Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Sex and Relationships

Is Cheating Ever OK?

By Greta Christina, The Blowfish Blog. Posted July 11, 2008.


If one partner refuses to have sex, does the other have the right to seek it elsewhere?
Advertisement

Is cheating on your partner ever okay?

For a long time, I thought the answer was "no." And a pretty unequivocal "no," at that. I thought that people should keep their promises -- especially important promises -- and if one of those promises was a promise to be monogamous, then so be it. If you weren't willing to be monogamous, I thought, then you shouldn't make a promise to be it.

But as the years have gone by, my thinking on this has been changing. My thinking has been changed a lot -- or rather, has become clarified -- by a series of columns that sex advice columnist Dan Savage has been writing about sexless marriages and relationships, and the unfairness of denying your partner sex and then getting outraged when they seek it elsewhere. And my thinking was put into sharp focus by, of all places, a recent episode of "Secret Diary of a Call Girl," and a passing comment made on the subject by the main character, the call girl Belle.

The comment: "Yeah, he's married. But his wife hasn't had sex with him for five years, so I suppose they're both breaking the marriage contract." Which is the crux of my new, revised thinking about cheating.

In a perfect world, everyone would spell out their sexual desires and expectations -- their Yeses and Nos and Maybes, their Must Haves and No Fucking Ways and Only If You Get Me Drunk And Buy Me Diamondses -- early on in their relationships. It wouldn't solve all these little misunderstandings; needs and desires can change, and people in love can be first-class experts at deluding themselves into thinking their piddly little problems will work themselves out. But the misunderstandings wouldn't be quite so prevalent as they are now.

In reality, though, we don't live in a perfect world. The imperfect reality is that there are a whole host of default assumptions that most people make when they get into relationships.

One of those assumptions is monogamy. In modern American culture, it's generally assumed that a romantic and sexual relationship will be monogamous, unless you agree otherwise.

But another of these default assumptions, I think, is sex. It's also generally assumed that a romantic and sexual relationship will be, well, sexual. (With reasonable exceptions to be made for times of illness or great stress, of course.)

And now, let's take a look at ethics and contracts. Because another thing that's generally understood in our society is that, if one person breaks their side of an agreement, the other person is under no obligation whatsoever to keep theirs.

I don't know enough about the law to know if this concept always holds true in legal contracts (although my understanding is that it usually does). But I would argue that it does hold true in the social contract. If you promise to sweep the sidewalk on Tuesdays if your neighbor does it on Fridays, and you start blowing it off, you have no right to expect your neighbor to keep it up. If I promise to help you move if you take me out for pizza after, and I flake out on helping you move, I have no right to expect pizza. If you skank out on your half of a bargain, you have no right to assume that the other party will stick to theirs.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: cheating, monogamy, relationships

Read more of Greta Christina at her blog.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Sex and Relationships! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Monogamy is a myth
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Jul 11, 2008 7:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Monogamy is a myth Posted by: synx
Sexless = Sexual replacement
Posted by: curiousdwk on Jul 12, 2008 5:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that if party A doesn't want sex, party B should have the right to seek it elsewhere without guile. Sex is a drive - like hunger. One cannot be forced to go without without damage (to one's psyche in this case).

I'm probably getting myself in hot water here, but I thought this about Bill Clinton. How do we know if Hillary just didn't want sex or perhaps preferred sex with women (or younger men, or whatever). Without knowing more of the sexual lives than we knew, I didn't feel comfortable passing any judgment on him. And I felt uncomfortable with the number of people who wanted to pass judgment on him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Monogamy is a Sacred Cow in Our Society
Posted by: Libertine on Jul 12, 2008 7:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps the question should be "Should monogamy always be an unquestioned part of every intimate relationship", rather than, "Is 'cheating' ever OK?"

While monogamy isn't natural for human beings in general, some people have an easier time being monogamous than others. The intensity of libido, of sex drive, varies widely among people. Monogamy is, perhaps, easier among those with roughly matching sex drives, and easiest among those with moderate to low libidos, where variety and/or novelty isn't high on their list of sexual needs. With a couple where both partners have relatively low libidos, a sexual dry spell would not necessarily make them want to look elsewhere for sexual gratification. Monogamy tends to work well for such people.

