In a healthy relationship, both sides determine what’s cheating and what isn’t.
A question that comes up at some point in most relationships is “What counts as cheating?” Sex, of course—and by that we mean any sexual contact at all. Kissing? Very likely. Face it, any physical contact, not with a bunch of other sweaty dudes, is usually a no-no. Past that, however, the black-and-white of adultery shades into the gray of suspicion. What about lunch with a coworker, drinks after work, or maybe even dinner? Phone calls, emails, or texts late at night? Even if partners accept physical dalliances outside the relationship, they may be less forgiving of emotional entanglements. Sex is fine but no love.
So what counts? And who’s to say?
It would be easy just to say, “If you have to ask, it’s cheating.” True, that would be the safest strategy: just don’t do anything, with anybody, that would ever arouse any suspicion, whatsoever. But this is excessive and really isn’t fair to either partner.
Another way to think of it is: what wouldn’t you want her to do? If you have similar values, then anything you wouldn’t want your partner doing on the side is probably something you shouldn’t be doing either. But as often as you may finish each other’s sentences (which is just so cute), you are still not the same person. You can’t just assume that she feels the same way about your boundaries.
So what’s the answer? You’re not gonna like it—especially if the reaction to Hugo Schwyzer’s article on porn use is any guide—but bear with me.
♦◊♦
Why should either of you have the right to do something that upsets the other? You’re in this relationship to make each other happy, not anxious or miserable.
|
Your cheating is whatever she says it is.
Wait, wait… there’s more. If I just left it like that, I’d be conforming to the myth that the man always cheats and the woman gets to draw the line. To the extent that the man may cheat, it’s the woman’s prerogative to say what she is and isn’t comfortable with. She’s an equal partner in this relationship, and she has every right to say what she’ll allow as far as your interaction with other women.
Her cheating is whatever you say it is.
You’re in this relationship too, and you have legitimate concerns over what she might be doing with friends, neighbors, coworkers, or Fire Station No. 5. Just as she has the right to say what she’s comfortable with you doing, you have the same right with respect to what she does.
Let’s turn things around and look at it a different way. Why should either of you have the right to do something that upsets the other? You’re in this relationship to make each other happy, not anxious or miserable. If you can’t work or hang out with beautiful and intelligent women without crossing a line your girlfriend or wife sets, there are two possibilities: 1) You know she’s being reasonable, and you’re a jerk. 2) You think you’re being reasonable, and she’s too uptight. The first is your problem, buddy—good luck with that—but the second is a problem between both of you, and one that cannot be ignored.
Am I saying you should just submit to what she does or does not want you to do? Not at all. If you don’t like it, tell her. She has every right to her opinion, but so do you. If you don’t like what she thinks, then talk about it. Just don’t do something she doesn’t like, and then complain that she’s too controlling. If you think she’s too restrictive, then maybe she’s not the woman for you (and you’re not the right man for her).
Of course, the same thing goes if she thinks you’re too controlling. If she wants to go for drinks with her former underwear model boss, and you don’t like it, then you have to talk about it. If you and your wife or girlfriend can’t agree on terms of engagement “with the enemy,” that signals a deeper problem within the relationship, one that has to be dealt with.
In the end, you both have the right to say what makes you uncomfortable. Since either of you can leave if you’re unhappy, you have to agree on these things, or the relationship isn’t going to last. When it comes to cheating—or porn use, or any other issue in the relationship—her opinion counts no more or less than yours. If she says lunch with a coworker is cheating, then it is—but if you don’t accept this, you have to discuss it with her.
