Pages: 1 2 3

 

2010-12-05 11:31:09
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6613|London, England
The OP only asked if it's cheating to have sex outside of a relationship. Say you're going out with someone that you know is a pornstar, they're not cheating on you by having sex outside of the relationship. Because you know they're a pornstar and yet you're still going out with them (which means you're ok with it). It would be illogical to think of them as cheating scum.

It all boils down to whether the person is ok with you having sex outside of the relationship, I'd say 99% of the time people are not, which is why nobody ever tells their partners that they're fucking other people, and that's cheating.
2010-12-05 11:31:16
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

It's pretty dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people merely because their take on sex differs from yours.
Ditto.

Some people link the physical and emotional aspects of the relationship inextricably. Thus, if you de-link them, you aren't in a "committed" relationship. It would seem you're just treating the other person as a physical prop at that point. Not exactly the thing "committed" relationships are made of, IMHBCO.
Ditto? Kindly point out how I'm dismissing anyone's take on commitment in a relationship.

Not only is it patently ridiculous for you to apply your own standards of morals and commitment to everyone, and judge accordingly, but it's without sense entirely to suggest that remaining emotionally committed in a relationship is tantamount to treating your significant other as a "physical prop." Unless you ignore the part about emotional commitment.
You are dismissing my take on commitment in a relationship, are you not?

How exactly am I applying my own standards of morals and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? I'm giving my views and advice on the OP--as asked by the OP. My views do not separate a "committed relationship" and "emotional commitment". They are intrinsically linked.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-12-05 11:32:21
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5350|London, England

mikkel wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

mikkel wrote:

It seems pretty straight-forward if you take a second to consider what being faithful actually is. If your actions abuse the faith that your spouse or significant other places in you to respect the terms of your relationship, then you're being unfaithful. If those terms explicitly permit you to have emotionally-detached sex with others, then you're good to go.
Emotionally-detached sex is an oxymoron.
More or less. I think it's fairly easy, however, to surmise what the OP means by emotional detachment.
Of course. I've known people that treat sex as nothing more than a handshake. To each their own. Personally, I've never had sex without becoming at least somewhat emotionally attached so it's a foreign concept to me.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-12-05 11:47:32
mikkel
Member
+383|6593

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:


Ditto.

Some people link the physical and emotional aspects of the relationship inextricably. Thus, if you de-link them, you aren't in a "committed" relationship. It would seem you're just treating the other person as a physical prop at that point. Not exactly the thing "committed" relationships are made of, IMHBCO.
Ditto? Kindly point out how I'm dismissing anyone's take on commitment in a relationship.

Not only is it patently ridiculous for you to apply your own standards of morals and commitment to everyone, and judge accordingly, but it's without sense entirely to suggest that remaining emotionally committed in a relationship is tantamount to treating your significant other as a "physical prop." Unless you ignore the part about emotional commitment.
You are dismissing my take on commitment in a relationship, are you not?

How exactly am I applying my own standards of morals and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? I'm giving my views and advice on the OP--as asked by the OP. My views do not separate a "committed relationship" and "emotional commitment". They are intrinsically linked.
Refer to the edit to the post you quoted.

I argued that it was dense for you to dismiss the commitment in a relationship between two people based on your own perception of commitment. You replied, saying "ditto." You need to point out where it is that I dismissed any commitment in any relationship between any two people.

How are you applying your own standards of moral and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? You're doing so by dictating what commitment is using one specific take on the concept. The OP is irrelevant, as your post was in reply to mine.
2010-12-05 11:48:24
-Whiteroom-
Pineapplewhat
+572|6651|BC, Canada
@OP:
I find the question to be pretty easy to answer.
If you are in an open-committed relationship, then no it is not cheating.
If you have to hide the fact that you did it to remain in the relationship, or if it would cause the other in the relationship distress, then yes its cheating.
2010-12-05 11:52:41
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

mikkel wrote:

Refer to the edit to the post you quoted.

I argued that it was dense for you to dismiss the commitment in a relationship between two people based on your own perception of commitment. You replied, saying "ditto." You need to point out where it is that I dismissed any commitment in any relationship between any two people.

How are you applying your own standards of moral and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? You're doing so by dictating what commitment is using one specific take on the concept. The OP is irrelevant, as your post was in reply to mine.
The "ditto" was referencing your dismissal of my view take on commitment in a relationship. You did exactly that.