But for those of us with moderately high to very high libidos and/or where variety and novelty is important, monogamy is akin to the restrictor plates that NASCAR uses at superspeedways to limit how fast the cars can go. That is, there's a lot of power (sex drive) being thwarted to keep it within socially accepted limits.

If you've got a couple with mismatched libidos, as described here, you've got a recipe for frustration for the one with the higher libido. Such couples may be well-matched otherwise, but the expectation of strict monogamy in such instances can ruin what was otherwise a good marriage.

Likewise, there are instances where one partner becomes chronically ill or disabled and is no longer able to have sex. Is it fair to expect the healthy partner to satisfied with "just cuddling" for the rest of their lives?

Another related sacred cow is that many people believe that sex and love must always go together; that the only "proper" reason to have sex is as a way to express love for one's partner. But in reality, people have sex for many different reasons in addition to love: to fill a physical need similar to eating, sleeping and so on, a stress reliever, they're horny, etc. I'm of the opinion that as long as sex is between consenting adult partners, there is no one "proper" justification for sex.

In addition to questioning the assumption that all intimate relationships must always be monogamous, no matter what, we need to question the assumption that the only proper reason to have sex is to express love for one's partner. Perhaps then, couples with mismatched libidos or those with a disabled partner who are otherwise happily married, could continue to be happily married without one partner being sexually frustrated.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

avoiding the real issue
Posted by: hcxholly on Jul 12, 2008 1:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although Christina does point out that the issue should be talked about- I'm afraid that communication is the real answer to this problem, NOT seeking sex outside of a monogamous relationship. Cheating isn't going to fix a problem; it's only going to exacerbate existing ones and create new ones. Marriage is so more than just a contract. Although one may say sex is not just about love, marriage (or an agreed-to monogamous relationship) IS. Compromises can be made when it comes to a difference in libido that will satisfy both partners that do not have to include cheating. If thats okay with both partners, then all right. But if it's going to drastically hurt one partner, it's not worth it.

I've seen both sides of this issue, including from being the one with the higher libido. With my first pregnancy my libido was decreased to nil- and my husband told me he would be perfectly happy never having sex again as long as he was with me. So I'm afraid this article comes across as just excuses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

how could cheating be justified?
Posted by: marlino on Jul 12, 2008 7:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
your article was good for opening discussion on a pretty sensitive issue to most people - whichever end they find themselves on.
although you clearly point out that the issue is fraught with complexities that you did not elaborate on in order to push your point, there is a huge factor that wasn't really stated that I feel is crucial: honesty.
Vows / intentions aside, "cheating" is when the partner having the sex on the side is doing so secretly. while the partner not providing the expected sex is hiding...what?
it's one thing to satisfy natural and normal urges but it's entirely different when one is leading a double-life. whether it's through casual, infrequent sex or more involved, ongoing affairs - the other partner in the monogamous relationship is the victim when they're kept in the dark.
And if the cheating partner is still occasionally successful at getting the other partner to have sex with her/him? How fair is it to the non-cheating partner to not be given a real choice?
When the cheating partner is pretending to still be monogamous for the other - going through the motions of working out problems, planning their lives, etc. AND assuming that the other partner is being true to her/him - then the cheating becomes self-delusion.
Which brings me to my point - how can a couple ever work out problems between each other including the differing needs for sex when the cheater has one hand under the table?
Is it that you're trying to point out that monogamous relationships ought to end sooner than they do when sexual differences become problems? Or that it's okay to actually go behind your partner's back?
And if you're simply questioning whether monogamy is even doable in this (or any) day and age, I'd say that's a fair question and one many people ponder.
But to justify cheating (secretly having sex with others outside of a monogamous relationship) simply because one's needs aren't being met is atrocious. It's not about the sex anymore. It's about intimacy. It's about respect. And it's about trust.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's never so simple
Posted by: enji on Jul 12, 2008 9:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As others have commented, I too feel the default of monogamy needs to be questioned, but that the lack of communication and dishonesty that comes with cheating are not acceptable responses to the lack of a sex life.

I love the practical no-nonsense way Dan Savage approaches this issue.