—Photo denharsh/Flickr
Check This Out…
[…]Here are some of the sites we recommend for our visitors[…]…
This whole things about “what is cheating” is a great example of the three most important things in a relationship: communication, communication, communication. What “being faithful” mans to you is a really important conversation, one every couple should be having, and yet one that many couples never have – because “we all know what it means” etc. Truth is, there’s about as many interpretations of “faithful” and “cheating” as there’s relationships. Don’t go around assuming you know what your partner wants. Don’t let yourself fall into some script you think is the standard that must be followed. Have the conversation,… Read more »
Heh — I’ve been there. I spent about six years in a relationship wherein my spouse and I both were open to the idea of sex with other people — but within which respecting both sets of personal standards left monogamy (for me) as the only course of action which would stay within both of our comfort zones for the relationship. She was fine with me having no-strings-attached (safe) sex, but only under circumstances (such as professional engagements) wherein any possibility of emotional attachment was foreclosed. Moreover, if I took advantage of the blanket permission she granted, she didn’t want… Read more »
I like the illustration, which is a little more provocative than the article itself. A good reminder of the fact that we’re talking about issues that tap into deep, fierce feelings.
I’m sure the graffiti writer meant it to be sarcastic and rhetorical.
What a lot of people are afraid to consider is that maybe the real, true response to the graffiti was, “Yes, as a matter of fact, she was worth it.”
Some good general wisdom here, but I got stuck on one of the highlighted quotes: “You’re in this relationship to make each other happy, not anxious or miserable.” I agree with this sentiment, but I’m not comfortable with it as a literal statement. You can’t actually MAKE someone else happy. Ultimately your partner’s happiness is his or her responsibility. If you’re a loving partner you can make a big difference towards her happiness, but totally depending on someone else for your happiness is not a healthy approach. If your main goal in a relationship is to make someone else happy… Read more »
No, I didn’t mean that statement literally–you’re right, being happy is each person’s responsibility. I simply meant that you’re in a relationship to give your partner a chance to be happier.
Well, crap. I meant to put that comment on another piece. Whoops! Sorry.
It’s OK–hopefully the editors will delete it. 🙂
“Porn does not automatically negate a man’s love for his family or the part of him that is capable of love, though of course, it certainly doesn’t help those qualities to grow.” The image you paint right before this line is what I think is really going on for most people when they’re so freaked out about their partners porn usage. We are socialized to believe that men are really just wild animals in need of a woman to tame them and that underneath whatever civilized exterior they adopt to make us ladies happy, there’s a beast just wishing it… Read more »
Thanks, Nan, but is this the article you meant to comment on?
Thank you, Mark. I couldn’t agree more. Incidentally, what you wrote about is one of the reliable standbys in sex addiction recovery work. In early recovery, there’s so much confusion about what passes as “healthy” sexuality and what is over the line, something most addicts have sorely crossed over repeatedly. Refreshing then, that in this highly complex field, there is a simple adage that works: Don’t do something you wouldn’t do with your partner standing right there next to you. It’s actually “the Golden Rule”: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” Words to live by….… Read more »
Thanks, Lili, that’s wonderful of you to say! I have to say something about Golden Rule ethics, however, one flaw with which is that it puts everything in terms of how that person wants to be treated rather than how others want to be treated. For instance, it could be used to justify a man (or woman) having, say, oral sex outside his relationship if he honestly wouldn’t mind his partner doing the same, regardless of how his partner might feel about it. The Golden Rule can be a wonderful place to begin an ethical discussion, and it may prevent… Read more »
True enough, Mark…thanks for pointing that important distinction out. I was thinking that even the adage about “not doing anything we wouldn’t want our partner to see us doing”, might apply using that logic too, no? Using the contentious issue of porn use, for example, a man (or woman) might entitle themselves to use it, figuring it’s ok since they wouldn’t mind their partner finding out about their use. But unless that arrangement is specifically agreed upon in advance, it would be presumptuous for the person to use it on those grounds. (Much like Hugo was saying in his article… Read more »
Absolutely, yes–as you point out, Lili, they’re basically the same thing. Again, the Golden Rule can be an eye-opener, a step toward putting oneself in another’s shoes, but unless one considers the other person’s opinions, the ethical consideration is never complete. At worst, it ends up being “lowest common denominator” ethics–the person who has the loosest moral constraints sets the rules.
