Anyone cheated on someone they were with?

Post Reply New Topic

Fnord, that is a cop out answer. Of course it's an agreement or it wouldn't have been mentioned. If you have such views, you won't have any problems clarifying that with the person you start a relationship with (as PTSmorrow said), correct?

This sounds like borrowing $20 from a work friend and agreeing to pay him back on payday. Payday comes and he asks for his $20 and you just laugh at him, saying, "Well you never signed a contract with me so tough luck - you ain' gettin' it! Haw-haw!"

If you make any agreement with someone, you can honour it and have integrity - or you can ignore it and be selfishly cruel.

If people are just in those early stages of dating and NO commitments have been made yet, that's a whole different ball game.

If you're stupid enough to enter into an agreement with no intention intention of honoring it, then sooner or later no one will want to enter into an agreement with you at all.

The trick is to avoid any commitments while you can still "play the field", thus avoiding any form of "cheating".

Fnord, listen to your own advice

I do.

I decided to stop "playing the field" long before I even met my wife, so the commitment of engagement and marriage was no problem for me.

It's those people who've dated once and then believe that they are "committed" that I have to laugh at.

One date does not a commitment make, nor is there a full commitment until the wedding is over.

For once ... we agree.

As a single adult, it was not unusual for a woman to suggest moving in with me after the second or third date -- they'd often "mark their territory" with a few personal items after having spent only one night.

Sex is not a commitment; nor is it a proposal of marriage.

Fnord, those are extreme behaviours. If someone suggested moving in after 2 or 3 dates, I would run, until I couldn't stop.

No, sex isn't a commitment, but having a relationship is. And being a responsible adult, is making clear all boundaries are established from the start. If playing the field is what a man wants, then he needs to make it clear. As does a woman, because this isn't exclusive to men.

on of my co-workers is dating a girl and he tried to avoid the label of being her "boyfriend". mostly because he was quite unsure on if he liked her enough for a commitment. so while hes dating her, he is also still online talking to and planning dates with other girls. if she found out, she would be quite hurt because she does want to be steady with him, its just mutual. so in their case, sex or no sex, clear commitment or not, he can still hurt her. and btw these people are both NT.

if the whole goal of the topic is, at what point is it allowed, the answer morally should be never. if someone is going to be hurt, then something wrong is happening. this can be fixed if people are more honest upfront about how they really feel and what their needs really are. some people really just need the exciting sex that cant come from their partner, who they deeply love. they should just talk about an open relationship. for the other side, people who wanted the emotion that comes with sex, then chances are the relationship is broken and typically done for unless they have kids and are willing to just push through.

I moved.


Define "relationship". From my perspective, any two people who know each other have a relationship. They could be enemies, friends, lovers, partners, semi-strangers with benefits, friends with benefits, platonic lovers ... the list goes on. The only people who don't have relationships with each other are those who have never met.


Is that why women invented The Rules?


Men are simpler in this respect -- unless we explicitly state that we want exclusive commitment, the default arrangement is more "open". With women, it seems to be the other way around -- the default state is exclusivity and commitment.

... but that's just my opinion...

We are talking about a sexual/intimate/emotional connection. Obviously, as I wouldn't be talking about cheating on my enemies.

To define the intimate relationship, that's *when*, you decide if it is to be exclusive, platonic, lovers, partners, and so on.

I don't think it's women who think the default system is set to exclusivity. That's why I ask. Because I have the right to decide whether I want to be with someone, if he is going to be dishing it out to everyone else. That's what being adult and responsible is all about. If someone wants to play games, they are welcome to do so, but not with me.

Then you have those who are troglodytes and expect the woman to be faithful but think it's OK for men to do it. Rubbish!

But then again, I seriously doubt you would be wanting to go anywhere, if I was in a romantic relationship with you. I had one person cheat on me once (that I know of) and it was a woman. So, I am quietly confident. Plus, I am not the type to nag, I ask once, I trust you, you slip, you're gone. Simple really.

half those rules will make sure women are single, the other half are just "be happy and get out there".
id be worried for anyone who read that book.

I'd be worried (if I were single) if I knew my girlfriend had read "The Rules" or subscribed to "Cosmopolitan" or any of the numerous bride's magazines. They all seemed to be focused on their eventual wedding, and not necessarily on our relationship. Most had no idea of what a real marriage is all about ... those that did seemed to all have lawyers on speed-dial ...

I would assume many Aspie males who struggle with dating/relationships would have an aversion to cheating if they finally managed to get in a relationship.Those who have developed the skills to get in relationships would be more prone towards cheating in my opinion.

Ok you moved, but that's not common when you dated only 2 or 3 times. That's crazy and risky.

"Crazy" is the right word. I was going to move to another state anyway, so it all worked out. That was in the late 1970s.