baddog1
 
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 02:21 pm
To me - adultery (and all that it encompasses) is one of the worst things a person could do to another person and/or family.

However; I've heard from some who claim that adultery actually saved their otherwise listless or nearly-over marriage.

I seriously doubt that I could ever trust again after this and wonder what that would be like!

Any thoughts?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 4,692 • Replies: 46
No top replies

 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 04:29 pm
Re: Adultery
baddog1 wrote:
To me - adultery (and all that it encompasses) is one of the worst things a person could do to another person and/or family.


I agree with you 100%.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 05:06 pm
It seems silly to me to say that adultery saved a marriage.

If a marriage got better afterwards, I'd say it was in spite of the adultery, and more about finally communicating, finally growing, finally connecting in a new way.

All of those things can happen without the catalyst of adultery, and are probably much more likely to happen in a successful way if they happen outside of the context of adultery.

Especially, I think that anyone who says that ("saves marriages") in advance of having an affair, as some sort of justification, is much more likely to have it all backfire horribly than actually accomplish anything remotely positive.
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 07:14 pm
I'm with jpinmilwaukee on this one.



I personally couldn't comprehend how adultery could make a marriage better, but I think Maybe I understand it in principle.

For instance....At one point my husband had a health crisis and could very well have died....then, there were literally years where it was touch and go, a lot of physical pain, life adjustments, etc.

I started going to therapy for a while, and this came up as a big stress issue. I was saying that this whole thing, while very stressful, had really brought us together as a whole. It was like we had been through the worst imaginable, and working together through it really cemented our relationship where it just could not be broken, no matter what.

The therapist commented that when something dramatic like this happens, it can either bring you closer together, or drive you apart, and fortunately it did not do the latter.

So, that said....I suppose if there was an affair, but it was realized how terrible that was, and forgiveness was sincerely sought, and amends made, vows retaken.....I guess if you both believe that was your worst, and you're still together, then nothing will drive you apart.

Does that make sense?
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 10:55 pm
I guess probably it boils down to something along the lines of what Chai said. Though adultery is not a way to "fix" your marriage I do see how in some... very rare cases... something like that could after being talked about and worked through make the relationship stronger in the end. Because as it was said it may have opened lines of communication that weren't open before. Though in most cases I don't see something like that happening, honestly speaking. I don't think I'd stick around if my significant other was committing adultery and I knew about it. I just don't think it's right to do that.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 06:05 am
I am going to disagree with most of you. First, let me say that I don't condone adultery. I think that it is deception of the worst sort.

Saying that, I have known of cases where adultery did not make a marriage stronger, but helped a person deal with an otherwise intolerable marriage.

My "take" on this is probably that of an older person, who began her life in an era where people did not divorce as readily as they do now. Women stayed in poor marriages because of economic reasons, and both men and women in bad relationships stayed together "for the sake of the children". Society had not realized at that time that often divorcing was perferable as far as the kids were concerned, to them living in a house with the constant squabbling of the parents.

I am not talking now about the chronic womanizer or man chaser, which, IMO is a deep seated emotional problem. I am referring to the man who takes a mistress, or a woman a lover, and has a long term relationship with him/her. The emotional comfort that the person receives often would allow him/her stay in a dysfunctional marriage.

Years ago, I knew of a number of instances, where a man had a mistress on the side, or the wife a lover, to provide some relief from the dreariness of his/her married life.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 08:31 am
Chai Tea wrote:
The therapist commented that when something dramatic like this happens, it can either bring you closer together, or drive you apart, and fortunately it did not do the latter.

It's hard to be wrong with that kind of diagnosis.
0 Replies
 
flushd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 08:38 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I am going to disagree with most of you. First, let me say that I don't condone adultery. I think that it is deception of the worst sort.

Saying that, I have known of cases where adultery did not make a marriage stronger, but helped a person deal with an otherwise intolerable marriage.
......
Years ago, I knew of a number of instances, where a man had a mistress on the side, or the wife a lover, to provide some relief from the dreariness of his/her married life.


And instances of men taking a 'mister' on the side. Or the wife taking a female lover. Smile

I see your point, Phoenix. Most likely still a valid one too in various places in the world.
0 Replies
 
Treya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 09:43 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I am going to disagree with most of you. First, let me say that I don't condone adultery. I think that it is deception of the worst sort.

Saying that, I have known of cases where adultery did not make a marriage stronger, but helped a person deal with an otherwise intolerable marriage.

My "take" on this is probably that of an older person, who began her life in an era where people did not divorce as readily as they do now. Women stayed in poor marriages because of economic reasons, and both men and women in bad relationships stayed together "for the sake of the children". Society had not realized at that time that often divorcing was perferable as far as the kids were concerned, to them living in a house with the constant squabbling of the parents.

