, more saintly than the rest... 


BUT....


One thing you will not be is a happy Saint......you will be angry at home, likely take it out on the kids, angry at work, grow to hate your spouse, bitter, what is self esteem , resentment filled , envious of others who are gettin' some --to the detriment of your own selves. So being faithful in the face of THAT -how worthy is it , just to say you are better than the next guy who fell ? 

So sometimes being faithful = utterly miserable. Meanwhile your spouse doesn't give a da** how faithful you have been!! But yet, they still ain't giving it up - what a sacrifice it has become. All for integrity. This is where I think ANYONE is crazy to stay. Insane infact. 


The only thing I would personally fault a cheater for (under those circumstances) - is the hiding, the lying, the secrecy of it. I would terribly sympathize with his or her plight. 

As for me, I will honestly say, if I found myself in this type of marriage, I would likley fall --the only thing that saves me is this...lying & hiding is NOT something I do .... I would cause so much VERBAL HELL about my needs not being met-when this started to happen, HE would undoubably KNOW where I was headed - no secrets there! I'd spell it out -just like MEM. 

And clearly , he would have a CHOICE to leave me, divorce me, throw me out, if he was not willing to step it up & we work it out to where we was both happy. I would not reduce myself to a miserable celibate saint. 

But Yeah, everyone thinks it can't happen to them, what a joke, preach it to the choir. IF they have no sex drive -SURE -hell that would be EASY! ... I agree with Chilly Morn terribly here :


> but if you go over to the coping with infadility board theres an awsome thread about why people cheat.
> 
> if you talk to a marriage counsler they will also tell you that the neglector/ignorer dose indead bare some of the responsibility for the events that lead up to someone cheating.
> 
> is it wrong to cheat because your spouce is neglecting/ignoring your pleas to make a better effort to their spouces needs. sure it is but you would be foolish to think that it can't happen to you.a lot of the people who cheat never in a million years thought they would.
> 
> you never know how your going to act until your in the situation yourself.
> 
> and each situation is different. how many kids do you have,how old are they ,how much money are you going to loss,who get the dog and house ,
> 
> 
> its very easy to take the stance that the cheater is always the bad guy. but in my opinion the neglector/ignorer really has there head up their a$$ for not paying attention and realising the it takes 2 for a marriage to work.
> 
> some people just ani't strong enough or their fed up enough or at some point they even might hope to get caught so it finally ends their marriage but a wise person would want to know that this happens a lot and to portect yourself from it you should be a good partner or this might happen to you.
> 
> 
> its just the way it is and to burry your head in the sand and say they should have divorced first is just not realistic thinking statistically.



Who is really worse off, the ones who fall or the ones who stay in a miserable existence wasting their best years ? At least if you fall, you may hit the jackpot & fall with someone who might be a GOOD MATCH (it happens) -so you can leave the loveless ungiving, unintimate, cold as ice ass you are with and have wasted X amount of years of your life.

Again, I don't feel cheating is right, but I can still have sympathy for those who fall into it, given their particular circumstances, they are simply NOT all the same - 2 sides to every story, always.


----------



## MEM2020

*Thank you*

SA,
Thank you for your kind words. I do believe it is better to be straight with each other. I also think you can be direct with someone and at the same time project that you care and love them and want to work it out.

I ABSOLUTELY believe that it is more and more common for the LD spouse to evade, lie and deny. And sometimes the only way the HD spouse can get the truth is to discuss consequences.





SimplyAmorous said:


> There is alot of talk about the Cheating not being known, it is the HIDING, the cheated on spouse's being "in the dark", unable to make a choice- the unfairness of this. I agree! Secrets OF THIS TYPE have NO place in a marital union, even if it is in the gutter at the time. When one starts sliding down the secrecy slide in a marriage, only TROUBLE comes from it.
> 
> Even if being brutally honest causes terribly HURT feelings and Emotional FIGHTS to overcome with the need of heart wrenching forgiveness, it is more commendable & should be used. I would point to MEM's example, I have no problem with how he handles his marriage & sex life & what he says to his wife- after her words to him. They put it out there -they allow each other to make thier own decisions ....
> 
> 
> 
> Tough but HONORABLE none the less.
> 
> But really, when you get down to it , are these unknowing unwilling to open the legs spouses that stupid-- I am with OkeyDokie when he said this
> 
> Yes, they are stupid, foolish and blind if they think so. I will teach my daughter this well -long before she gets married. To please her man or if she takes this for granted --to NOT be freaked when he is looking elsewhere, cause IT HAPPENS, and she is NOT immune -no matter how beautiful she is or a good mother-- to be repulsed by his touch is to destroy her marraige. Too many, unfortunetely, fall into hiding/affairs fearing what will be lost in a divorce.
> 
> We need to all *be taught *outright before we marry how utterly devestating, emotionally crushing it is to withhold, reject, trample our Lovers desires, never showing we need them, want them, if we start treating affection like a plague.....
> 
> .....and what THIS does to the others psyche whom they vowed to love & cherish till death..... how it infact renders these men (& women) near hopeless, WEAK, depressive, left only to fantasize what once was -or could be, lonliness grows to such a degree, some would welcome ending it all -would be easier, others become NUMB to life...
> 
> left yearning desperately for touch, it will get to the point of anyone's touch, a man thirsting in the desert, in need of some validation he is worth something-cause he isn't worth sh** at home, then throw in the allure of the opposite sex hottie at work showing some kindness, listening to his pain , attention that brightens his day, something he has been missing in months , 2 cravers meet, hanging by a thread - after all we ARE only HUMAN .........Ok so you resist, you are above human, more saintly than the rest...
> 
> 
> BUT....
> 
> 
> One thing you will not be is a happy Saint......you will be angry at home, likely take it out on the kids, angry at work, grow to hate your spouse, bitter, what is self esteem , resentment filled , envious of others who are gettin' some --to the detriment of your own selves. So being faithful in the face of THAT -how worthy is it , just to say you are better than the next guy who fell ?
> 
> So sometimes being faithful = utterly miserable. Meanwhile your spouse doesn't give a da** how faithful you have been!! But yet, they still ain't giving it up - what a sacrifice it has become. All for integrity. This is where I think ANYONE is crazy to stay. Insane infact.
> 
> 
> The only thing I would personally fault a cheater for (under those circumstances) - is the hiding, the lying, the secrecy of it. I would terribly sympathize with his or her plight.
> 
> As for me, I will honestly say, if I found myself in this type of marriage, I would likley fall --the only thing that saves me is this...lying & hiding is NOT something I do .... I would cause so much VERBAL HELL about my needs not being met-when this started to happen, HE would undoubably KNOW where I was headed - no secrets there! I'd spell it out -just like MEM.
> 
> And clearly , he would have a CHOICE to leave me, divorce me, throw me out, if he was not willing to step it up & we work it out to where we was both happy. I would not reduce myself to a miserable saint.
> 
> But Yeah, everyone thinks it can't happen to them, what a joke, preach it to the choir. IF they have no sex drive -SURE -hell that would be EASY! ... I agree with Chilly Morn terribly here :
> 
> 
> Who is really worse off, the ones who fall or the ones who stay in a miserable existence wasting their best years ? At least if you fall, you may hit the jackpot & fall with someone who might be a GOOD MATCH (it happens) -so you can leave the loveless ungiving, unintimate, cold as ice ass you are with and have wasted X amount of years of your life.
> 
> Again, I don't feel cheating is right, but I can still have sympathy for those who fall into it, given their particular circumstances, they are simply NOT all the same - 2 sides to every story, always.


----------



## FirstYearDown

Force, no.

Heavily contribute, hell yes.


----------



## Aquarious 1

People who cheat DO NOT HAVE A CONSCIENCE. When children are involved especially . Better find an alternative way of getting your jollies for the childrens sake. This is what i mean.


----------



## Runs like Dog

I think some people would prefer if their spouse cheated if only to justify them finally taking some action toward throwing them out.


----------



## unbelievable

If I beat my wife with a ball bat, I'm not forcing her to call the police but that would be the logical and predictable consequence of my actions. It would presumptuous bordering on insanity for me to believe I could daily beat her but never face any adverse consequences.


----------



## chillymorn

unbelievable said:


> If I beat my wife with a ball bat, I'm not forcing her to call the police but that would be the logical and predictable consequence of my actions. It would presumptuous bordering on insanity for me to believe I could daily beat her but never face any adverse consequences.


theres an analogy that drives my point home quite nicely


----------



## Grayson

unbelievable said:


> If I beat my wife with a ball bat, I'm not forcing her to call the police but that would be the logical and predictable consequence of my actions. It would presumptuous bordering on insanity for me to believe I could daily beat her but never face any adverse consequences.


To proceed with this analogy, her calling the police would be equivalent to separation/divorce...it's the above-board means of addressing the issue. Now, if, instead, she got someone to beat the tar out of you with a baseball bat, that's a little more equivalent to an affair. While it may not be an unexpected or surprising outcome, you're not responsible for her choice to respond by taking the low road instead of the high road.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## unbelievable

A guy beating me with a ball bat would damage me. Someone else getting something I clearly didn't want doesn't harm me. If I toss something in the trash repeatedly, it's clear it's not mine. I don't want it. I have no interest in it. I have surrendered all claims. I have no right to gripe if someone else thinks my trash is their treasure.


----------



## Acorn

A husband is resting his hand on an over burner, and his wife turns the flame on. He quickly pulls his hand away from the flame to get away from the immense pain, inadvertently slapping his wife's arm as part of his recoil.

We can argue that he could have handled things much better by taking no action and burning his hand off. Or, calmly using his other hand to shut the flame off while his hand suffered needlessly. No one is arguing that he had choices.

Wife: I didn't force you to hit my arm though!
Husband: You forced the situation on me. You acted completely carelessly and selfishly and you weren't thinking of me at all when you did what you did. So yes, I wasn't thinking about your arm at that point, I was worried about my hand.


----------



## unbelievable

Sorry, don't get it. Removing one's hand from a fire is a spontaneous action requiring near zero thought. His striking her arm was not a deliberate choice. For all reasonably sane people who do not suffer from paralysis, withholding all forms of sex for long periods of time is a deliberate choice.


----------



## Acorn

unbelievable said:


> Sorry, don't get it. Removing one's hand from a fire is a spontaneous action requiring near zero thought. His striking her arm was not a deliberate choice. For all reasonably sane people who do not suffer from paralysis, withholding all forms of sex for long periods of time is a deliberate choice.


In the analogy, the wife's deliberate choice of turning on the flame caused the husband's reaction. In other words, her action forced a response in him.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Aquarious 1 said:


> People who cheat DO NOT HAVE A CONSCIENCE. When children are involved especially . Better find an alternative way of getting your jollies for the childrens sake. This is what i mean.


Women and men who repeatedly deny their spouses KNOWING FULL WELL IT IS HURTING THEM have NO conscience either. Those willing denyers are by no means innocent in this matter. 

Frankly , I bet near half of all divorces would never come to this place IF this was NOT going on. But I don't know the statistics of coarse. I am the most impressed by the spouses who can forgive when they realize it was BECAUSE of them and their lack of love & concern -to forgive the falling of the one they ignored & rejected. 

I say all of this -and I never cheated, nor did my husband, but I have a good friend who suffered this in their marriage, I encouraged her to take her husband back, he WAS a good man who did a bad thing, she was a rejector, she learned a valuabe lesson from this & the hurt it brought upon her. It should have never happened. But she realizes now how badly she was treating him. He speaks vehemently against cheating, this is good ! She now speaks against denying her husbands needs. 

Sometimes it takes some bad things to happen to wake some people up ! Why does some women need a Brick layed into their heads ?


----------



## Deejo

Hope someone else has already said it ...

Cheating is betrayal.

Withholding or refusing intimacy is betrayal.

They are the same. End of story.

There may be reasons why both occur. Maybe valid reasons. But either act is contrary to, and damaging to a loving relationship.


----------



## michzz

Deejo said:


> Hope someone else has already said it ...
> 
> Cheating is betrayal.
> 
> Withholding or refusing intimacy is betrayal.
> 
> They are the same. End of story.
> 
> There may be reasons why both occur. Maybe valid reasons. But either act is contrary to, and damaging to a loving relationship.


In a similar arena. However, one KEY difference is that nobody ever got an STD from not getting sex.


----------



## unbelievable

You can only steal from an owner. Leave your bike laying around in the rain for months on end in the middle of town, unsecured and unattended, it's abandoned property and nobody's going to jail if they take it. Whether it ends up in the trash, auctioned to the highest bidder, or with a new owner, is no business of the original owner. They relinquished ownership when they abandoned it.


----------



## Grayson

Acorn said:


> In the analogy, the wife's deliberate choice of turning on the flame caused the husband's reaction. In other words, her action forced a response in him.


It's still an uneven analogy. Her choice of turning on the burner triggered an involuntary nerve and muscle response. Neither divorcing, suffering in silence nor cheating are involuntary responses...each requires a conscious choice.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Enchantment

michzz said:


> In a similar arena. However, one KEY difference is that nobody ever got an STD from not getting sex.


It does not have to just be physical intimacy being withheld (referring to the intimacy mentioned in Deejo's post just above). It could also be any kind of emotional intimacy as well. You may not get an STD from that, but it would surely leave a sickness in your soul, so to speak.


----------



## Enchantment

unbelievable said:


> You can only steal from an owner. Leave your bike laying around in the rain for months on end in the middle of town, unsecured and unattended, it's abandoned property and nobody's going to jail if they take it. Whether it ends up in the trash, auctioned to the highest bidder, or with a new owner, is no business of the original owner. They relinquished ownership when they abandoned it.


I'm not sure I understand your analogy. Are you saying you feel it is okay for a person to cheat on their spouse because they weren't getting their needs met?

To me, it doesn't matter whether the bike would have been abandoned or not. The right thing to do would have been to leave it alone because it is not yours - abandoned or not.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> It's still an uneven analogy. Her choice of turning on the burner triggered an involuntary nerve and muscle response. Neither divorcing, suffering in silence nor cheating are involuntary responses...each requires a conscious choice.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Some men cannot leave a marriage due to moral code, kids, or whatever reason unless there are truly extreme circumstances. Sexual neglect is not extreme enough to leave, so this is a non-option. Some of these men have physical/emotional needs that simply MUST be met. Spending the rest of their life sexless is not an option. Of those men, some can justify an affair to themselves. Probably because it is their only option.

Isn't it possible that the man did indeed choose to cheat, but at the same time, due to his moral code, he had no choice given the situation he found himself in? If he had no choice, it was forced upon him by definition.

A wife withholds. This FORCES a response from the man. A woman withholding FORCES a response from the man. If the man truly feels that his only acceptable option is to cheat, he will feel FORCED into cheating.

Yes, he did choose that option, but he was forced into choosing the option. It is possible to make a choice because you were forced into it.


----------



## Grayson

Acorn said:


> Some men cannot leave a marriage due to moral code, kids, or whatever reason unless there are truly extreme circumstances. Sexual neglect is not extreme enough to leave, so this is a non-option. Some of these men have physical/emotional needs that simply MUST be met. Spending the rest of their life sexless is not an option. Of those men, some can justify an affair to themselves. Probably because it is their only option.


You said it yourself: they JUSTIFY an affair to themselves. It's not that an affair is their "only" option...it's what they find to be the most convenient option for them.



> Isn't it possible that the man did indeed choose to cheat, but at the same time, due to his moral code, he had no choice given the situation he found himself in? If he had no choice, it was forced upon him by definition.


I would say no, it's not possible. Someone who - in your own words - CHOOSES to cheat loses any claim to a moral high ground. Such a person DOES have choices (as you acknowledge by your own choice of words), but finds those choices less palatable than cheating, for some reason. Cheating is never "the only choice."



> A wife withholds. This FORCES a response from the man. A woman withholding FORCES a response from the man.


I would hesitate to say "forces" a reaction, but let's go with that, because I can understand the meaning behind it. You're correct *A* reaction is provoked. Said reaction can be one of several. Which leads us to....



> If the man truly feels that his only acceptable option is to cheat, he will feel FORCED into cheating.


Rationalization, 100%.



> Yes, he did choose that option, but he was forced into choosing the option. It is possible to make a choice because you were forced into it.


I disagree. While he may have been "forced" into choosing AN option, the mere presence of other options being freely available to him, by definition, precludes being "forced" into any one choice. No one is saying that all of the options available are necessarily enjoyable, but this notion that someone is "forced" to cheat does not withstand scrutiny.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

I didn't realize cheaters have a gun pointed at their heads and even then, they have options.
Ridiculous to "justify" it any other way. 
100% agree with Grayson.


----------



## Acorn

> While he may have been "forced" into choosing AN option, the mere presence of other options being freely available to him, by definition, precludes being "forced" into any one choice. No one is saying that all of the options available are necessarily enjoyable, but this notion that someone is "forced" to cheat does not withstand scrutiny.


This is an amazingly narrow concept of "forced", in my opinion. If that's how you define it, I guess you are right.

If a woman is threatened at gun point and raped, that'd be enough for me to say she was forced to have sex. I suppose your argument would be that she had the option to resist and be shot, so therefore she was not forced to have sex but rather made the choice to. And by extension, if she were married, she therefore chose to have sex and cheat on her husband.

To me, I forgive her and feel bad for her - she was forced. By your logic, she wasn't. Personally, I don't think what you or I think matters. I think that woman is going to go home and feel like she had no choice and wonder why she was put in that situation. And she isn't going to care whether you believe her or not. She's going to suffer internally enough as it is.

Same thing goes for the sexless husband. If he really thought he had no choice under the neglectful wife scenario, I'm not going to judge him.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> This is an amazingly narrow concept of "forced", in my opinion. If that's how you define it, I guess you are right.
> 
> If a woman is threatened at gun point and raped, that'd be enough for me to say she was forced to have sex. I suppose your argument would be that she had the option to resist and be shot, so therefore she was not forced to have sex but rather made the choice to. And by extension, if she were married, she therefore chose to have sex and cheat on her husband.
> 
> To me, I forgive her and feel bad for her - she was forced. By your logic, she wasn't. Personally, I don't think what you or I think matters. I think that woman is going to go home and feel like she had no choice and wonder why she was put in that situation. And she isn't going to care whether you believe her or not. She's going to suffer internally enough as it is.
> 
> Same thing goes for the sexless husband. If he really thought he had no choice under the neglectful wife scenario, I'm not going to judge him.


Comparing criminal behavior and cheating in the same sentence is amazingly narrow. Comparing a woman being raped to a man in a sexless marriage is just insulting and dangerous.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Comparing criminal behavior and cheating in the same sentence is amazingly narrow. Comparing a woman being raped to a man in a sexless marriage is just insulting and dangerous.


I would agree, it would be beneath you to do so.

My premise was that if a man is thrust into a sexless marriage scenario, and he truly felt like there was no other option but to cheat, could he in fact be forced into his action? By definition, if he felt he had no choice, he would be technically forced.

Grayson argued that he was not forced because other options existed, whether they were palatable or not.

This argument does not hold water with me. I introduced the legal topic of rape to show that even if a woman has other options at the time, if she truly felt raped, it is reasonable to say she was forced into the act. There should be little debate on this point.

I am trying to understand why the courtesy isn't extended to the husband in a sexless marriage scenario. Why, if he truly felt he had no other choice, is it not enough to say he was forced? What exactly is the difference here. Is it because we are sympathetic to certain scenarios and not others? Is it because we simplify it so easily and say, "He could just leave!".

It is a debatable point certainly, which is why I'm happy to debate and spar on the topic a little bit. If you want to disagree with me please do.

You have floated some questions on the boards and I have tried to kick around the tires with you in a few. Why would you personally attack me when I do the same? It is a bit disappointing.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> I would agree, it would be beneath you to do so.
> 
> My premise was that if a man is thrust into a sexless marriage scenario, and he truly felt like there was no other option but to cheat, could he in fact be forced into his action? By definition, if he felt he had no choice, he would be technically forced.
> 
> Grayson argued that he was not forced because other options existed, whether they were palatable or not.
> 
> This argument does not hold water with me. I introduced the legal topic of rape to show that even if a woman has other options at the time, if she truly felt raped, it is reasonable to say she was forced into the act. There should be little debate on this point.
> 
> I am trying to understand why the courtesy isn't extended to the husband in a sexless marriage scenario. Why, if he truly felt he had no other choice, is it not enough to say he was forced? What exactly is the difference here. Is it because we are sympathetic to certain scenarios and not others? Is it because we simplify it so easily and say, "He could just leave!".
> 
> It is a debatable point certainly, which is why I'm happy to debate and spar on the topic a little bit. If you want to disagree with me please do.
> 
> You have floated some questions on the boards and I have tried to kick around the tires with you in a few. Why would you personally attack me when I do the same? It is a bit disappointing.


I didn't attack you in any way. I said exactly what you said to Grayson. A woman being raped is literally not in control of herself. Somebody else is and often times being held against her will with a weapon. That is not even remotely the case with a a sexless marriage. He HAS choices, just not ones that he wants to make, i.e. upset the applecart, so he takes the easy way out.
If we are going with lack of "choice" to excuse our behavior, then let's free bank robbers who lost their jobs and had no money, or the murderers who got fed up with his co-workers and shot up his place of work. They had no choice, right? 
Barring your life being in danger, we ALL have choices. 
I am in no way excusing those who withhold. My husband made a CHOICE to withhold from me for nearly our entire marriage. I made a CHOICE to not cheat. I could have left at any time or I could stay. I chose to stay. 
Cheating is a choice. It is deliberate, calculated, dishonest and dangerous. If we say that it is not a choice, then withholding sex isn't a choice either. It isn't deliberate, calculated, dishonest and dangerous. None of us are responsible for our actions.
Is that the road we want to take? I don't.


----------



## Grayson

Let me just start by saying that I hate that the multi-quote feature isn't available on the mobile site. So, I'll have to address your two posts separately.



Acorn said:


> This is an amazingly narrow concept of "forced", in my opinion. If that's how you define it, I guess you are right.


It's not about how I define it...it's about what the word actually, y'know...means.

I try not to be "that guy"...the one who does this in online discussions, but, in this case, I think it's appropriate.

From dictionary.com:

_force
[fawrs]
- noun 1.*strength 2.*violence 3.*energy 4.*power to influence or persuade 5.*body of military troops or police - verb (used with object)forcedforcing 6.*to compel to do something 7.*to bring about or obtain by force 8.*to break open 9.*to cause (plants) to grow at an increased rate_



> If a woman is threatened at gun point and raped, that'd be enough for me to say she was forced to have sex. I suppose your argument would be that she had the option to resist and be shot, so therefore she was not forced to have sex but rather made the choice to. And by extension, if she were married, she therefore chose to have sex and cheat on her husband.


You suppose wrong, but that's a very nice straw man you have there. Being threatened at gunpoint puts one's life in jeopardy. While their certainly are options available, their viability can be mitigated by the very real threat of death. Where's the imminent threat to life and limb in a sexless marriage?



> To me, I forgive her and feel bad for her - she was forced. By your logic, she wasn't. Personally, I don't think what you or I think matters. I think that woman is going to go home and feel like she had no choice and wonder why she was put in that situation. And she isn't going to care whether you believe her or not. She's going to suffer internally enough as it is.


Straw man. You proceed from a false premise, and equate two vastly inequitable situations and sets of conditions.



> Same thing goes for the sexless husband. If he really thought he had no choice under the neglectful wife scenario, I'm not going to judge him.


Wrong. The same thing doesn't go for the sexless husband. Unless the OW has a gun pointed at him, the two scenarios aren't remotely equitable, and choosing what he sees to be the least inconvenient path when there's no risk to life or limb is far from "having no choice." The man you describe may rationalize the situation to himself as having "no choice" is doing so to salve his own conscience.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson

Acorn said:


> I would agree, it would be beneath you to do so.
> 
> My premise was that if a man is thrust into a sexless marriage scenario, and he truly felt like there was no other option but to cheat, could he in fact be forced into his action? By definition, if he felt he had no choice, he would be technically forced.


Your premise is flawed. Such a man DOES have a choice. His life is not in danger from being in a sexless marriage. He is free to make choices in how to handle the situation. He is not forced into ANY of those choices. He can choose to take the high road, the low road, or even no road, but his response to the situation is his choice and his alone. Factors in his life may influence his decision, but, since he's not under true duress, it's a freely made choice.



> Grayson argued that he was not forced because other options existed, whether they were palatable or not.
> 
> This argument does not hold water with me. I introduced the legal topic of rape to show that even if a woman has other options at the time, if she truly felt raped, it is reasonable to say she was forced into the act. There should be little debate on this point.


Surely you can see and acknowledge the difference between someone being threatened with their life and someone whose spouse is withholding sex, right?

But, let's apply your logic. I FEEL as though my wife and I should have more money. She was out of work for an extended period, then got a job paying much less than she'd been making. I was then out of work for a short while, myself. By your logic, I could say that I'm FORCED to rob someone/someplace.

Your logic fails, because you are trying to equate two inherently inequitable circumstances. There should be little debate on this point.



> I am trying to understand why the courtesy isn't extended to the husband in a sexless marriage scenario. Why, if he truly felt he had no other choice, is it not enough to say he was forced? What exactly is the difference here. Is it because we are sympathetic to certain scenarios and not others?


It has nothing to do with sympathy, or lack thereof. It has everything to do with the fact that (pay close attention), no matter what his rationalizations may be (here it comes): HE. WASNT. FORCED. TO. CHEAT.



> Is it because we simplify it so easily and say, "He could just leave!".


To put it bluntly, yes. Generally speaking. To go back to your in-poor-taste, inequitable rape analogy, the victim "just leaving" may very well result in her death.

"Just leaving" a sexless marriage carries no such risk with it.



> It is a debatable point certainly,


...provided one ignores what words mean.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson

One last question, Acorn, since you "went there" with your latest example. And, I feel dirty for putting it this way, but....

Is it your contention that the cheating husband in your hypothetical sexless marriage is a rape victim?

After all, if the two situations are analagous as you claim, he is being "forced" to cheat - for the purposes of this discussion, being "forced" to have sex with someone other than his spouse - would, by definition, be raped.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Grayson said:


> Your premise is flawed. Such a man DOES have a choice. His life is not in danger from being in a sexless marriage. He is free to make choices in how to handle the situation. He is not forced into ANY of those choices. He can choose to take the high road, the low road, or even no road, but his response to the situation is his choice and his alone. Factors in his life may influence his decision, but, since he's not under true duress, it's a freely made choice.
> 
> 
> 
> Surely you can see and acknowledge the difference between someone being threatened with their life and someone whose spouse is withholding sex, right?
> 
> But, let's apply your logic. I FEEL as though my wife and I should have more money. She was out of work for an extended period, then got a job paying much less than she'd been making. I was then out of work for a short while, myself. By your logic, I could say that I'm FORCED to rob someone/someplace.
> 
> Your logic fails, because you are trying to equate two inherently inequitable circumstances. There should be little debate on this point.
> 
> 
> 
> It has nothing to do with sympathy, or lack thereof. It has everything to do with the fact that (pay close attention), no matter what his rationalizations may be (here it comes): HE. WASNT. FORCED. TO. CHEAT.
> 
> 
> 
> To put it bluntly, yes. Generally speaking. To go back to your in-poor-taste, inequitable rape analogy, the victim "just leaving" may very well result in her death.
> 
> "Just leaving" a sexless marriage carries no such risk with it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...provided one ignores what words mean.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


You and I think alike. I wrote the identical thing. It IS a choice. If I feel I am not earning what I want at work, I have three choices. Deal with it, leave or commit corporate theft. Fact is, they are all choices and they all have consequences. If I were however to pick stealing from the company coffers, could I stand up in court and say they MADE me do it? Uh, no.
Same goes for a cheater. Period.


----------



## Grayson

And now for something completely different....

(Good grief, won't this guy stop posting?!?!)

This discussion reminded me of a bit that standup comedian Felicia Michaels did back in the 90's. She was a cute, petite blonde who had a "dumb blonde" stage persona complete with high, kinda squeaky voice. In one bit, she said, "Looking like I do and sounding like I do, I can get away with ANYthing to a guy." (She adopts a pouty expression and twirls her hair.) "But, hooneeeey.... I didn't MEAN to sleep with your brother. He TRICKED meeee."
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Acorn

I think we were doing something as simple as arguing what the word means after all.

A wife who is withholding sex cannot force (from your post: "to bring about or obtain by force") a man to cheat. There is no violence or whatever. Point taken.

That being said, a man who finds himself in a sexless marriage can feel forced (from Mirriam: "compelled by necessity") into cheating on his wife.

Now that I see the differences in definition, I see the rape example was in inflamatory. I apologize. I was trying to convey that since all feelings are valid, and he could hypothetically feel compelled by necessity to take this action, it is also a fair point. You can argue that perhaps he shouldn't feel like he was forced, but you cannot argue if he tells you he felt forced.

I can answer the other posts point by point if you want, but hopefully this is sufficient to say we were arguing apples and oranges.


----------



## FirstYearDown

SimplyAmorous said:


> Women and men who repeatedly deny their spouses KNOWING FULL WELL IT IS HURTING THEM have NO conscience either. Those willing denyers are by no means innocent in this matter.
> 
> Frankly , I bet near half of all divorces would never come to this place IF this was NOT going on. But I don't know the statistics of coarse. I am the most impressed by the spouses who can forgive when they realize it was BECAUSE of them and their lack of love & concern -to forgive the falling of the one they ignored & rejected.
> 
> I say all of this -and I never cheated, nor did my husband, but I have a good friend who suffered this in their marriage, I encouraged her to take her husband back, he WAS a good man who did a bad thing, she was a rejector, she learned a valuabe lesson from this & the hurt it brought upon her. It should have never happened. But she realizes now how badly she was treating him. He speaks vehemently against cheating, this is good ! She now speaks against denying her husbands needs.
> 
> Sometimes it takes some bad things to happen to wake some people up ! Why does some women need a Brick layed into their heads ?


:iagree::iagree: When I read the complaints of decent husbands on here who do not get any lovin', I want to find their wives and shake them.


----------



## unbelievable

Enchantment said:


> I'm not sure I understand your analogy. Are you saying you feel it is okay for a person to cheat on their spouse because they weren't getting their needs met?
> 
> To me, it doesn't matter whether the bike would have been abandoned or not. The right thing to do would have been to leave it alone because it is not yours - abandoned or not.


I wouldn't cheat on my wife but not because she would be any sort of victim or that she would suffer any harm. She has abandoned that part of the relationship. I don't cheat because it wouldn't solve the real problem and it would potentially create others. In short, I don't believe it would be a wrong against her. I believe it wouldn't be smart, like taking a strong pain killer daily rather than getting a broken arm set. I'd get only temporary relief rather than address a larger issue. Also, I wouldn't be the sort of man I expect of myself or the sort of man God expects if I committed adultary. I just don't see how my wife could legitimately claim victim status.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> But, let's apply your logic. I FEEL as though my wife and I should have more money. She was out of work for an extended period, then got a job paying much less than she'd been making. I was then out of work for a short while, myself. By your logic, I could say that I'm FORCED to rob someone/someplace.


To help explain further, if you truly felt you needed more money for whatever reason, and you had no other way to obtain money other than stealing, I would feel it appropriate to say you felt forced to steal.

It does not sanction the stealing, and perhaps you had other options you did not know about, but it would not change the fact that, in your eyes, you were forced to steal.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> Is it your contention that the cheating husband in your hypothetical sexless marriage is a rape victim?


The fact that you even ask this question completely devalues the discussion.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> I think we were doing something as simple as arguing what the word means after all.
> 
> A wife who is withholding sex cannot force (from your post: "to bring about or obtain by force") a man to cheat. There is no violence or whatever. Point taken.
> 
> That being said, a man who finds himself in a sexless marriage can feel forced (from Mirriam: "compelled by necessity") into cheating on his wife.
> 
> Now that I see the differences in definition, I see the rape example was in inflamatory. I apologize. I was trying to convey that since all feelings are valid, and he could hypothetically feel compelled by necessity to take this action, it is also a fair point. You can argue that perhaps he shouldn't feel like he was forced, but you cannot argue if he tells you he felt forced.
> 
> I can answer the other posts point by point if you want, but hopefully this is sufficient to say we were arguing apples and oranges.


You asked for a spar, please address my response. Feels forced? Is that a valid argument for deliberate action? I don't think so.
It's an excuse.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> To help explain further, if you truly felt you needed more money for whatever reason, and you had no other way to obtain money other than stealing, I would feel it appropriate to say you felt forced to steal.
> 
> It does not sanction the stealing, and perhaps you had other options you did not know about, but it would not change the fact that, in your eyes, you were forced to steal.


If you say you felt forced then you are in effect saying you have no free will. Which of course in this day and age is simply not true. You have the free will to do whatever it is you want to do. If caught some of the things are punishable, like stealing. By saying you felt forced to steal is just blaming someone else for you behaviour.

I think what you are talking about are mitigating circumstances. I stole to buy food because my children were starving, or something like that. I killed him because he was raping my daughter. I hit him with a baseball bat because he was a burglar in my home.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> He HAS choices, just not ones that he wants to make, i.e. upset the applecart, so he takes the easy way out.


You know, the thing about this board and this topic is that so great is that it helps people see options they didn't know they had. Take a woman in an EA. She'll come here and insist that she must divorce and be with her man. 

You know she has better options. I know she has better options. She does not know she has better options. Whatever chemicals or hormones she's got going with "the fog" has her convinced SHE MUST BE WITH THAT MAN. She sees no other future, that's why it's "the fog"! In fact the whole 180 plan is to help wake her up and realize that she has two very big options instead of just one.

Is she really forced to be with that man? NO, of course not. Does she think she is forced to? ABSOLUTELY. That's why she's here. And with any luck, someone like you or me will help her see that she has options, and she'll choose a better one.

I can see why some men may feel like they need to cheat in a sexless marriage. Do I think they have no options? They have plenty. Would you cheat? You said no. Would I? Haven't yet! But can I be non-judgmental and accept that right now, there are some men that feel like they have no options, and maybe it's my job to help him see them before he does something as repulsive as cheating? I can.



Therealbrighteyes said:


> Cheating is a choice. It is deliberate, calculated... and dangerous.


There are many elderly folks that get phished by email every day. They are told that unless they log in to the phony site, they will lose their savings. So they log in, and yes, they lose their savings to the scammers.

They had the option not to do it. But for whatever ability they had to process the situation, they felt they had only one choice. So they took it. It was deliberate, calculated, and very dangerous. And when it was over, they probably cried for weeks because THEY DIDN'T REALIZE THEY HAD BETTER CHOICES.

And no, I'm not equating phishing with sexless marriages. I am trying to convey that while you and I can armchair quarterback and realize that cheating is one of many choices, the people involved might not realize it. I don't think every cheater fits this description, but at least some would. 

If you were to scan all the topics on the general section front page, do you think at least some of the OPs might not realize all their choices? Usually they only see one, they feel forced to take it, and they find it unpalatable. That's why they are here and that's why we are here. To help them see things that can't see on their own.

And finally, this board is filled with nice guys. I really can see a nice guy reasoning that he can't leave the marriage and destroy his kids, he doesn't want to bother his wife with sex because he knows she doesn't want it, but his body is burning with need, so the correct, preferred, and only choice forced upon him is to cheat, and then feel awful about it afterward. Maybe I'm crazy. But I really can understand that, as a recovering nice guy. He is not powerless, but he FEELS powerless and that's his reality. I know this hypothetical nice guy was wrong to cheat, but there is a part of me that understands how he got there, and yes, it would feel like something forced upon him.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> If you say you felt forced then you are in effect saying you have no free will. Which of course in this day and age is simply not true. You have the free will to do whatever it is you want to do. If caught some of the things are punishable, like stealing. By saying you felt forced to steal is just blaming someone else for you behaviour.
> 
> I think what you are talking about are mitigating circumstances. I stole to buy food because my children were starving, or something like that. I killed him because he was raping my daughter. I hit him with a baseball bat because he was a burglar in my home.


Yes, exactly. 

I think someone can feel forced to do something because of any number of reasons. Some mitigating circumstances would be deemed acceptable by society, others would be thought of as an excuse. If someone truly felt forced - no cop outs but truly forced - for a generally unacceptable reason, I think they need help more than they need our judgment.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> You know, the thing about this board and this topic is that so great is that it helps people see options they didn't know they had. Take a woman in an EA. She'll come here and insist that she must divorce and be with her man.
> 
> You know she has better options. I know she has better options. She does not know she has better options. Whatever chemicals or hormones she's got going with "the fog" has her convinced SHE MUST BE WITH THAT MAN. She sees no other future, that's why it's "the fog"! In fact the whole 180 plan is to help wake her up and realize that she has two very big options instead of just one.
> 
> Is she really forced to be with that man? NO, of course not. Does she think she is forced to? ABSOLUTELY. That's why she's here. And with any luck, someone like you or me will help her see that she has options, and she'll choose a better one.
> 
> I can see why some men may feel like they need to cheat in a sexless marriage. Do I think they have no options? They have plenty. Would you cheat? You said no. Would I? Haven't yet! But can I be non-judgmental and accept that right now, there are some men that feel like they have no options, and maybe it's my job to help him see them before he does something as repulsive as cheating? I can.
> 
> 
> 
> There are many elderly folks that get phished by email every day. They are told that unless they log in to the phony site, they will lose their savings. So they log in, and yes, they lose their savings to the scammers.
> 
> They had the option not to do it. But for whatever ability they had to process the situation, they felt they had only one choice. So they took it. It was deliberate, calculated, and very dangerous. And when it was over, they probably cried for weeks because THEY DIDN'T REALIZE THEY HAD BETTER CHOICES.
> 
> And no, I'm not equating phishing with sexless marriages. I am trying to convey that while you and I can armchair quarterback and realize that cheating is one of many choices, the people involved might not realize it. I don't think every cheater fits this description, but at least some would.
> 
> If you were to scan all the topics on the general section front page, do you think at least some of the OPs might not realize all their choices? Usually they only see one, they feel forced to take it, and they find it unpalatable. That's why they are here and that's why we are here. To help them see things that can't see on their own.
> 
> And finally, this board is filled with nice guys. I really can see a nice guy reasoning that he can't leave the marriage and destroy his kids, he doesn't want to bother his wife with sex because he knows she doesn't want it, but his body is burning with need, so the correct, preferred, and only choice forced upon him is to cheat, and then feel awful about it afterward. Maybe I'm crazy. But I really can understand that, as a recovering nice guy. He is not powerless, but he FEELS powerless and that's his reality. I know this hypothetical nice guy was wrong to cheat, but there is a part of me that understands how he got there, and yes, it would feel like something forced upon him.


You keep comparing apples to Q-tips. A woman in an EA has already made her choice. And yes, it is a choice. Fog or no fog, she made the choice initially to involve herself in an affair.
Now you bring in the elderly?! Um, the two aren't remotely related. Preying on people is not what this discussion was about. I didn't realize we were going into a Prince in Nigeria. Geez.
Nice guy? A nice guy who doesn't want to piss his wife off instead goes behind her back and cheats, lies, gaslights, lies some more and then claims he had no choice? Nice guy my butt.
More like cold, calculated, teflon Don. Nothing is his to own up to.
I don't identify with cheaters. I know plenty and I know plenty who have been cheated on. One common denominator amoungst cheaters: cowards. Small surprise that they would then say they had no choice in the matter. It's a choice. Whether you make that choice is up to you but know that nobody made you or forced you to make that choice. That's all on you.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> You keep comparing apples to Q-tips. A woman in an EA has already made her choice. And yes, it is a choice. Fog or no fog, she made the choice initially to involve herself in an affair.
> Now you bring in the elderly?! Um, the two aren't remotely related. Preying on people is not what this discussion was about. I didn't realize we were going into a Prince in Nigeria. Geez.
> Nice guy? A nice guy who doesn't want to piss his wife off instead goes behind her back and cheats, lies, gaslights, lies some more and then claims he had no choice? Nice guy my butt.
> More like cold, calculated, teflon Don. Nothing is his to own up to.
> I don't identify with cheaters. I know plenty and I know plenty who have been cheated on. One common denominator amoungst cheaters: cowards. Small surprise that they would then say they had no choice in the matter. It's a choice. Whether you make that choice is up to you but know that nobody made you or forced you to make that choice. That's all on you.


Well I guess I'm in a real pickle. Yes, I brought up elderly and nice guys and really anyone who I could think of that might not think like you, but it's not really working. I'm out of ideas.

Acorn: What about (person who might not think like Brighteyes)? Isn't it possible they might feel like they had no choice and were in effect forced to do something? That they might not think like you do on this topic?

Response: Doesn't matter! If they thought like me they'd realize they had choices!

Everyone does not think like you. I will admit if they did on this issue, the world would be a better place. But sadly, they do not.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Wanted to add I had plenty of opportunity to cheat. Sexless marriage for the worse part of 17 years and I did not. Could I have justified it? Eh, maybe. The poster Unbelievable says that he had already broken his vows so the vows are no longer valid. I disagree. My vows were still valid. The vows I took were still true.
All of this justification is just that, justification. What remains is that it is a choice. I made a choice not to, others make a choice to. Bottom line is, when the sh!t hits the fan.....you can't blame anybody but yourself. My husband made his choice and I made mine. Neither of us can say we didn't have choices. 
To say otherwise is to discredit free will as AFEH said and also consequences that differentiate us from animals.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> Well I guess I'm in a real pickle. Yes, I brought up elderly and nice guys and really anyone who I could think of that might not think like you, but it's not really working. I'm out of ideas.
> 
> Acorn: What about (person who might not think like Brighteyes)? Isn't it possible they might feel like they had no choice and were in effect forced to do something? That they might not think like you do on this topic?
> 
> Response: Doesn't matter! If they thought like me they'd realize they had choices!
> 
> Everyone does not think like you. I will admit if they did on this issue, the world would be a better place. But sadly, they do not.


No, everybody doesn't think like me, nor do I expect them to. I do think however that you will find that while cheating is rampant, the majority of society feels it is a choice and not forced on anybody and most would agree with that. If it wasn't viewed as a choice, states wouldn't have it as an "extra" within divorce situations in certain states. If cheating wasn't a choice, then spouses wouldn't be punished financially in court for doing so. 
Yes, you threw everything in your argument. Stick with one topic though. You lost me with the already cheater and the elderly. 
Signed, Captain of the debate team who won state.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> No, everybody doesn't think like me, nor do I expect them to. I do think however that you will find that while cheating is rampant, the majority of society feels it is a choice and not forced on anybody and most would agree with that. If it wasn't viewed as a choice, states wouldn't have it as an "extra" within divorce situations in certain states. If cheating wasn't a choice, then spouses wouldn't be punished financially in court for doing so.
> Yes, you threw everything in your argument. Stick with one topic though. You lost me with the already cheater and the elderly.
> Signed, Captain of the debate team who won state.


You are a good debater. 

I respect (and frankly agree with you) that cheating is never the only option. Where I disagree that some people might not see it that way. 

I think my points flow like this:

1) Sexual neglect is abusive.
2) People in abusive situations do not always see clearly.
3) It is possible people not seeing clearly may not understand all their choices. They may in fact feel they only have one choice.
4) If a person feels through circumstance that they only have one choice, they may feel forced to take that choice.
5) Therefore, if a sexually neglected spouse legitimately feels he only has one option, he will feel he was forced into that one option.

I respect that you feel different. Thanks for the debate.


----------



## Grayson

Wall o' text...take one:



Acorn said:


> I think we were doing something as simple as arguing what the word means after all.
> 
> A wife who is withholding sex cannot force (from your post: "to bring about or obtain by force") a man to cheat. There is no violence or whatever. Point taken.
> 
> That being said, a man who finds himself in a sexless marriage can feel forced (from Mirriam: "compelled by necessity") into cheating on his wife.


I still don't buy it.

Cheating is not a necessity.



> Now that I see the differences in definition, I see the rape example was in inflamatory. I apologize. I was trying to convey that since all feelings are valid, and he could hypothetically feel compelled by necessity to take this action, it is also a fair point. You can argue that perhaps he shouldn't feel like he was forced, but you cannot argue if he tells you he felt forced.


Sure I can. I can tell him that, despite this "feeling," he's full of caca del toro. He's rationalizing to himself. "Feeling forced" does not equate to *being *"forced."

For example, I _feel _that you're arguing the point for arguing's sake, not because you truly believe your point to be terribly valid. Does my "feeling" it to be so make it so?



Acorn said:


> To help explain further, if you truly felt you needed more money for whatever reason, and you had no other way to obtain money other than stealing, I would feel it appropriate to say you felt forced to steal.


See above. Regardless of my "feelings," I wasn't "forced" to steal. In that example, I made a choice...the choice to take the easy way out.



> It does not sanction the stealing, and perhaps you had other options you did not know about, but it would not change the fact that, in your eyes, you were forced to steal.