In my opinion, and I actually do agree with much of what others have written above, it’s absolutely necessary to have parts of the self that are not accessible to one’s partner. This might not extend to adultry. In some ways, a full-disclosure relationship is not only not-desirable, it’s actually impossible. I’ve tended to have very long relationships, with long periods of time before anything sexual took place, so it’s worked for me. This doesn’t fit into an ethical system, of course. But it seems to work. Some of a person’s sexuality is theirs and not their partner’s. So if… Read more »
I would agree with you in spirit, in Henry, but I would still maintain that both partners should agree on what parts of their life they keep secret (extending what I wrote in the article about adultery specifically) and only then keep them secret. I don’t think one partner should decide unilaterally that porn-watching is OK if his partner feels otherwise; if they disagree on things like this, they need to talk about it, even if the result is that they agree not to talk about it in the future (i.e., keep it a secret).
As long as each lives by their own rules. So, if she says watching porn is a no-no, then her watching a steamy romance movie or book that may give rise to thinking of the movie character or someone else is also a no-no. Or having private sessions with a battery operated friend recalling such a movie or book. In order for this to work, there must consistency
I don’t think each has to live by his or her own rules–partners may be uncomfortable with different things and can place different boundaries on each other. The important thing is mutual respect of each other’s comfort zones, not that they necessarily coincide.
“I don’t think each has to live by his or her own rules”
Not being will to live by one’s own rules is called hypocrisy. Hypocrisy seldom leads to long term success in any kind of relationship.
Maybe I was unclear… Imposing rules and then refusing to live by them yourself–if your partner wants you to–is hypocrisy, I agree. But that assumes your partner would impose the same boundaries you would, which is not necessarily the case. (Maybe she doesn’t like him using porn, but he doesn’t mind if she does–does mean she shouldn’t use it, out of some sense of solidarity? She should be willing to stop, of course, but only if he asks her to, and only if she agrees.) What I meant was, partners would adhere to each other’s rules and boundaries, whether they… Read more »
If you look up hypocrite, you won’t find the disclaimer, “if your partner wants you to.” It’s simply : “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” I have yet to see hypocrisy in practice yield positive results long term.
Furthermore, having two sets of standards shows that the motivation is control rather than a true aversion to the behavior.
Eric, I just don’t think that the right way to apply the concept of hypocrisy here. (And I don’t see how two people having different standards of behavior for each other implies control.)
Mark – There is only one way to apply the concept of hypocrisy, use the use the actual definition of the word. Again, there is no element of “if your partner wants you to” related to it. It’s simply making rules (particularly related to matters of morals) that you yourself are unwilling to live by. Here is how Webster’s applies it: “the hypocrites who criticize other people for not voting but who don’t always vote themselves.” Regarding control: expecting your partner to refrain from conduct you are unwilling to getting refrain from is to control them – as opposed to… Read more »
Yes, hypocrisy is defined one way (by that dictionary) but can be applied to many different aspects of a situation, resulting in different results–I think that’s where we disagree. (I come back to this at the end of this comment.) And I agreed that if one partner was “unwilling” to live by the standards they set (if asked to by their partner) would be hypocrisy. I simply maintain that partners can legitimately have different standards. I’m more concerned that neither partner feels betrayed by the other’s behavior, according to each partner’s standards, then that they live by the same exact… Read more »
Mark – Check any lexicographic reference and you will only find that one person is involved in the concept of hypocrisy. You seem to have your own customized definition of hypocrisy. Unfortunately, it’s too late to redefine the term. If one partner expects the other to refrain from getting off using porn (for example) but practices essentially the same thing him/herself, his/her opposing argument is defeated (as there is no basis to claim it wrong/unfair/whatever it s/he’s doing it) and his/her partner is very unlikely to continue to refrain long term. Why should s/he be deprived if his/her partner is… Read more »
I’m not redefining the term, Eric–hear me out. You’re assuming that standards (against porn use, for instance) have to based on ethical generalities that therefore apply equally to both persons. If that were true, then I would agree with you. But I see these standards as deriving from personal preferences, not moral universals, and as such I see no reason that both people should have to adhere to them if only one values them (other than solidarity, as I mentioned above).
