I have always found it hard to understand why so many men take it so hard when the women that they are with have sexual relationships with other men. In my conversations with people from the so-called redneck constituency, the conversation starter is either With all the taxes you are paying, don't you feel like you're living in a socialist country? or if I saw my wife in bed with another man, I would shoot them both. I had women in my life who had sexual relationships with other men; but I never shot them. I do not understand why so many men feel the temptation to do such a thing. The men who have sex with many women are seen as studs; the women who have sex with many men are seen as sluts. I do not understand why this kind of standard exists. I say this as someone who was never into casual sex or promiscuity. The women I've been with, I either loved or they were my good friends. Many of the same men who have been with many women sexually also have the same feelings regarding their wives or their long-term partners. Why is this? I've known any number of men who have had many sexual relationships who could not forgive their wives having affairs. What is it really that motivates this behavior? I have seen men go on and on about how hurt they have been in these situations. Why are they hurt by this so much? Maybe it is because they feel that they're not allowed to have feelings unless it is in a stable situation, and if the woman leaves or has other relationships then they feel that their heart is torn out. I believe that the solution toward that is to allow men to have feelings and not deny them as part of being masculine. The more this is done, the more the men are able to deal with their feelings, the less becomes the temptation for them to shoot their wives.
Of all of that long winded post about stupid people needing to find themselves in life, I see this one part you wrote, and it reminded me of a joke. A woman asks her boyfriend "Why is it that when a woman sleeps around, she is known as a slut, and a bad partner, but when a man sleeps around, he is called a player, like it's a good thing and other guys look up to him?". Her boyfriend responds "Well, look at it from the point of view a locksmith. A key that opens many locks is called a master lock. It's a very valuable key, and good to have. Now, a lock that is opened by many keys is a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty lock. No one wants a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty lock.".
Speaking from the perspective of a sporadic man-whore: It seems to me the partner usually takes it hard on either side. Some people never get over it. For a lot of people I've known, including myself, I think it's a matter of three things: 1. Hurts your ego. 2. Violates what they think of as true love, shatters their image of the relationship being real. 3. Since cheating usually involves deception, there's the violation of trust. We have this cultural idea that we're so special, they shouldn't even want anybody else, and we're sort of taught in our society that one person is supposed to be with one other person forever to call it romantic love. I concluded it's almost 100% ego in my case because of the fact that I wouldn't be offended at all if my fiancee slept with another girl - my only real concern would be if she decided she'd rather be with the other woman instead of me rather than in addition (or better yet, at the same time). I wouldn't find this threatening to my ego because I have no feeling of competition with women sexually. The 3rd one doesn't apply to me since I've never trusted anybody as an adult, and the 2nd one I just don't buy into - I believe polyamory is possible. The reasons that slutty men and women are viewed differently are cultural, but with an evolutionary basis as well. Evolution favors people who pass on their genes. Women have a much higher biological investment into producing offspring, and if she slept around how is she going to get support in raising the child? Men, on the other hand, benefit not only from raising their own children but also impregnating the women of other men and having other men raise their children. Thus men have a more natural drive to be slutty than women (not that natural determines right and wrong). Also, a man managing to have sex with 10 attractive women in a short time span implies that the guy has some kind of appeal. A woman doesn't need to have much appeal to get 10 attractive guys to have sex with her even over the course of 10 days. That said, I wouldn't say I ever had much fanfare for sleeping with "a lot" of women (definition of a lot depends on what social group you ask). Mostly people thought I was a jerk for it for being careless with peoples' emotions.
Because a commitment should mean something. If you cannot trust a partner sexually, you cannot trust them for anything. Is this just the next moral wall for the immoral to tear down?
a girlfriend cheating on you would be one thing.... a wife, mother of your children is another altogether, as that can destroy your family don't want to risk being killed, break up with the guy or divorce him before sleeping with other guys crimes of passion always have and always will exist .
I say this as someone who has been cheated on: that's bull(*)(*)(*)(*). If manslaughter is a "crime of passion," then so is cheating, and it is infinitely more excusable. You are essentially saying that a woman should remain in control of herself enough to refuse all advances because a man can't be expected to control themselves enough to refrain from flying into a murderous rampage. The double standard is practically painful to read. To look at manslaughter and say that "crimes of passion have and always will exist" while at the same time saying that cheating woman is "destroying your family" . . . really?