I'm not "dictating" anything. I'm giving my thoughts/advice on the topic--as fucking asked for in the fucking OP. It's too bad that it doesn't mesh with your views. I really couldn't care less. You're not the OP--why are you getting so bent out of shape over it?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-12-05 11:58:00
Deadmonkiefart
Floccinaucinihilipilificator
+177|6698
If she doesn't know and or is not OK with it, it's cheating.

If she is OK with it, it's weird, but I wouldn't call it cheating.
2010-12-05 12:00:23
mikkel
Member
+383|6593

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Refer to the edit to the post you quoted.

I argued that it was dense for you to dismiss the commitment in a relationship between two people based on your own perception of commitment. You replied, saying "ditto." You need to point out where it is that I dismissed any commitment in any relationship between any two people.

How are you applying your own standards of moral and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? You're doing so by dictating what commitment is using one specific take on the concept. The OP is irrelevant, as your post was in reply to mine.
The "ditto" was referencing your dismissal of my view take on commitment in a relationship. You did exactly that.
Again, like I said, refer to the edit. Let's recap, right quick.

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

It's pretty dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people merely because their take on sex differs from yours.
Ditto.
I didn't say that it's dense to dismiss anyone's views on emotional commitment. I said that it's dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people because their views on commitment conflict with yours. The "ditto" just doesn't apply, unless you can find a way to argue that I'm dismissing the emotional commitment in any kind of relationship.

FEOS wrote:

I'm not "dictating" anything. I'm giving my thoughts/advice on the topic--as fucking asked for in the fucking OP. It's too bad that it doesn't mesh with your views. I really couldn't care less. You're not the OP--why are you getting so bent out of shape over it?
Listen, FEOS. You can't just reply to my posts, and argue against what I'm saying, and then drag the OP into it when your arguments don't work out the way you wished them to. If you want to address the OP, then address the OP.

Last edited by mikkel (2010-12-05 12:01:23)

2010-12-05 12:26:02
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6397|North Carolina

CapnNismo wrote:

Let me ask you guys this question (this was the result of a convo with a mate of mine the other night): can you have sex with another person while you're in a committed relationship and still be faithful? I.E.: you have absolutely ZERO romantic feelings for the person you are sleeping with (like a one night stand), you're just looking for a bit of quick sexual gratification. Is in in that case cheating? You're still emotionally faithful to the person you are with but for just one sliver of time you're unfaithful physically.

My friend says this is not cheating, I honestly can't make up my mind. Thought it would be an interesting topic, something non-political and non-religious for once.
Unless you're in an "open" relationship, this is cheating.
2010-12-05 12:28:59
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Refer to the edit to the post you quoted.

I argued that it was dense for you to dismiss the commitment in a relationship between two people based on your own perception of commitment. You replied, saying "ditto." You need to point out where it is that I dismissed any commitment in any relationship between any two people.

How are you applying your own standards of moral and commitment to everyone and judging accordingly? You're doing so by dictating what commitment is using one specific take on the concept. The OP is irrelevant, as your post was in reply to mine.
The "ditto" was referencing your dismissal of my view take on commitment in a relationship. You did exactly that.
Again, like I said, refer to the edit. Let's recap, right quick.

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

It's pretty dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people merely because their take on sex differs from yours.
Ditto.
I didn't say that it's dense to dismiss anyone's views on emotional commitment. I said that it's dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people because their views on commitment conflict with yours. The "ditto" just doesn't apply, unless you can find a way to argue that I'm dismissing the emotional commitment in any kind of relationship.
OK, then. How about this? You're wrong. You like that better?

I didn't dismiss the emotional commitment between two people because their views on commitment conflict with mine.

I stated my views on the concept of de-linking physical and emotional commitment. And you then did to me exactly what you accused me of doing...hence the "ditto". Sorry if that was too nuanced for you.

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I'm not "dictating" anything. I'm giving my thoughts/advice on the topic--as fucking asked for in the fucking OP. It's too bad that it doesn't mesh with your views. I really couldn't care less. You're not the OP--why are you getting so bent out of shape over it?
Listen, FEOS. You can't just reply to my posts, and argue against what I'm saying, and then drag the OP into it when your arguments don't work out the way you wished them to. If you want to address the OP, then address the OP.
I can "drag the OP" into this any damn time I want to, since that's who I was addressing when you decided to respond to me. If you don't like my response to the OP, that's your problem, not mine. Your argument with me was directly against my response to the OP, so it is entirely relevant. It's your argument that's not working, not mine.

Sorry to rain on your parade, Mik.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-12-05 12:40:08
alexb
<3
+590|5932|Kentucky, USA

Cheating.
2010-12-05 12:41:50
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6530|Long Island, New York
It's absolutely, 100% cheating.