Mark – I haven’t assumed that these standards are based on ethical generalities. However, since you mention it, most of the ones related to cheating probably are. Regardless, I only used porn as an example because you did in the article. But, it could be anything. Let’s use ‘having dinner with an ex-girl/boyfriend’ as an example. If I tell my wife that I don’t want her having dinner with any exes (for whatever reason) but I do it myself I am being a hypocrite, which defeats whatever argument I made about not wanting her to do it. Creating a rule… Read more »
OK–I think it just comes down to disagreement over how to apply hypocrisy to this situation.
Mark – I haven’t assumed that these standards are based on ethical generalities. However, since you mention it, most of the ones related to cheating probably are. Regardless, I only used porn as an example because it was cited as an example in the article. But, it could be anything else. Let’s use ‘having dinner with an ex-girl/boyfriend’ as an example. If I tell my wife that I don’t want her having dinner with any exes (for whatever reason) but I do it myself I am being a hypocrite, which defeats whatever argument I made about not wanting her to… Read more »
Sorry, didn’t mean to double post.
“OK–I think it just comes down to disagreement over how to apply hypocrisy to this situation.”
There is no way to disagree on how to apply a term whose definition is clear (no lexicographical debate). Check any dictionary and you will not find the concept (as you argue) of a third person’s agreement or disagreement being applied.
Eric, dictionaries don’t provide complete analyses of terms–if they did, they’d be much longer and philosophers would be out of jobs.
Again, we can agree on the definition but disagree on how it should be applied–and we do, as I explained.
Mark, your application of the term contradicts the basic, common, well known, every day use of the term, the etymology, and the many examples of the use, as shown in many dictionaries.
If you wish your argument to hold water you’ll need to provide evidence that the common application of the term is not as indicated in the various dictionaries but instead as you claim.
OK, but you need to provide evidence of that astounding indictment you make in the beginning of your last comment too–it would be hypocritical not to, don’t you think? 😉
Happy to. Please provide yours first, as already requested.
Well, to be fair, you made an accusation that you want me to defend myself against, but which you have yet to explain. But I would really rather not get into an extended discussion on the nature of hyporcrisy, so can we call it a day?
I haven’t made any accusation or indictment, just a statement of fact that virtually every adult has at one time or other applied the term hypocrisy in the same common way I and the dictionaries apply it.
Whereas, your argument remains unsupported. If you want to leave it that way, it’s OK by me.
OK… this is my THIRD *[make that FOURTH!!] time typing this, and my carefully composed words have been lost to the ether not once but TWICE [make that THREE TIMES!]. (Does Good Men Project have some annoying kind of auto-reset mechanism when the page has been open for a while? If so, it really needs fixing!) I will try again, and save diligently every half-minute or so! This is in reply to Eric M. If I sound a bit testy, it’s more about the possible webpage glitch than anything else! 😛 Okey dokey then… Eric, you said “… if she… Read more »
Thanks, mofo–glad you liked it, and I like the points you made as well.
Don’t ask. Don’t tell.
Obviously, the sacred female draws all the lines, and I have to disagree with your implication that women cheat too, women don’t cheat, only men can cheat because only men are responsible for their own actions, they are also responsible for the actions of women. So when women “cheat,” its in reality her male partner that has cheated.
…This doesn’t even make sense.
I think this was an attempt at sarcasm, which fell a bit flat. One of the complaints some people have is that women have no responsibility for their actions, and so taken to the extreme one might say since in every transgression there is a responsible party, and the woman is never responsible, it must therefore be the man at fault.
I don’t agree with any of that, but I think that’s what he was trying to convey.
When I am in a relationship, the formula is really simple. I only do things I would still do if my partner were standing right next to me. No stress.
I wholeheartedly agree with this perspective. I would add that if you wouldn’t do it with your partner right next to you, you may want to reconsider it. Thanks for putting this in terms of the relationship.
Thanks, Lesli!