I am saying crimes of passion can be caused by cheating, cause and effect, and yes, a spouse should control themselves and not be unfaithful.... if you cheat on your husband or wife, yes, you risk them losing it it's wrong to commit both adultery and murder... .
So we should expect people to control themselves and not be unfaithful because we can't expect people to control themselves and not murder people. Again, the double standard is mind-boggling.
you should not cheat on your spouse cause it's the right thing to not cheat on your spouse.... cheating on your spouse is a bad thing to do, and yes, it might just drive many over the deep end and be a very ugly situation I do not condone the adultery or the murder, but I understand why the murder happened as it was a crime of passion say a man cheats on his wife and the wife throws a pan at him and knocks him out, while it was wrong of her to do that, I understand why she did it, as the man hurt her first .
You also shouldn't kill your spouse (or anyone else for that matter) unless you are doing so for the protection of yourself or someone else. We both agree that killing and adultery or wrong, where we differ is that I see murder as a far worse offense and that people shouldn't be held to a different standard because they get mad about something. Murder is murder even if you are mad just like cheating is cheating even if you are horny. If a person's family would be more torn apart by an affair than by murder, then that family has some seriously (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up values. How can someone seriously prioritize fidelity over human life? People should be held responsible for their own actions. That's the double standard I'm talking about: characterizing cheaters as moral agents who are in control of their own actions but murderers as helpless victims of their own emotions. "It might just drive many over the deep end" isn't a mitigating factor, it's excuse-making. Many cheaters say that the actions of their partner "drove them" to cheat as well.
they call it a crime of passion for a reason, your not thinking straight when you commit the crime, don't want your husband or wife to enter this state, do not cheat on them yes, people should be held responsible for their own actions, both the cheater and the cheated on, but were not talking about that, were just saying what can happen if you cheat on your spouse if you kill your cheater spouse you could spend the rest of your life in prison, that is why many kill themselves after, it's basically a suicide and taking the cheater with them maybe adultery should be a crime again? as it hurts someone and should it not according to you "be punished", if the cheated had legal ways of doing that, maybe they would, who knows "Many cheaters say that the actions of their partner "drove them" to cheat as well." then get a divorce... then have sex with whoever you want...... all I am saying is if you do something to hurt someone, they just might hurt you back .
An excuse that cheaters make all of the time. Which would mean that you are more responsible for your husband or wife's mental state than they are for their own, which is ridiculous. Anyone that volatile has serious emotional control problems, whether you cheat on them or not. And yet your previous quotes on this thread present a double-standard in this regard. Cheaters are in control of their actions, but murderers . . . well, their victims are somehow partially to blame. What's next? "Don't want to be attacked by a Muslim terrorist? Well, don't insult Islam."
as I said, maybe Adultery should be a crime, if the cheated on had a legal recourse to punish the cheater, maybe they would not lose it Adultery imo is as bad as any physical assault would be if you go into Harlem and start calling black people the n-word, you increase your odds of being hurt or killed, same with cheating on your spouse were talking reality, not if what the person responding to those hurtful actions was right or not .
Again, you focus your blame elsewhere. Put the blame where it belongs: on the person who actually committed the crime. And, IMO, it is immoral to value fidelity more than life. And in your version of reality, cheaters are to be held to a different standard than murderers. I disagree. Accepting "they were driven to do it" for one and not the other is an unmistakable double standard. If we are to be held responsible for our own lust then we are to be held responsible for our own wrath. Victim blaming in either case is ludicrous.
the blame is on the cheater for cheating and the cheated on for the violence.... no one has ever claimed otherwise but the fact is, cheating on your spouse may cause them to snap and commit that violent act, so yes, they would be partly to blame as it was their hurtful actions that caused the response I say it's not safe to hurt people, they might hurt you back it's like the robber that breaks into a house, then trying to say it wasn't partly the robbers actions that got him shot while he was running away .
I don't agree with the logic that cheaters are fully in control of their actions but murderers are not. I'll just leave it at that.
I will add one thing, while 'cheating' is wrong and can lead to the 'cheated on' losing it they have proved that there is a monogamous gene.... .so it's partly genetic if one is a cheater or not "Gene switches make prairie voles fall in love" http://www.nature.com/news/gene-switches-make-prairie-voles-fall-in-love-1.13112 "Monogamy gene found in people" http://www.nature.com/news/gene-switches-make-prairie-voles-fall-in-love-1.13112 maybe people that do not want a cheating spouse should get them genetically tested prior to marriage . .