It's sad that this is the kind of question is even being asked.
2010-12-05 13:05:23
Benzin
Member
+576|5990
I am absolutely loving this thread, lol.
2010-12-05 13:08:15
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5229|Cleveland, Ohio
well it aint cheating if she doesnt care.  did he tell her?  if not then yes it is cheating.
2010-12-05 14:05:46
Benzin
Member
+576|5990
I find it interesting to note that it's often being said "he cheat on her" and not the other way around.
2010-12-05 14:45:28
mikkel
Member
+383|6593

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

The "ditto" was referencing your dismissal of my view take on commitment in a relationship. You did exactly that.
Again, like I said, refer to the edit. Let's recap, right quick.

FEOS wrote:

Ditto.
I didn't say that it's dense to dismiss anyone's views on emotional commitment. I said that it's dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people because their views on commitment conflict with yours. The "ditto" just doesn't apply, unless you can find a way to argue that I'm dismissing the emotional commitment in any kind of relationship.
OK, then. How about this? You're wrong. You like that better?

I didn't dismiss the emotional commitment between two people because their views on commitment conflict with mine.

FEOS wrote:

Cheating. Full stop.

If you have an "agreement" then you aren't in a "committed" relationship.
Right.

FEOS wrote:

I stated my views on the concept of de-linking physical and emotional commitment. And you then did to me exactly what you accused me of doing...hence the "ditto". Sorry if that was too nuanced for you.
What I accused you of doing was dismissing the commitment in relationships that don't adhere to your idea of how a relationship should be. You keep saying that you're justified in saying "ditto," and you also keep failing to show just where I'm supposed to have dismissed the commitment in any kind of relationship. I realise that it's because can't. Repeating the accusation ad nauseam doesn't make it any more right.

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I'm not "dictating" anything. I'm giving my thoughts/advice on the topic--as fucking asked for in the fucking OP. It's too bad that it doesn't mesh with your views. I really couldn't care less. You're not the OP--why are you getting so bent out of shape over it?
Listen, FEOS. You can't just reply to my posts, and argue against what I'm saying, and then drag the OP into it when your arguments don't work out the way you wished them to. If you want to address the OP, then address the OP.
I can "drag the OP" into this any damn time I want to, since that's who I was addressing when you decided to respond to me. If you don't like my response to the OP, that's your problem, not mine. Your argument with me was directly against my response to the OP, so it is entirely relevant. It's your argument that's not working, not mine.

Sorry to rain on your parade, Mik.
You replied to a post of mine, arguing against the contents of that post, authored by me. This is ridiculous even for you, FEOS.
2010-12-05 15:34:17
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6462
i guess if you want to talk semantically, 'cheating' implies some form of deceit, dishonesty and betrayal... i.e. to CHEAT, literally.

i would class it as being 'unfaithful', again semantically in the sense that being 'faithful' implies (previously faith-bound) monogamy.

every relationship is different so you can never say absolutely what is right/wrong. not for me, though.

if you don't care/respect/love your current partner enough to be 'bothered' by unfaithfulness, why be with them? that suggests there's someone better out there for you.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-12-05 15:37:11
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6641

It's cheating, assuming that your partner hasn't ok'd it, but it's perfectly possible to have sex with someone without emotional involvement.
2010-12-05 16:31:54
Ticia
Member
+73|5327

CapnNismo wrote:

Let me ask you guys this question (this was the result of a convo with a mate of mine the other night): can you have sex with another person while you're in a committed relationship and still be faithful? I.E.: you have absolutely ZERO romantic feelings for the person you are sleeping with (like a one night stand), you're just looking for a bit of quick sexual gratification. Is in in that case cheating? You're still emotionally faithful to the person you are with but for just one sliver of time you're unfaithful physically.

My friend says this is not cheating, I honestly can't make up my mind. Thought it would be an interesting topic, something non-political and non-religious for once.
Always found funny how sex is always the deal breaker when it comes to faithfulness when in fact it probably is the one that means the least when it comes to trust.
Try having a a closer bond with someone from the opposite sex (or same if you're gay) doing everything together except intercourse and then tell your partner is not cheating, most will probably won't even care and then get surprised one month later when you leave them.
2010-12-05 17:58:18
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6397|North Carolina

Ticia wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Let me ask you guys this question (this was the result of a convo with a mate of mine the other night): can you have sex with another person while you're in a committed relationship and still be faithful? I.E.: you have absolutely ZERO romantic feelings for the person you are sleeping with (like a one night stand), you're just looking for a bit of quick sexual gratification. Is in in that case cheating? You're still emotionally faithful to the person you are with but for just one sliver of time you're unfaithful physically.