I think what's missing here, but is included in Savage's advice, is the understanding that people change. People can change in drastic ways. People who get into relationships in their teens and twenties are still growing up. Physiologically and emotionally they are still unfinished. It is wishful thinking to suppose that contracts, agreements, understandings that are created in those years will still apply to the 30 or 40 something. Add to the mix the unexpected life experiences that change perspectives, and that person 20 years later is even more so a different person.

Understandings in relationships need always to be revisited, renegotiated, and recommitted to. To assume a default is asking for failure.

It has been my experience that allowing for this uncertainty, expecting it, makes the present ever more precious, and commitment even more certain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Responsibility
Posted by: JayRome on Jul 13, 2008 6:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a wonderful text that everyone would benefit from Love Without Limits by Dr. Deborah Anapol. In fact, it should be a required text in Junior high, not to promote polyamory, per se, but to offer an alternate perspective for sexual lifestyle choices. Oh, I know, it'd go over like a lead balloon, but reading above and beyond polyamory the text offers a primary way of relating that includes good communication, honesty, clarity, and sexuality that goes beyond just immediate physical gratification and encompasses a sexuality that includes the spiritual dimension - NOT religion - but the energy body, a sharing on an etheric level, and a sexuality that includes responsibility and consequences.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horrible
Posted by: Love Me, I'm a Liberal on Jul 14, 2008 9:49 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, terrible article. Patriarchy apolgism on how it's okay to fuck prostitutes behind your SOs back. Internalized sexism trying to befriend the misogynists while selling out the womens. Shame!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Horrible Posted by: easter
A Question Worthy
Posted by: talkville on Jul 15, 2008 6:13 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is it ever OK to cheat? Worthy of Stoics, of Cynics, Epicureans, Hedonists, of Patriarchs of the Desert Religions, of Ascetics of all degrees and preferences. Worthy of at least a few years of Medieval Scholastic Exegesis and Hermeneutics applied to the Sacred Text of The Book. It has occupied countless Country Squires such as Adam Smith, Hume, Locke, Bentham, Mills, and all those other Moral Philosophers of that Enlightenment and rise of Right Reason of the 17th and 18th centuries. It has occupied those pinnacles of German High Idealism culminating with Kant and Hegel. And then Rousseau, Pascal, Descartes in France and a multitude of Aristocrats (who hasn't heard of DeSade?). It pre-occupies us.

And the question starts at each birth anew for the Single One: "I'm supposed to be this way, perhaps just this once....."; "I choose to live in this way; but just this once....". And then it enters into relations with an Other. Continuity, consistency, permanence, fixity, perfection,non-deviation, eternal from beginning to end. A Sentence in the Book of Nature. One Sentence made of Two Writers, perhaps, or Many, or One.

"In reality, though, we don't live in a perfect world. The imperfect reality is that there are a whole host of default assumptions that most people make when they get into relationships."

It's those "default assumptions"! Certainly at the least a Host of them! And if these assumptions are Not-Human?

I think any answer will be outlived by the question. It's posed anew, each time with each birth of a human child entering into relations and relationships with the existing conditions which meet him or her. After all, it's a human question. Now, as for those 'default assumptions'... Ah! perhaps some hints to progress and development for we humans? Lots there to take a studied look at; some parts are well-hidden, well-protected, well-fortified. "Access Denied!" By whom? Uber-humans? gods? Demi-gods?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Never lose the respect or passion!
Posted by: purplemoon0130 on Jul 17, 2008 9:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Taking your vows seriously is No.1 in a relationship.
Sex and money are the biggest issues causing divorce these days. Couples are giving up too easily and many times after the first major arugment, they want a divorce! WORK OUT and TALK about the problem before ending it. When there is a sex problem, analyze the "reason" WHY there's that problem and try to fix THAT before jumping into someone's else's arms. 90% of the time it's the women who have the "don't wants". Right? Women normally don't think or "feel" emotionally the same as men. Many men don't need affection, passion, romance and all the "mushy" stuff. But most women do!! Women don't walk around with an erection most of the day..haha..and think about sex 200 times a day! If a woman doesn't want to "make love"...her definition of it...and men it's usually "pure sex actions"..and she isn't getting the "emotional" needs met to turn her on, the majority of the time the answer will be no. Sometimes with the woman growing resentment inside of her for feeling like a sexual doormat! And yes, I'm speaking from my own experiences and the experience of so many of my women friends. Oh, there are exceptions in some women, but I'm speaking of the majority. A woman needs to BE turned on. Only being touched for sexual play turns off many women!! They end up feeling angry, used and unloved. Men just don't bother having the "pansy", romantic playing, gentle touches and kisses on the neck, hands, etc. with whispers in the ears and you get the picture, that turns a woman into a tiger!! If more men would practice this and make his woman feel sexy and desired as a woman and not just for sex, the needing to find "outside" sex partners would disappear or lessen enormously! I know many men don't want to go through this drawn out process, but too many women don't feel loved or passionatley desired, leaving her wanting no part to have that boring sex or feeling used inside. Get it??

And to add: Many men are very selfish when it comes to satisfaction. As long as they get their pleasure ending, they could care less about their woman having the same. What woman wants to keep having sex with a man that NEVER satisfies her? NONE!!!! So men, use your brains or get educated in the "lovemaking" department. Women just don't think like men in many areas of life. Emotions have a large part in it. So men, LEARN it!!! You just may find out you have that bedroom tigress after all! Always make it special if that's what it takes. It may be work, but what funner "work" is there really? HaHa
Then, in many cases, the married individuals just get thrilled with the "new" stuff even if they are getting sex every night at home. Those are the types that should never marry in the first place. Not everyone is cracked up to be married and be magonamous.

Remember this vital saying: Always treat your wife like your girlfriend and always treat your husband like your boyfriend. Never take each other for granted..EVER!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cheating, or truly honest discussion?
Posted by: Dr. Bonnie on Jul 19, 2008 5:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As you touched on in this post, before it comes to sleeping with a person other than your partner, a truly honest, open dialogue needs to happen. This can often be a long and painful process – bringing it up briefly doesn't count! If one person is at the point of considering seeking sex outside the relationship, the other person deserves to know that. This in itself may be a wakeup call.

A relationship should be fulfilling for both people – a sexless relationship usually isn't truly fulfilling for anyone, even the person withholding sex. So while yes, the person opposed to having sex may be breaking their half of the bargain, chances are, deep down, they are not happy about it.

It is this discontentedness on both peoples' part that could be the crux of a compelling conversation BEFORE one person turns to an affair to “solve” the problem. I deal a lot with couples who have problems – even affairs (physical and emotional) – because of differences over money, and I treat these issues much as I would a sexual affair (or, in this case, a potential sexual affair) and encourage couples to dialogue in what I call the “Smart Heart Dialogue.” These practices can be applied in situations that aren't necessarily related to money. Basically, it relies on validating each person's feelings and giving them a safe place to be honest. If you're the person wanting – and not getting – sex, you may be angry about this. But the person who is withholding sex may be upset about something too, which could be what led to the sexless relationship in the first place. This is not to brush off what's going on in the relationship – quite the opposite – it's to give each person a platform to be heard and not judged, not retaliated against, while they are going through what could be a huge shift in the relationship.

For people in a sexless relationship this doesn't necessarily happen without help from a therapist or counselor, particularly if this problem is long-standing. But this is what I mean about a truly open, honest dialogue. You need to do whatever it takes to save your relationship – NOT consider one person's reneging the justification to pursue an additional relationship. Just because one person is breaking your vows or agreement doesn't give the other person license to do whatever they want. It should be a red flag that there is something that needs to be worked on – bringing a third person “into” the relationship rarely ever solves problems!

Dr. Bonnie
www.docbon.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If the Brother can afford it.....
Posted by: pangolin on Jul 23, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He gets to cheat. Women have so many 'out the door' clauses that range from 'don't touch my ass' to 'if you're back goes out so do you' and the ever popular 'my dog/cat was here before you mister,' that there really is no committment of contract left in our society.

A relationship lasts as long as it does and each player is a completely free agent. All contracts not enforcable by law are null and void. So go ahead and cheat, she's cheating on you if she can get it. Be sure of that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]