So you suggest that I didn't know I could look for a second job? I didn't know I could try to trim expenses? Carrying over to this apparently completely oblivious to the world husband in your example, he's never heard of divorce? He's never heard of counseling? He's only ever heard of cheating? C'mon...now you're just being disingenuous.



Acorn said:


> The fact that you even ask this question completely devalues the discussion.


I'm not the one who equated living in a sexless marriage to rape at gunpoint.


----------



## Grayson

Wall o' text...take two:



Acorn said:


> You know, the thing about this board and this topic is that so great is that it helps people see options they didn't know they had. Take a woman in an EA. She'll come here and insist that she must divorce and be with her man.
> 
> You know she has better options. I know she has better options. She does not know she has better options. Whatever chemicals or hormones she's got going with "the fog" has her convinced SHE MUST BE WITH THAT MAN. She sees no other future, that's why it's "the fog"! In fact the whole 180 plan is to help wake her up and realize that she has two very big options instead of just one.
> 
> Is she really forced to be with that man? NO, of course not. Does she think she is forced to? ABSOLUTELY. That's why she's here. And with any luck, someone like you or me will help her see that she has options, and she'll choose a better one.


A couple of things here, in no particular order:

This example deals with a woman who has already entered into and continued an affair. That it's to the point she's ready to end her marriage would indicate that she has already continually made choices to continue the affair.

Also, what you describe are the actions of an addict. If we follow this logic through, drug addicts are "forced" to keep sticking a needle in their arm. Alcoholics are "forced" to take another drink. Gambling addicts are "forced" to drain their bank account for that next game of cards, craps, roulette, whatever.

No one is responsible for their actions...they're all "forced" upon us.

(Skipping all the blather about phishing schemes which have absolutely nothing to do with the issue on the table.)



> If you were to scan all the topics on the general section front page, do you think at least some of the OPs might not realize all their choices? Usually they only see one, they feel forced to take it, and they find it unpalatable. That's why they are here and that's why we are here. To help them see things that can't see on their own.


You _really _expect us to believe that someone who's coming to a message board with a marriage problem, who's gone to the trouble of finding said board, is unaware of options to respond to a sexless marriage other than cheating?

C'mon...pull the other one.



> And finally, this board is filled with nice guys. I really can see a nice guy reasoning that he can't leave the marriage and destroy his kids,


So he *is *aware of other options.



> he doesn't want to bother his wife with sex because he knows she doesn't want it,


So he *is *aware of other options.



> but his body is burning with need, so the correct, preferred, and only choice forced upon him is to cheat, and then feel awful about it afterward.


"Only" choice? Wait a second...he considered and eliminated divorce and discussing the issue with his wife. Thus, he chose to cheat...it was not "forced upon him." It was a conscious decision. He weighed his options, and opted to cheat.

(Snippage of saying the same thing several different ways.)



Acorn said:


> I respect (and frankly agree with you) that cheating is never the only option. Where I disagree that some people might not see it that way.
> 
> I think my points flow like this:
> 
> 1) Sexual neglect is abusive.
> 2) People in abusive situations do not always see clearly.
> 3) It is possible people not seeing clearly may not understand all their choices. They may in fact feel they only have one choice.
> 4) If a person feels through circumstance that they only have one choice, they may feel forced to take that choice.
> 5) Therefore, if a sexually neglected spouse legitimately feels he only has one option, he will feel he was forced into that one option.


To repeat an earlier point, "feeling" something to be the case does not mean it is so. "Feeling" forced is not _being _forced. Further, I get the impression, based on the various elements of your examples, that you feel (there's that word again) the same...your own examples defeat themselves.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn, a while back on TAM there was a prevalent “blame the victim” approach. The victim being the betrayed spouse BS. It was blame the victim in the sense that the BS MUST HAVE DONE SOMETHING TO FORCE their spouse to have an affair. So not only was the BS suffering the terrible affects of discovering their partner’s affair, they were also being told they were the likely cause of it! There was a bit of a battle royal in these things and the “blame the victim” approach finally stopped in that it is no longer prevalent. It is now pretty quickly jumped on as soon as it arises.

“She/he forced me to do it” is a belief/phrase from a person who has a “victim mentality”. So yes, you probably have a victim mentality. I don’t mean to be cruel by saying that, but I think you should look into what a victim mentality is. And if you see yourself there then you have an immense opportunity for big positive changes in your life. You could for example say to yourself “Today is the day I stop blaming other people for the negative aspects of my life. Today is the day I am the one who decides my future and what my life will be like.”. That's more or less a prerequisite anyway to starting the Manning Up journey. What Man doesn't accept responsibility for his own actions?

But I believe in these things, affairs and other negative things in marriages the “victim” (the person who has been hurt, but not a person with a victim mentality) should look to see if in some ways they brought that hurt onto themselves. I also believe this can only be done once they have forgiven the person that hurt them. So looking at the MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES is something to be done should the two partners ever decide to reconcile and start building their marriage afresh.




Meanwhile, the person who had the affair, the disloyal spouse, should accept total responsibility for their own actions. Simply because they are an adult fully in charge of and responsible for the personal decisions they make in their life. Not only must they be held accountable for those decisions, it is far better for them if they hold themselves accountable as well. It’s the “I’m guilty your honour” which will, if the court is merciful, result in a lesser punishment and may even result in being totally forgiven.

But DS rarely admit their guilt. They lie and deny and when faced with evidence blame their spouse “You made me do it” or” You forced me to do it”. Which is just like the DS jumping up and down on their LS’s already broken leg. And of course, that doesn’t result in forgiveness or a lesser punishment. It generally results in the end of the marriage.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> I'm not the one who equated living in a sexless marriage to rape at gunpoint.


Actually you are.

My argument has been that if a person truly will feel forced under a certain set of circumstances to do something, is he not in fact forced to do that thing?

In that strict sense, every single example I've put up including the rape victim has been true to that point. 

I see you and I were arguing different things, I can see why my example would make your eyes pop out now, and I can see why you might misunderstand what in fact I was drawing contrast to. I have since apologized and taken my ownership of my role in your misunderstanding.

With that being said, I never once said anything like what you are accusing me of, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop.


----------



## Acorn

Grayson said:


> To repeat an earlier point, "feeling" something to be the case does not mean it is so. "Feeling" forced is not _being _forced. Further, I get the impression, based on the various elements of your examples, that you feel (there's that word again) the same...your own examples defeat themselves.


I have on more than one occasion now admitted that feeling forced does not equate to being forced by strict definition.

What I am wondering is, if someone truly feels like they only have one option, is it reasonable to accept that they may feel forced to take that option?

In other words, if someone is compelled to act (we have agreed on this point), and the person compelled to act is only aware of one option, can we expect any response other than the one he thinks of? If so, how can a person choose an option that they are not currently able to accept as a legitimate option.

I am genuinely curious. A response without the patented Grayson 'wit' would be most welcome.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> “She/he forced me to do it” is a belief/phrase from a person who has a “victim mentality”. So yes, you probably have a victim mentality. I don’t mean to be cruel by saying that, but I think you should look into what a victim mentality is.


I have had a rough past. 

Right now, I'm finding it interesting discussing the strict premise that a person may have many options, but if he is not aware of any but one, is he not in fact forced to take that option if he is compelled to act. I sort of wish this discussion had taken place on a topic less charged than cheating, because as I am understanding the topic better, I am butting heads with a lot of people who think I'm defending the cheaters in some way.

I am one of the saps that sees the drug addict rob the store, and while I understand that he needs to be arrested for his act, the real solution to the problem would be educating him and helping him break off his addiction. In other words, introducing options that he either did not know he had, or could not utilize without help. I don't get as mad at him as I would if the guy came in and robbed me to fund his new iPod or something. Am I compassionate, or just a sucker? I dunno! I'm happy with who I am, so I'm not changing it. I guess I just am more comfortable with situations if I understand them better.

I don't give the cheater in this sexless example a free pass. He made his bed and he needs to lie in it. What I am learning from this thread is that I find both spouses roles equally repulsive. I have also learned about myself that if I imposed a sexless marriage on my spouse and I truly believed that she felt her only option was to cheat, I could forgive her for that. Again, maybe I'm a sucker.


----------



## Acorn

As an aside, I can also accept that a healthy person has the responsibility to understand all his/her options before choosing one.

I believe that in abusive situations (chemical, domestic, emotional, whatever), it would be a grave error to assume the person involved is operating under 'healthy' parameters.


----------



## Halien

Acorn said:


> I have on more than one occasion now admitted that feeling forced does not equate to being forced by strict definition.
> 
> What I am wondering is, if someone truly feels like they only have one option, is it reasonable to accept that they may feel forced to take that option?
> 
> In other words, if someone is compelled to act (we have agreed on this point), and the person compelled to act is only aware of one option, can we expect any response other than the one he thinks of? If so, how can a person choose an option that they are not currently able to accept as a legitimate option.
> 
> I am genuinely curious. A response without the patented Grayson 'wit' would be most welcome.


Acorn, hope you don't mind a different viewpoint:

The reality, as you've admitted, is that a bad marriage doesn't actually force someone to cheat. But lets talk about what really hapens in real life. The cheater, once confronted, will adamantly declare, holding on to it until they are blue in the face, that their partner made them cheat, or at least made it justified. Now, I'm a pretty big guy. I'm sure I could beat them up to a state where they'll say anything I want them to say in order to get away from me, but short of that, it ain't gonna' happen. They had no other option,from their point of view, in most cases. Because of their conscience, which seems like a paradoxical entity in a cheater, or a selfish need to feel justified, they will usually stick to their story short of me or another person pulling out their fingernails.

My point? Well, I'm not sure what the point is. If they are a sociopath, then their reality is the universe, and we are but mere actors in their play, so they were forced. For the other 99% of cheaters, it depends upon if you look at it from their screwed up point of view, or the 6 billion other people who will say that he/she was just looking for an excuse to cheat.

I'm just attempting humor, I hope you know. It just seems like the two arguments are looking at it from a different point of view.


----------



## unbelievable

Before I can cheat, I must owe someone faithfulness. One who serially willfully denies their spouse sex has withdrawn from the marriage. My child has needs only I can provide. If I don't provide those needs, I am guilty of child neglect and I will be punished. If I neglect the needs of my pets, needs they can't meet by themselves, I am guilty of animal cruelty and I will be punished. In both cases, the law will no longer consider me a parent or a pet owner but an abuser. A spouse can't adequately meet their own sexual and social needs if their mate refuses. Divorce may seem like a reasonable corrective measure, but whether the neglected spouse is male or female, both must lose considerable financial security. Would a physically abused woman likely call the police if she knew she would end up arrested and fined for being the victim of domestic violence? That would be illogical. Divorce, the corrective measure most people here advocate, punishes the victim. It is easy to see why some people would turn to porn or go outside the marriage for a little relief. Is adultary morally right? No. Neither is it morally right to deny one's own identity and to pretend to be an emotionless, sexless zombie when they aren't. It isn't morally right to abandon one's children to an abuser. Either instance would be morally superior than defrauding one's spouse by serially withholding sex/intimacy/emotional needs. 
If my wife couldn't be trusted to fulfill her role as a wife, why would I expect she could be trusted to fulfill her role as a mother? I wouldn't abandon my kids to the care of a selfish abuser. Wouldn't doing so make me guilty of child neglect?


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> I have had a rough past.
> 
> Right now, I'm finding it interesting discussing the strict premise that a person may have many options, but if he is not aware of any but one, is he not in fact forced to take that option if he is compelled to act. I sort of wish this discussion had taken place on a topic less charged than cheating, because as I am understanding the topic better, I am butting heads with a lot of people who think I'm defending the cheaters in some way.
> 
> I am one of the saps that sees the drug addict rob the store, and while I understand that he needs to be arrested for his act, the real solution to the problem would be educating him and helping him break off his addiction. In other words, introducing options that he either did not know he had, or could not utilize without help. I don't get as mad at him as I would if the guy came in and robbed me to fund his new iPod or something. Am I compassionate, or just a sucker? I dunno! I'm happy with who I am, so I'm not changing it. I guess I just am more comfortable with situations if I understand them better.
> 
> I don't give the cheater in this sexless example a free pass. He made his bed and he needs to lie in it. What I am learning from this thread is that I find both spouses roles equally repulsive. I have also learned about myself that if I imposed a sexless marriage on my spouse and I truly believed that she felt her only option was to cheat, I could forgive her for that. Again, maybe I'm a sucker.


That says you are compassionate but that’s doesn’t mean to say you have to be weak! There are people in the world that take advantage of compassionate people, they manipulate them so be careful with that or you will be a sucker!

The drug addict in your example must first learn there are dire consequences for breaking the law. If you are a woolly headed liberal and want to wrap him/her in cotton wall and say you must have had a very bad past then sure, he’ll just go and rob again. The Liberal leader in the UK has just this week pledged $75,000,000 to send the rioters, looters, arsonists etc. of a few weeks ago ON A SUMMER CAMP because he thinks “society” has let them down!


----------



## AFEH

unbelievable said:


> Before I can cheat, I must owe someone faithfulness. One who serially willfully denies their spouse sex has withdrawn from the marriage. My child has needs only I can provide. If I don't provide those needs, I am guilty of child neglect and I will be punished. If I neglect the needs of my pets, needs they can't meet by themselves, I am guilty of animal cruelty and I will be punished. In both cases, the law will no longer consider me a parent or a pet owner but an abuser. A spouse can't adequately meet their own sexual and social needs if their mate refuses. Divorce may seem like a reasonable corrective measure, but whether the neglected spouse is male or female, both must lose considerable financial security. Would a physically abused woman likely call the police if she knew she would end up arrested and fined for being the victim of domestic violence? That would be illogical. Divorce, the corrective measure most people here advocate, punishes the victim. It is easy to see why some people would turn to porn or go outside the marriage for a little relief. Is adultary morally right? No. Neither is it morally right to deny one's own identity and to pretend to be an emotionless, sexless zombie when they aren't. It isn't morally right to abandon one's children to an abuser. Either instance would be morally superior than defrauding one's spouse by serially withholding sex/intimacy/emotional needs.
> If my wife couldn't be trusted to fulfill her role as a wife, why would I expect she could be trusted to fulfill her role as a mother? I wouldn't abandon my kids to the care of a selfish abuser. Wouldn't doing so make me guilty of child neglect?


But the “victim” is already being punished inside the marriage. (Some don’t even know it can be deliberate, premeditated and malicious. When they wake up to that, they’ll end the marriage). It will just depend as to whether the punishment (hurt, pain) is greater inside or outside the marriage. But the “victim spouse” (if there is such a thing) will never know if they’re better off inside or outside until they’ve been out for a while and is able to reflect on the past.

So sometimes it comes down to “how much pain can you bare?”. It’s almost like when the heat gets too hot we really do jump out of the pot. And then we don’t care so much what the new future holds, all we know is we don’t want the future that’s guaranteed should we stay in the marriage. It’s what happened in the French Revolution. The people knew what they didn’t want and went round chopping off heads. Then they had to build their new future after the chaos they’d introduced to their lives.

It is so very different when there are dependent children in the mix.


----------



## unbelievable

If one spouse has changed the rules of the game and it's every selfish person for themselves, then porn, adultary, or any other selfish course of action would seem to be fair game. If a wife is openly committing adultary, would anyone expect the husband to just stay home and be a monk, pretending there is a marriage when there is none? Withholding is not morally superior to adultary. They are both defrauding, selfish violations of intimacy.


----------



## Acorn

Halien said:


> Acorn, hope you don't mind a different viewpoint:
> 
> The reality, as you've admitted, is that a bad marriage doesn't actually force someone to cheat. But lets talk about what really hapens in real life. The cheater, once confronted, will adamantly declare, holding on to it until they are blue in the face, that their partner made them cheat, or at least made it justified. Now, I'm a pretty big guy. I'm sure I could beat them up to a state where they'll say anything I want them to say in order to get away from me, but short of that, it ain't gonna' happen. They had no other option,from their point of view, in most cases. Because of their conscience, which seems like a paradoxical entity in a cheater, or a selfish need to feel justified, they will usually stick to their story short of me or another person pulling out their fingernails.
> 
> My point? Well, I'm not sure what the point is. If they are a sociopath, then their reality is the universe, and we are but mere actors in their play, so they were forced. For the other 99% of cheaters, it depends upon if you look at it from their screwed up point of view, or the 6 billion other people who will say that he/she was just looking for an excuse to cheat.
> 
> I'm just attempting humor, I hope you know. It just seems like the two arguments are looking at it from a different point of view.


I love other viewpoints!

I see what you are saying and maybe I am trying too hard to stick up for the small percentage of people that my question actually applies to. I admit that.

I am going through my awakening right now and perhaps the thing I am noticing most is that every notion I held true about people's motivations, decisions, etc. seems entirely different now... about almost anything. People were not acting the way I thought they were acting. Perhaps this is an admission that some of my viewpoints are naive, I could live with that. This also is an admission that if I looked at someone and said, "He's just justifying something!", I could be entirely mistaken. In fact, I could very well be justifying his behavior to fit into my life model - the exact behavior I'm accusing him of!

I was thinking in the car today that I may be coming across as saying, "The man felt forced, so therefore, the wife forced him." I really am not. I do think there are a percentage of men that would say, "I feel forced", and that's it. No blame anywhere - here is my situation, I have only one real option, there it is.


----------



## AFEH

unbelievable said:


> If one spouse has changed the rules of the game and it's every selfish person for themselves, then porn, adultary, or any other selfish course of action would seem to be fair game. If a wife is openly committing adultary, would anyone expect the husband to just stay home and be a monk, pretending there is a marriage when there is none? Withholding is not morally superior to adultary. They are both defrauding, selfish violations of intimacy.


Surely being a monk or being an adulterer is a choice a person makes. In the same way a person can choose either to stay in a bad marriage or leave it behind them. Every single choice a person makes is decided by what is best for them given the circumstances they are in. And in that way every single choice a person makes in their life is a selfish choice, based on their own predominant needs. There is no such thing as a selfless person who commits selfless acts. They just don’t exist.

Sure there are compromises in marriages. And each time we make a compromise we sacrifice a little of what we wanted but we do so “for the greater good”. But compromise too much such that the sacrifice is great then before we know it we’ve become a martyr to our cause. And when the martyr’s cause doesn’t bring them what THEY WANTED they can become the most bitter and resentful people on the planet. Martyr’s are perhaps the most selfish people of all.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> That says you are compassionate but that’s doesn’t mean to say you have to be weak! There are people in the world that take advantage of compassionate people, they manipulate them so be careful with that or you will be a sucker!
> 
> The drug addict in your example must first learn there are dire consequences for breaking the law. If you are a woolly headed liberal and want to wrap him/her in cotton wall and say you must have had a very bad past then sure, he’ll just go and rob again. The Liberal leader in the UK has just this week pledged $75,000,000 to send the rioters, looters, arsonists etc. of a few weeks ago ON A SUMMER CAMP because he thinks “society” has let them down!


I definitely agree on all counts. I am trying to understand people, but there definitely needs to be consequences even with that understanding.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> I could be entirely mistaken. In fact, I could very well be justifying his behavior to fit into my life model - the exact behavior I'm accusing him of!


That’s called psychological projection. Most people with a victim mentality do it, they think others are like them, are motivated in the same way they themselves are. It is exceedingly common in life and it’s a sign of an immaturity, a sign of bit of a small, closed mind, a naivety if you like. We’ve all been there at some time or other so don’t worry about it. It does though again mean you have great opportunity for personal growth.

To get out of projecting (and other things) read Awareness by Anthony de Mello. He’ll help you to take yourself out of your own unique equation of your life (I do this, I get that) and see and subsequently really understand what’s going on in your particular world. And then things really will begin to change. Many people don’t live more than an inch or so outside their own head. Anthony de Mello will help you get a least a yard or two away from it. No drugs involved!


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> I definitely agree on all counts. I am trying to understand people, but there definitely needs to be consequences even with that understanding.


If you only ever truly understand yourself you will have done exceptionally well! But your “self” is a moving target, it’s constantly changing, evolving. I like the Chinese phrase “If you haven’t seen your friend for THREE DAYS, take a very careful look, he may have changed”.

Now if you do understand your self and you can nurture your self, take care of it, help it grow, comfort IT etc. then you are doing very well indeed. At some time in their life a Man will go on this INNER JOURNEY. It’s that inner garden thing, it needs fertilizing, weeding, watering, testing (ha!).


----------



## AFEH

Acorn, here’s a revelation for you!

Now you know you PROJECT, you also know OTHERS PROJECT AS WELL. That for me was a massive life lesson. And when you really become AWARE OF PROJECTION you’ll see it coming from a mile away.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> That’s called psychological projection. Most people with a victim mentality do it, they think others are like them, are motivated in the same way they themselves are. It is exceedingly common in life and it’s a sign of an immaturity, a sign of bit of a small, closed mind, a naivety if you like. We’ve all been there at some time or other so don’t worry about it. It does though again mean you have great opportunity for personal growth.
> 
> To get out of projecting (and other things) read Awareness by Anthony de Mello. He’ll help you to take yourself out of your own unique equation of your life (I do this, I get that) and see and subsequently really understand what’s going on in your particular world. And then things really will begin to change. Many people don’t live more than an inch or so outside their own head. Anthony de Mello will help you get a least a yard or two away from it. No drugs involved!


Did a quick google on this, trying to apply it to me:

I grow up in an abusive environment. I get this victim mentality. I believe everything is my fault because that's what I am told. I wake up a little. I realize that it wasn't really my fault. So my tendency is to project this "not your fault" mentality on to hypothetical sexless guy and go up to bat for him a little too eagerly. I too easily assume that he did not know he had options, because when I was abused, I did not know I had options so he must be just like me. 

Am I understanding this right? Would explain why I feel like I'm the only one sticking up for the guy, lol.

I ordered that book last week btw, still not arrived! Grrr! I am really interested in reading it as I've seen you mention it a number of times.


----------



## Halien

Acorn said:


> II am going through my awakening right now and perhaps the thing I am noticing most is that every notion I held true about people's motivations, decisions, etc. seems entirely different now... about almost anything. People were not acting the way I thought they were acting. Perhaps this is an admission that some of my viewpoints are naive, I could live with that. This also is an admission that if I looked at someone and said, "He's just justifying something!", I could be entirely mistaken. In fact, I could very well be justifying his behavior to fit into my life model - the exact behavior I'm accusing him of!
> .


Maybe you were naive in the past, but I don't think its a bad thing. I believe there is a type of profile that some men fit into, like me, where we choose to be naive, in a sense. You get married, and make the choice to see the marriage as something that can be great, if you put your share of work into it. I suspect that this is one of the real factors behind the reason that men initiate divorce less frequently. My therapist concurs. We sacrifice, because that is what we think of as the right thing to do. But then you begin to realize that maybe your wife doesn't share that same vision. Lots of women do, but maybe not our wives. With this awakening, you begin to look at everything differently, intentionally removing the blinders.

I don't know. Maybe I'm way off base. Its Friday, and my group always goes out to lunch together. At a local sports bar, there's a younger waitress that hits on me more often than not. Ten years younger. She calls me sweetie, and writes her mobile phone number on the receipt every time. In the past, maybe I would've thought, "Gee, how nice. There's some sort of attraction here, and I'm flattered." Now, I see it for what it is. More often than not, I forget to remove my company ID card from my hip. Everybody in the city knows that if you have a white card, you are management, and the average income is pretty good, and you probably have a cool nestegg in company stocks. I'm sweetie because of the sweet smell of cash in my pocket. Don't worry, I'm not always this pessimistic, but it would've been nice to be a sweetie because I had a cute butt or something.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> Did a quick google on this, trying to apply it to me:
> 
> I grow up in an abusive environment. I get this victim mentality. I believe everything is my fault because that's what I am told. I wake up a little. I realize that it wasn't really my fault. So my tendency is to project this "not your fault" mentality on to hypothetical sexless guy and go up to bat for him a little too eagerly. I too easily assume that he did not know he had options, because when I was abused, I did not know I had options so he must be just like me.
> 
> Am I understanding this right? Would explain why I feel like I'm the only one sticking up for the guy, lol.
> 
> I ordered that book last week btw, still not arrived! Grrr! I am really interested in reading it as I've seen you mention it a number of times.


Unless you’ve broken the law when it becomes societies decision, you are your own personal judge as to whether something is your fault or not. Some of those judgemental decisions can be instant, others can take one heck of a long time. But the OVERRIDING GOLDEN RULE is to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN LIFE. And let others do the same (the only exception is a dependent child).

I changed my life when I changed career in my 30s.I told myself if I fail I blame no other person. Not my peers, not my reports, not my managers, not the clients, not the office staff, not the technology. If there was a failure it will have been because I didn’t communicate well enough, manage, motivate, lead or whatever in the right way. I was very successful with that “attitude”.

But I came to realise in life there is a team. Companies are a team, marriages are a team. And some of those team members can drop the ball, either consciously or not, for personal reasons or not. So no, not everything that goes wrong in our life is due to our shortcomings and sometimes there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it whatsoever.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn, people with a victim mentality believe that everything that goes wrong in their life is somebody else’s fault! In some aspects they have the mentality of a seven year old in that they don’t accept personal responsibility.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Halien said:


> I don't know. Maybe I'm way off base. Its Friday, and my group always goes out to lunch together. At a local sports bar, there's a younger waitress that hits on me more often than not. Ten years younger. She calls me sweetie, and writes her mobile phone number on the receipt every time. In the past, maybe I would've thought, "Gee, how nice. There's some sort of attraction here, and I'm flattered." Now, I see it for what it is. More often than not, I forget to remove my company ID card from my hip. Everybody in the city knows that if you have a white card, you are management, and the average income is pretty good, and you probably have a cool nestegg in company stocks. I'm sweetie because of the sweet smell of cash in my pocket. Don't worry, I'm not always this pessimistic, but it would've been nice to be a sweetie because I had a cute butt or something.


Pretty easy way to find out. Skip the white badge and wear a blue one or whatever color "demotion" looks like. If she comments, she's after your money. If she doesn't, she's after your butt. Do it today and post back what happened.


----------



## Halien

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Pretty easy way to find out. Skip the white badge and wear a blue one or whatever color "demotion" looks like. If she comments, she's after your money. If she doesn't, she's after your butt. Do it today and post back what happened.


Sadly, not gonna' happen. The women on the team are going to a brown bag lunch seminar, so the guys have decided that they want to go to the restaraunt with the scantily clad, busty waitresses that makes Hooters look like Chuckie Cheese. Considering that I'm one frequenly mentioned by name on our employee satisfactions surveys for the 'mutual respect' questions, this isn't my kind of place.

Sorry for being in such a foul mood today. Reconciliation hasn't been going well lately.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Halien said:


> Sadly, not gonna' happen. The women on the team are going to a brown bag lunch seminar, so the guys have decided that they want to go to the restaraunt with the scantily clad, busty waitresses that makes Hooters look like Chuckie Cheese. Considering that I'm one frequenly mentioned by name on our employee satisfactions surveys for the 'mutual respect' questions, this isn't my kind of place.
> 
> Sorry for being in such a foul mood today. Reconciliation hasn't been going well lately.


I'm sorry to hear that. Hey, there's always next Friday!
Cheer up, today is the first day of fall. Ah, what an awesome season.


----------



## Halien

Therealbrighteyes said:


> I'm sorry to hear that. Hey, there's always next Friday!
> Cheer up, today is the first day of fall. Ah, what an awesome season.


Thanks, I will not hijack the thread any further. The day is looking better, anyway. Found out that I get to opt out of a planned two week business trip to India and S. Korea coming up, so I can enjoy fall.

Oh, and my wife is definately not forcing me to check out the waitress next Friday. As for me, I'll make the choice to only think of my wife that way.


----------



## Zzyzx

unbelievable said:


> Withholding is not morally superior to adultary. They are both defrauding, selfish violations of intimacy.


I completely, wholeheartedly agree with this! The fact is, the withholder is a cheater too! She (or he) cheated first! In my case, my ex cheated on our marriage by withholding her affections and her sex, that's how I look at her actions. As I said before, I was never a cheater via adultery, instead I chose the high road and divorced her. But I have to qualify that by mentioning that having no children made the option to leave considerably easier. While I do not condone the actions of my friends in sexless marriages with children who cheat, I can understand where they're coming from even as I am counseling them to either try to repair things with the "cheating" wife or else divorce her (and tolerate the attendant financial damage well chronicled by Dalrock).



AFEH said:


> Surely being a monk or being an adulterer is a choice a person makes. In the same way a person can choose either to stay in a bad marriage or leave it behind them. Every single choice a person makes is decided by what is best for them given the circumstances they are in. And in that way every single choice a person makes in their life is a selfish choice, based on their own predominant needs. There is no such thing as a selfless person who commits selfless acts. They just don’t exist.
> 
> Sure there are compromises in marriages. And each time we make a compromise we sacrifice a little of what we wanted but we do so “for the greater good”. But compromise too much such that the sacrifice is great then before we know it we’ve become a martyr to our cause. And when the martyr’s cause doesn’t bring them what THEY WANTED they can become the most bitter and resentful people on the planet. Martyr’s are perhaps the most selfish people of all.


Yes everyone is selfish, but the withholders are often just as selfish as the cheaters. BOTH parties must own their actions. While the actual cheater must own the cheating action, the sexless cheater must own the withholding action. Any couple that has successfully reconciled from an affair will tell you this, that there is work to be done on the withholder's side as well as on the cheater's side.

So no I don't go with the "forced" viewpoint that Acorn does, but I strongly believe that betrayed spouses have often laid the groundwork in which the cheating happened and the betrayed spouses must own that in addition to the cheater owning the cheating.


----------



## Zzyzx

One story from the cheating front: one of my friends in a sexless marriage was told by his wife he could get his elsewhere as long as he kept everything discreet and completely out of her sight. So he did. And then she treated him a lot better once he stopped demanding sex from her. Then he got her to reenter the work force when their youngest entered middle school so that when he finally filed for divorce on the occasion of that kid's entry into college, he didn't have to pay alimony on top of the property split. His justification was he made it about being a full time dad to his kids, but I kept telling him, you never took the high road on her, how are you going to explain to them what happened? How are you teaching your sons to handle something like this? How are you teaching your daughters to take their vows seriously if they hear from mommy that they can get away with withholding?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Zzyzx said:


> I completely, wholeheartedly agree with this! The fact is, the withholder is a cheater too! She (or he) cheated first! In my case, my ex cheated on our marriage by withholding her affections and her sex, that's how I look at her actions. As I said before, I was never a cheater via adultery, instead I chose the high road and divorced her. But I have to qualify that by mentioning that having no children made the option to leave considerably easier. While I do not condone the actions of my friends in sexless marriages with children who cheat, I can understand where they're coming from even as I am counseling them to either try to repair things with the "cheating" wife or else divorce her (and tolerate the attendant financial damage well chronicled by Dalrock).


A withholder is not a cheater. What they are doing is out in the open and known to both involved and therefore both can decide if they want to continue. Cheating at it's very core is the lying and deception. The two are not even remotely the same.


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> A withholder is not a cheater. What they are doing is out in the open and known to both involved and therefore both can decide if they want to continue. Cheating at it's very core is the lying and deception. The two are not even remotely the same.


If a sexless husband confronts his neglectful wife and says, "Our sex life is not acceptable within the marriage, so going forward I will be exploring sex outside the marriage.", would this be more acceptable?

There is no underground behavior in this case. One party unilaterally enforced a sexless marriage, the other responded by unilaterally declaring an open marriage.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> If a sexless husband confronts his neglectful wife and says, "Our sex life is not acceptable within the marriage, so going forward I will be exploring sex outside the marriage.", would this be more acceptable?
> 
> There is no underground behavior in this case. One party unilaterally enforced a sexless marriage, the other responded by unilaterally declaring an open marriage.


Yes, I would. That isn't cheating, it's an open marriage and both then have the ability to stay or go.
See, choices!


----------



## Acorn

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Yes, I would. That isn't cheating, it's an open marriage and both then have the ability to stay or go.
> See, choices!


Yes.  Interesting. Thanks.


----------



## AFEH

Acorn said:


> If a sexless husband confronts his neglectful wife and says, "Our sex life is not acceptable within the marriage, so going forward I will be exploring sex outside the marriage.", would this be more acceptable?
> 
> There is no underground behavior in this case. One party unilaterally enforced a sexless marriage, the other responded by unilaterally declaring an open marriage.


Acorn, maybe your handle is well chosen, you are like a child seeking permission to behave how you want to behave.

That little acorn, now he never sought anybody’s permission. He just was, he took his chances, just lived and grew into an oak.

Be careful you don’t make TAM, the people here, a surrogate for your wife. You’ve already made your wife a surrogate for your mother. Maybe you don’t know that.




Maybe freedom is too frightening for you and that’s why you always seek permission, approval. Reckon you need independent counselling, a coach to teach you how to fish and feed yourself. How to be independent in every way.


----------



## Zzyzx

Therealbrighteyes said:


> A withholder is not a cheater. What they are doing is out in the open and known to both involved and therefore both can decide if they want to continue. Cheating at it's very core is the lying and deception. The two are not even remotely the same.


You're using a narrow definition of cheating. I'll cite the first dictionary link from this Google search:


> cheat [cheet]
> 
> verb (used with object)
> 1. to defraud; swindle: He cheated her out of her inheritance.
> 2. to deceive; influence by fraud: He cheated us into believing him a hero.
> 3. to elude; deprive of something expected: He cheated the law by suicide.
> verb (used without object)
> 4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.
> 5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.
> 6. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.
> 7. Informal . to be sexually unfaithful (often followed by on ): Her husband knew she had been cheating all along. He cheated on his wife.


You're using #7 and I have no problem with that, but as you should see above, that is not the only definition available to us. Try applying these definitions for the withholding spouse:

#1: to defraud: She cheated him out of her vows to the marriage.
#2: to deceive: She cheated him into marriage by making him believe she would always hold to her vows.
#3: to elude; to deprive of something expected: She cheated the marriage by withholding sex.
#4: to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats her husband without regrets.
#5: to violate rules or regulations: She cheats at her marriage vows. (OK that one could be a stretch, but you should look at it from the view that vows could represent rules or regulations regarding conduct in a marriage.)

Every one of these I cited can and should be applied to the betraying spouse as well. I'm just saying the withholding spouse shouldn't be assumed to be a saint even though she will often deceive those around her into believing that is the case.

Again, I reiterate my point: the withholding spouse is often a cheater as is the betraying spouse. BOTH must own their "cheating" actions.


----------



## Zzyzx

Therealbrighteyes said:


> Yes, I would. That isn't cheating, it's an open marriage and both then have the ability to stay or go.
> See, choices!


I can see how the story of my friend given permission by his wife to cheat on her fits into that narrative. I don't find open marriage any more acceptable than cheating without permission, but if it floated their boats, I guess that's an interesting way to look at it.

But ... I would be remiss if I didn't give the denouement in my friend's case. His wife didn't like getting divorced; he phrased it to her that he was tired of living the lie of being in a marriage in name only. But even then she still didn't acknowledge her responsibility for cheating on her marriage vows. Her new public narrative was "oh poor me! My husband was a cheater all these years!" No mention that she gave him permission to do it and no one would believe him when he brought it up. What a piece of work! So I asked my friend, how did that work for you? And he had to acknowledge I might have been right. Open marriage is *not* a good option... Too bad there wasn't anything remotely resembling Athol Kay's blog at that time, he sure could have used that kind of help; I had nothing to offer him there other than cheating wasn't a good idea.

So while I don't agree that a husband can be "forced" into cheating, it really goes to the point I made several pages ago: there exist some women who have incredible tunnel vision around this, who refuse to see the light let alone own that they helped make the ground fertile for their husbands' infidelity and are stunned when it shows up either in the form of an affair and/or in the form of divorce papers. They live in a fog which says it's perfectly OK to do that to their husbands just as cheaters live in the fog that says they're perfectly justified to step out on their spouse.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Acorn said:


> Yes.  Interesting. Thanks.


Just to be clear, I am not talking about coming home and saying I'm going to get it elsewhere because you won't do x,y,z. I am referring to that if your partner REFUSES to take action. At that point though, your partner has blatantly said your feelings don't matter and I don't respect you enough to try and change at which point, why bother staying married.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Zzyzx said:


> You're using a narrow definition of cheating. I'll cite the first dictionary link from this Google search:
> 
> 
> You're using #7 and I have no problem with that, but as you should see above, that is not the only definition available to us. Try applying these definitions for the withholding spouse:
> 
> #1: to defraud: She cheated him out of her vows to the marriage.
> #2: to deceive: She cheated him into marriage by making him believe she would always hold to her vows.
> #3: to elude; to deprive of something expected: She cheated the marriage by withholding sex.
> #4: to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats her husband without regrets.
> #5: to violate rules or regulations: She cheats at her marriage vows. (OK that one could be a stretch, but you should look at it from the view that vows could represent rules or regulations regarding conduct in a marriage.)
> 
> Every one of these I cited can and should be applied to the betraying spouse as well. I'm just saying the withholding spouse shouldn't be assumed to be a saint even though she will often deceive those around her into believing that is the case.
> 
> Again, I reiterate my point: the withholding spouse is often a cheater as is the betraying spouse. BOTH must own their "cheating" actions.


The definitions you gave as to cheating don't apply to marriage though. Cheating in marriage means infidelity. 
Also nobody said the betrayer was a saint, I sure didn't. 
Lastly, you keep saying "she" as if "he" would never do this. 
My husband did and he did it because he resented the hell out of me. 
I go back to my post on another thread, resentment is the root of all sexless marriages, barring physical reasons. Get to the root of the resentment and your sex life improves.


----------



## Acorn

AFEH said:


> Acorn, maybe your handle is well chosen, you are like a child seeking permission to behave how you want to behave.
> 
> That little acorn, now he never sought anybody’s permission. He just was, he took his chances, just lived and grew into an oak.
> 
> Be careful you don’t make TAM, the people here, a surrogate for your wife. You’ve already made your wife a surrogate for your mother. Maybe you don’t know that.
> 
> Maybe freedom is too frightening for you and that’s why you always seek permission, approval. Reckon you need independent counselling, a coach to teach you how to fish and feed yourself. How to be independent in every way.


Does this mean you are comfortable with me commenting on your user name, your mental development, my opinion of your usage of TAM, and what area(s) you can can use independent counseling on?


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

Zzyzx said:


> I can see how the story of my friend given permission by his wife to cheat on her fits into that narrative. I don't find open marriage any more acceptable than cheating without permission, but if it floated their boats, I guess that's an interesting way to look at it.
> 
> But ... I would be remiss if I didn't give the denouement in my friend's case. His wife didn't like getting divorced; he phrased it to her that he was tired of living the lie of being in a marriage in name only. But even then she still didn't acknowledge her responsibility for cheating on her marriage vows. Her new public narrative was "oh poor me! My husband was a cheater all these years!" No mention that she gave him permission to do it and no one would believe him when he brought it up. What a piece of work! So I asked my friend, how did that work for you? And he had to acknowledge I might have been right. Open marriage is *not* a good option... Too bad there wasn't anything remotely resembling Athol Kay's blog at that time, he sure could have used that kind of help; I had nothing to offer him there other than cheating wasn't a good idea.
> 
> So while I don't agree that a husband can be "forced" into cheating, it really goes to the point I made several pages ago: there exist some women who have incredible tunnel vision around this, who refuse to see the light let alone own that they helped make the ground fertile for their husbands' infidelity and are stunned when it shows up either in the form of an affair and/or in the form of divorce papers. They live in a fog which says it's perfectly OK to do that to their husbands just as cheaters live in the fog that says they're perfectly justified to step out on their spouse.


Well I for one don't think an open marriage is a good thing. I simply said it is an option if both are on board. In your friends case, the ex-wife can hardly say she was cheated on if she gave permission in advance. 
Also, there is saying that the cheater is 100% responsible for their CHOICE to cheat and the couple is 50% responsible for the breakdown in the marriage. You won't find many here there that own their share, sadly. Read about the husbands saying my wife doesn't want sex and it all rings the same. I do everything, she does nothing...she still doesn't want sex. Do you really think that is the honest truth? One wears a halo and the other horns? 
It all boils down to two sides to every story and it was interesting to read when a few wives of "sexless men" came on here and the story was markedly different. That may have been the case with your friends wife, maybe not, I am just saying it is a possibility.
You mention fertile ground for infidelity and a wife needs to own that. By your own statement, then the person not getting sex needs to own their share of why they aren't. 
Also, you say "she" in every part of your post. Read around here, it's balanced among the sexes. Plenty of wives here are in sexless marriages too and yes we need to own our contribution to that to.


----------



## Zzyzx

Therealbrighteyes said:


> The definitions you gave as to cheating don't apply to marriage though. Cheating in marriage means infidelity.


You insist on the narrow definition of "cheat". We'll have to agree to disagree.


Therealbrighteyes said:


> Also nobody said the betrayer was a saint, I sure didn't.
> Lastly, you keep saying "she" as if "he" would never do this.
> My husband did and he did it because he resented the hell out of me.
> I go back to my post on another thread, resentment is the root of all sexless marriages, barring physical reasons. Get to the root of the resentment and your sex life improves.


Your point is well taken.



Therealbrighteyes said:


> Well I for one don't think an open marriage is a good thing. I simply said it is an option if both are on board. In your friends case, the ex-wife can hardly say she was cheated on if she gave permission in advance.


Yet she did! The potential for blowback like this is one of several reasons why I believe open marriage is no better than outright cheating.



Therealbrighteyes said:


> Also, there is saying that the cheater is 100% responsible for their CHOICE to cheat and the couple is 50% responsible for the breakdown in the marriage. You won't find many here there that own their share, sadly. Read about the husbands saying my wife doesn't want sex and it all rings the same. I do everything, she does nothing...she still doesn't want sex. Do you really think that is the honest truth? One wears a halo and the other horns?
> It all boils down to two sides to every story and it was interesting to read when a few wives of "sexless men" came on here and the story was markedly different. That may have been the case with your friends wife, maybe not, I am just saying it is a possibility.
> You mention fertile ground for infidelity and a wife needs to own that. By your own statement, then the person not getting sex needs to own their share of why they aren't.
> Also, you say "she" in every part of your post. Read around here, it's balanced among the sexes. Plenty of wives here are in sexless marriages too and yes we need to own our contribution to that to.


If I appear to imply that the fertile ground leading to the cheating was entirely the betrayed spouse's responsibility, I never meant that. I've always said BOTH parties need to own responsibility for their part in what happened. And that includes the circumstances that led to the moment of betrayal. Yes that will be full of he this and she that, both parties will have to really "hear" the other party's pain in the aftermath if any reconciliation will be possible. Or better yet "hear" what it takes to get across to the other party LONG before it happens.

Yes I said "she", but you are right it could just as easily be "he". It's just I'm not very politically correct that way. So let it be known when I say withholding spouse and betraying spouse, they could be either sex and everyone is free to substitute "he" for "she" and vice versa in all my previous statements and still get the point I'm trying to get across here: that there are NO saints on either side.


----------



## Runs like Dog

It's not about sex, it's about power and control.


----------



## AFEH

Runs like Dog said:


> It's not about sex, it's about power and control.


You must enjoy narrow minded thinking.


----------



## bookworm

Ugh everyone is blaming the person withholding sex? Well sometimes it's not a game. Sometime really horrible things come into play. Rape, abuse. So to you who are "teaching your daughter she has to please her man" I sincerely hope she is able to. Sometimes a man or woman cannot have sex for a physical or emotional reason. And this is permission to cheat? I don't think so. For better or for worse. There is not ammendment to that saying "or until you stop sexually pleasing me."


----------



## chillymorn

bookworm said:


> Ugh everyone is blaming the person withholding sex? Well sometimes it's not a game. Sometime really horrible things come into play. Rape, abuse. So to you who are "teaching your daughter she has to please her man" I sincerely hope she is able to. Sometimes a man or woman cannot have sex for a physical or emotional reason. And this is permission to cheat? I don't think so. For better or for worse. There is not ammendment to that saying "or until you stop sexually pleasing me."


I agree 100% if you explained the horrable stuff before you got married but if you kept it to yourself and then decided it was to harriable and sex is off the menu thats a different story. you sold tainted goods and when the customer reasises it then theres a problem.


----------



## Nikki1023

Grayson said:


> NOone "forces" ANYone to cheat. The one cheating - be it the husband or the wife - CHOOSES to cheat. The loyal spouse may certainly contribute to the state of the relationship that leads the cheater to that choice, but it's still a choice. The loyal spouse may turn a blind eye or be willing to accept that his/her spouse is cheating, but it's still a choice.
> 
> If the loyal spouse allows it or just plain doesn't care, that's not cheating...that's an "open" marriage.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree: well said


----------