My friend says this is not cheating, I honestly can't make up my mind. Thought it would be an interesting topic, something non-political and non-religious for once.
Always found funny how sex is always the deal breaker when it comes to faithfulness when in fact it probably is the one that means the least when it comes to trust.
Try having a a closer bond with someone from the opposite sex (or same if you're gay) doing everything together except intercourse and then tell your partner is not cheating, most will probably won't even care and then get surprised one month later when you leave them.
This is a good point...   I suppose a certain amount of possessiveness concerning that makes sense.
2010-12-05 19:27:59
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

mikkel wrote:

What I accused you of doing was dismissing the commitment in relationships that don't adhere to your idea of how a relationship should be. You keep saying that you're justified in saying "ditto," and you also keep failing to show just where I'm supposed to have dismissed the commitment in any kind of relationship. I realise that it's because can't. Repeating the accusation ad nauseam doesn't make it any more right.

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

If you have an "agreement" then you aren't in a "committed" relationship.
It's pretty dense to dismiss the emotional commitment between two people merely because their take on sex differs from yours.
This is what I said "Ditto" to.

You referred to me as "dense" because my take on sex differs from yours. I didn't dismiss the emotional commitment between two people. Hence my statement that "you were wrong". At no point did I dismiss anything.

If you are having sex with someone with with whom you have an "emotional commitment," how are they any different--during the act--than the random person with whom you have no "emotional commitment?" The answer, of course, is they aren't. That means you have no real relationship with the first person if you have truly de-linked the emotional and the physical--during the physical act, the one you have an "emotional commitment" to is identical to a random stranger. Thus the "physical prop" remark.

If you say, "but the difference is that I have an 'emotional commitment' to the first person" then you have linked the emotional and the physical, because the two people/relationships are now different, making the physical act different between the two because of the emotional commitment you have with the first.

Thus, my point. I'm not dismissing anything. It's intrinsic to my argument.

It is you who was being dismissive, and thus why I said "ditto".

mikkel wrote:

You replied to a post of mine, arguing against the contents of that post, authored by me. This is ridiculous even for you, FEOS.
This is ridiculous even for you, mikkel...which is really scraping the bottom of the barrel.

I replied to the OP. You replied to my reply to the OP. I replied to your reply to my reply to the OP.  It all relates back to the OP, which the content of my original reply was based on, to which you were responding, to which I was responding. And you still say the OP isn't relevant?

Geez, mik. It's not all about you...
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-12-05 19:34:09
CC-Marley
Member
+407|6820
Umm no. It's called cheating.
2010-12-05 20:46:17
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6346

CapnNismo wrote:

Let me ask you guys this question (this was the result of a convo with a mate of mine the other night): can you have sex with another person while you're in a committed relationship and still be faithful? I.E.: you have absolutely ZERO romantic feelings for the person you are sleeping with (like a one night stand), you're just looking for a bit of quick sexual gratification. Is in in that case cheating? You're still emotionally faithful to the person you are with but for just one sliver of time you're unfaithful physically.

My friend says this is not cheating, I honestly can't make up my mind. Thought it would be an interesting topic, something non-political and non-religious for once.
It kinda f*cks up your intamacy level, just get a GF who will let you step out, or better yet one who will bring her freinds. Just dont bring them to your house, meet a a hotel.
2010-12-05 20:52:47
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6462
i also think the whole 'we're liberal!' / 'it's a platonic relationship' sorta talk is just a load of nonsense. there's a big difference between somebody being emotionally ignorant to how they feel / denying how something really makes them think, and genuinely not caring. i'm of the opinion that if you're with somebody that you love, care about and are insanely physically attracted to, then there's an inherent and inescapable amount of coveting and possessiveness in there. call it primal, if you will. i don't believe that a guy can truly be blase and fine about handing around his hot dish of a girlfriend to his best friend, just because they're 'laid back'. there's always going to be a degree of jealousy, unhappiness and emotional discontent about it. and, either immediately or over time, that will put stress on a relationship and cause fault-lines to appear.

of course there is always the situation where two people in a 'relationship' don't really care that much in the first place... but then it's a matter of them simply not caring enough, and thus the point and meaning of their relationship is the questionable part, and not the matter of 'cheating'. my comments on cheating and unfaithfulness are all made with the assumption that the relationship in question is an actually meaningful and fulfilling one in the first place.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2010-12-06 00:25:30
BVC
Member
+325|6687
OP, it sounds like your friend is trying to justify cheating.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard