Cheating??

[Untraceable726]

So my best friend and I were talking about this and she was under the impression that cheating on your relationship partner is more likely to happen in a gay relationship rather then a hetro one. So im curious and you can post aynonmously but I am curious if people out there have done this... Nobody is perfect and ill admit I did this in the past and have learned the hard way so ill be the first to say I did.

[Ultra]

I never cheated in my life and I do not intend to cheat in my lifetime. It's a waste of time. I've been cheated on once.

[toomuch45]

i did break up with boyfriends because of difficult times but ive never cheated on any of them.

[East]

I am not into owning anyone else or being owned and I never promise fidelity so I really can't cheat. What does "cheat" mean anyway? If my lover has sex with another man or woman...do I feel "cheated" in any way? I dont' require fidelity...I do require honesty and I give the same in return. The first thing I am honest about...my ego doesnt' require your world to being with my touch :biggrin:...in fact...I will kick your a*s if you even hint of that nonsense.:eek: I don't need to be anyone's best time or one and only...what a burden to put on myself or someone else. That is not love...it is prison IMHO

[fredv3b]

I define cheating as liaisons outside of the relationship without permission. I suspect that permission is far more likely to be given in a gay relationship than a straight one. I also dare say that the actual rate of such liaisons, with or without permission, is about the same so I suspect that your friend is wrong and cheating is less common.

For the record I am 100% into faithful monogamy.

[princealbertofb]

Which, Fred, might change as time passes by, but might also not, if your relationship is meant to last in the present conditions.
I'd agree with your definition, though. It's about trust, individual freedom and pressure. If a person doesn't feel pressured to act this way or that by rules decreed within the relationship, they are less likely, it seems, to overstep boundaries, aren't they?

[fredv3b]

If a person doesn't feel pressured to act this way or that by rules decreed within the relationship, they are less likely, it seems, to overstep boundaries, aren't they?

If a person doesn't feel under pressure to obey the rules, then they are more likely to obey them??????

That doesn't really make sense to me.

Someone who doesn't like the rules is more likely to 'feel pressured' into obeying them, but he breaks them because he doesn't like them.

[East]

If a person doesn't feel pressured to act this way or that by rules decreed within the relationship, they are less likely, it seems, to overstep boundaries, aren't they?

I think this is true because I have been faithful for almost 25 years without ever promising to be...because I WANT to. I definitely encourage my lover to do what he has to do and for me...it turns me on much more to know he comes home to me because he WANTS to and not because he is bound by some promise.

I have seen so much pain and angst in my life from people who promise to be faithful...and who base their self worth on whether or not someone is faithful to them. I have seen ugly revenge and the worst kind of hate all because of infidelity...I have seen people live out their lives as pathetic victims (drama queens) draining the life out of everyone who will listen to them whine about their unfaithful mates...waste their precious lives because they don't trust other people to not "cheat" on them...look at the divorce rate! So...my question sis...why do people make a promise they may or may not be able to keep? I only make promises I can keep and I am honest about that.,..I think more people should do the same:biggrin:

[princealbertofb]

If a person doesn't feel under pressure to obey the rules, then they are more likely to obey them??????

That doesn't really make sense to me.

Someone who doesn't like the rules is more likely to 'feel pressured' into obeying them, but he breaks them because he doesn't like them.

That's not quite what I said, Fred. I was saying: "Open the boundaries, don't restrict, give a man enough freedom and he will be in a place where he can commit willingly, not because forced to". It acts as a self guard of sorts, and makes a person define their own limits.

It's also about not expecting of someone something that they are unable to give you. You can't blame someone for who they are intrinsically. If they are roamers, then you've got to cut them some slack. If they're homebodies, then it stands to reason to let them stay at home. It doesn't mean that there is no room to explore, but it means that a lot of relationships come to an end because of rules that cannot be enforced and that ultimately fray a relationship at the edges or at its heart.

[fredv3b]

That's not quite what I said, Fred. I was saying: "Open the boundaries, don't restrict, give a man enough freedom and he will be in a place where he can commit willingly, not because forced to". It acts as a self guard of sorts, and makes a person define their own limits.

And what if the limits that he would like to define are much looser than I would like?

It's also about not expecting of someone something that they are unable to give you.

So it's impossible for some men to resist have sex outside of relationships? Do they not have freewill? If they really are unable to control their urges then should they be allowed to do serious jobs, operate heavy machinery, etc?

Wanders just dont want to control their urges. I'd agree that it is in practice foolish to expect them to be faithful, but I certainly don't give them any moral bye when they break promises of fidelity.

Sorry to be so blunt.