I am not talking now about the chronic womanizer or man chaser, which, IMO is a deep seated emotional problem. I am referring to the man who takes a mistress, or a woman a lover, and has a long term relationship with him/her. The emotional comfort that the person receives often would allow him/her stay in a dysfunctional marriage.

Years ago, I knew of a number of instances, where a man had a mistress on the side, or the wife a lover, to provide some relief from the dreariness of his/her married life.


Huh... interesting phoenix. I hadn't thought about it that way. Good point.
0 Replies
 
Bohne
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 09:57 am
Adultery is cheating and lying.
Whoever does that to me is not my friend, and can certainly not be my partner!
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 10:05 am
joefromchicago wrote:
Chai Tea wrote:
The therapist commented that when something dramatic like this happens, it can either bring you closer together, or drive you apart, and fortunately it did not do the latter.

It's hard to be wrong with that kind of diagnosis.



That wasn't a diagnosis....also, our relationship could have stayed exactly the same.

She said it "can" do this, not "will"

besides, that's not what my therapy was about, at least not entirely.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 07:44 pm
joefromchicago wrote:
Chai Tea wrote:
The therapist commented that when something dramatic like this happens, it can either bring you closer together, or drive you apart, and fortunately it did not do the latter.

It's hard to be wrong with that kind of diagnosis.



Joe, you make me laugh. And this isn't the first time Laughing
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 09:41 pm
Chai Tea wrote:
joefromchicago wrote:
Chai Tea wrote:
The therapist commented that when something dramatic like this happens, it can either bring you closer together, or drive you apart, and fortunately it did not do the latter.

It's hard to be wrong with that kind of diagnosis.



That wasn't a diagnosis....also, our relationship could have stayed exactly the same.

She said it "can" do this, not "will"

besides, that's not what my therapy was about, at least not entirely.


technically, she said "it can either do this or that," and the word 'either' implies that those are the only two probable possibilities.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 01:38 pm
As far as I understand these things, which isn't very far, I gather that feminists and evolution theorists don't recognise the concept.

They see it as a patriarchal/religious concept. The serious ones I mean. The not serious being inconsequential. They are posers.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 03:07 pm
I'm not understanding you, spendi. Could you explain a little more clearly what you said?

Are you saying feminists and ev. theorists don't recognize the concept of adultery?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 03:36 pm
That's right..

It isn't really that they "don't". It is that they can't.

All their philosophy goes awry if they do.

I did say serious ones. I have argued with a few of those. I heard one say that he didn't know what they were talking about with a daft idea like adultery. There was a young lady on the news the other night scoffing at the idea.

It's the drift. Not very nice is it?
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 03:44 pm
Thanks for clearing that up, spendi. No time to continue with this at the mo... be back tonight or tomorrow, though, so maybe then.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 04:50 pm
spendius wrote:
That's right..

It isn't really that they "don't". It is that they can't.

All their philosophy goes awry if they do.


Spendius, I would not describe myself as a "hardcore evolution theorist" any more than you would consider yourself as a "hardcore believer in molecules" -- yes, I certainly believe it, but it's not an issue of uncertainty.

Along with these beliefs come, usually, other beliefs such as the lack of a set purpose in life, lack of belief in spirituality, destiny, god, and spiritual sanctity of a relationship.

This does not, however, prevent people like me from recognizing and valuing a relationship on purely logical grounds. Even the most logical of us still have emotions that govern our behavior. Love, respect, trust...these are reasons not to cheat on a person that any evolutionist can recognize.

I'm sure there are some evolutionists who would happily cheat on their S.O. behind their backs, but that has nothing to do with believing in evolution.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 05:29 pm
Well stuh-

I'm not defending feminists or evolution theorists. I think they are barmy.

I'm just telling you what they think, and I have talked to a few, and it does make sense from their point of view philosophically. I do recognise that.

It just doesn't work though. Which I think is of over-riding importance. I like things to work.

The idea of adultery, they say, and I can't fault them on it, implies conjugal rights which implies, obviously, that a lady submits, often when she doesn't really feel like it for any one of a number of reasons such as a headache or her having realised what a boring old fart her lover actually is. A scenario some of them class as rape.

In return the lady gets a monopoly on an aspect of life more important than a pint of iced,foaming larger after a three day crawl through a hot desert and, by extension, a worker's wages.

As I said, and it must be stressed, I am only talking about serious feminists and evolutionary theorists. I'm not talking about people who use some aspects of these philosophical positions, the chosen aspects of course, to push their own boat out.

Evolution has no niche for pushing your own boat out. You either have it or you haven't. It's merciless.

I can't understand why you are debating it.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Oct, 2006 06:00 pm
Why am I debating it? Because I and nearly every single friend and family member is what you consider a "hardcore evolutionist" and nobody has the opinions that you say we have.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Adultery
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/23/2021 at 10:25:38