A secular debate about adultery

[lordpasternack]

Actually, I must state: I probably don't have sex as much as some active couples do. I'm not really particularly hypersexed, I've just screwed around a bit more than some. Similar amount of sex, wider base…

[hadespussercats]

Actually, I must state: I probably don't have sex as much as some active couples do. I'm not really particularly hypersexed, I've just screwed around a bit more than some. Similar amount of sex, wider base…

Don't try to back out now, nymphy!

Also, I wouldn't make assumptions about breadth of base just on current commitment. I think it's a good idea to feel really done with trying out new models before choosing a favorite.

[DRSB]

It's not that long that marriage has been about love, it was was all about pragmatism until the emergence of "romantic love" which was, when was it, 14thC?

For the most part of human history, marriage has been about regulating the passing of property and titles, practiced in the higher classes first and then spread further down.
Property itself is not such an old concept either, having come about only with the advent of agriculture, which was, when was it, a mere 10'000 years ago? What do those 10'000 years mean in evolutionary terms?
To talk about instincts would be nonsensical, we still have the same instincts as those foragers that evolved in an environment of promiscuity and sperm competition.

"Property" is not void of meaning today either. Of course you can love 5 and more people in parallel, but who'll get your house when you die? This question is in most countries still regulated by the institution of marriage.

What was Mel Gibson's wife left with after the break-up of the marriage, 400 grand and dazzling? And what about the mistress(es)?

[DRSB]

"You're only as faithful as your options" (Chris Rock)
Self-esteem plays a role too, men stray when they have high self-esteem (a sense of entitlement), women on the contrary, when they are low on self-esteem (seeking affirmation on the side).
Full article here: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles ... heat-sheet

[hadespussercats]

Chris Rock is hilarious, but his view on life can be grim.
And I'm growing increasingly uncomfortable with hard-line studies that claim that women are one way, and men another. I'm not saying that gender differences don't exist, or that they can't be illuminating-- just that such studies seem to brush over the spectrum of behaviors occupied by both sexes, and that scientists or sociologists who go into a study expecting to find differences, probably will, whether those differences are significant or not.

[Svartalf]

As a wise man said, this boils down to two posssibilities.
"Either you're monogamous, and then anything else is cheating (no need for religion to intrude there)
Or you're not"

[.Morticia.]

argh, why is "betrayal" always about sex?

Seriously, there are worse betrayals, much worse.

[hadespussercats]

argh, why is "betrayal" always about sex?

Seriously, there are worse betrayals, much worse.

Certainly. But the thread is about adultery. Which is about sex.

[DRSB]

And I'm growing increasingly uncomfortable with hard-line studies that claim that women are one way, and men another. I'm not saying that gender differences don't exist, or that they can't be illuminating-- just that such studies seem to brush over the spectrum of behaviors occupied by both sexes, and that scientists or sociologists who go into a study expecting to find differences, probably will, whether those differences are significant or not.

I concur on the studies, especially studies on sexuality whose polls consist mainly of college students, hardly the most representative poll; moreover, people are not really honest about their sexual behaviour. That's why I look at all sort of studies and compare, seeking to do my own reserach, know of no other way to come by data and statistics.

[hadespussercats]

And I'm growing increasingly uncomfortable with hard-line studies that claim that women are one way, and men another. I'm not saying that gender differences don't exist, or that they can't be illuminating-- just that such studies seem to brush over the spectrum of behaviors occupied by both sexes, and that scientists or sociologists who go into a study expecting to find differences, probably will, whether those differences are significant or not.

I concur on the studies, especially studies on sexuality whose polls consist mainly of college students, hardly the most representative poll; moreover, people are not really honest about their sexual behaviour. That's why I look at all sort of studies and compare, seeking to do my own reserach, know of no other way to come by data and statistics.

Yeah, I guess if you can't do the studies yourself, you've got to work with what's out there. And they are interesting.

[.Morticia.]

Actually, I must state: I probably don't have sex as much as some active couples do. I'm not really particularly hypersexed, I've just screwed around a bit more than some. Similar amount of sex, wider base…

It's quality that counts.

[nellikin]

I've thought about this issue a lot too. WRT to figures, I looked into polygamy/open relationships in depth last year. I seem to recall one book claiming that 60% of married men and 40% of married women are unfaithful. In total, 80% of marriages will experienced infidelity. I think the author was an American female, so I'm going to guess that was in the US (don't remember her name though). That's a lot.

WRT to jealousy - for me personally I think the fear of loss of partner/insecurity about "would he prefer somebody else" is key to the jealousy I've experienced in my life. That, of course, is linked with self-esteem issues, and over the years (as my self-esteem has grown) my jealousy has diminished. My logical brain never condoned it - hated it in fact - but it is very difficult to have reason override instinct in this regard.

I personally think open relationships, where polygamy is the norm, are great in terms of ethics etc. As long as all parties are in the know and happy with the arrangement, everything is peachy. I don't condone lies and deceit. When it comes to real life situations, I believe that open relationships can be high maintenance, as issues such as jealousy are constantly needing to be re-addressed. As monogamous relationships can be high-maintenance too, perhaps there is no great difference in terms of the emotional input required to maintain the relationship, just that the boundary conditions are different.

As for loving two people at once - off course it's possible (been there, though didn't go through with it, for two main reasons). I suspect it takes a lot of effort to not hurt partners in polygamous relationships - especially if there is a standing monogamous relationship when polygamy is first introduced. However, some people are fine with this and good on them.

[Copyleft]

Breaking agreements you've made with people who acted in good faith is wrong.

Ergo, you should not enter into such agreements.

[Thinking Aloud]

Ergo, you should renegotiate such agreements first.

[Warren Dew]

Property itself is not such an old concept either, having come about only with the advent of agriculture, which was, when was it, a mere 10'000 years ago? What do those 10'000 years mean in evolutionary terms?

Real property is an agricultural concept, perhaps. Personal property likely goes back to the paleolithic - certainly my kids got the concept of "mine" without any help from us.

I don't think of monogamous relationships as involving property rights in one's partner - it's more of a contractual relationship - but gorillas seem to, so it may be in our genes somewhere.