Is Chatting With A Member Of The Opposite Sex Cheating?

[Peikko 1,575]

Who gives a damn what the neighbours think? I don't. There is no such thing as a compromising situation but someone who is kidding themselves about being in a monogomous relationship can obviously compromise that relationship. Being in the face of temptation does not mean that one ever has to yeild to it or even give it the time of day. Integrity is not that hard to maintain if you understand what it means.

Edited March 10, 2008 by Purple_Hibiscus

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Speaking for myself, whether I care what the neighbors think depends entirely on who the neighbors are.

In my own neighborhood, I don't care so much since I don't know any of them too well.

But if I were to take a short 5 minute drive to my parents neighborhood and buy a house there, I'd care. The neighbors there know me. They've known me for a long time. And what's worse, they know my parents and all their friends. I'd care about appearances there, for their sake, if not for mine.

Which is why I live here... and not there.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven, you have to admit that you're a fairly jealous guy. I think if you are not afflicted with jealousy, you won't care who they invite over.

Both of us are like that and we're not alone in sharing that view. There are just some situations where I wouldn't feel comfortable putting myself in and I would presume than many married couples have varying thresholds of what they are comfortable with. What matters, IMO, is how both partners address those concerns (insecurities, jealousy...whatever you want to call it) and then find a compromise both can live with. I think people are kidding themselves if they think that because they are in a happy marriage and there is mutual trust, they could never be unfaithful to their partner (and you don't have to sleep with another person to be unfaithful). Infidelity happens to good people in good marriages sometimes and although it seems appropriate to blame it on bad judgment or untrustworthiness, I think we have a responsibility to not put ourselves in compromising situations.

I don't feel like I'm always on the verge of cheating on my spouse and I have to restrain myself at every turn. I don't *want* to cheat on my spouse. I can confidently say there is no situation that I could be in that would make me cheat on my husband unless deep down I wanted to throw away my relationship. I know the temptation to cheat theoretically comes up in every marriage, but I'm not a werewolf who turns into an adulterer at midnight. I can control myself.

I don't feel like I'm on the verge of cheating either. That's a bit of polarizing it to one extreme over another - being in control of one's action vs. being out of control. Good people who are in good marriages are capable of making bad decisions that could lead to unfaithfulness and it's not as simple as saying that because your spouse was unfaithful was because they aren't otherwise trustworthy partners.

[Alex+R 0]

When you say " decisions that could lead to unfaithfulness" you take the agency away from the person. Like they make a decision and are compelled to cheat and can't resist. So how is that not an issue of control?

[eric&gen 0]

Whats the point of being married if one must chat on line with other strange guys means they are not happy together? if they are friends from high school or college groups then that is OK.

[Fuzzness 2]

If you think that chatting with a member of the opposite sex is cheating....... you shouldn't be married

[mogdog 0]

Why would someone need a new chat buddy? A vast majority of the people on this website including myself met our others online. We all know where "innocent chatting" can lead. My wife and I had this same discusion not long ago. As I told her, I trust you but it's not proper for you to chat with other men. I will not chat with other women because there is no need to.

[Ban Hammer 13,364]

Charles, my neighbors called me a motherfcuker through the wall last night and they haven't even met me. I don't think anything I do will make them like me now.

you were cooking dinner and setting off the fire alarms again weren't you?

No, I asked them to be quiet. Although tonight I was boiling water and I burned the pot's handle because the flames were jumping up too high so now our apartment smells like melting plastic. Blechh.

alex burns water...film at 11

[Jenn! 918]

If you think that chatting with a member of the opposite sex is cheating....... you shouldn't be married

People are allowed to set the rules for their own relationships. Some people are much more conservative...as long as it works for them.

Anyway, I don't think chatting is cheating, though I have no desire to chat with internet men. I think message boards are a different thing.

[Caladan 19]

When you say " decisions that could lead to unfaithfulness" you take the agency away from the person. Like they make a decision and are compelled to cheat and can't resist. So how is that not an issue of control?

I don't see Stephen saying it's an issue of control, but an issue of not seeking out temptation, whatever that is for you. Non-relationship example: I like eating chips and salsa much more than is good for my figure, so I don't keep them in the house. Relationship example: People who know they are likely to cheat when they go out to bars and get drunk shouldn't go out and get drunk and then say 'oops, I didn't meant to cheat, I was drunk.' It does take agency away from them, but that's why we invented the term 'weakness of will.'

That's all tangential to the control issue. As to why someone would need a new chat buddy, though, there's lots of reasons if the spouse is foreign, doesn't speak the language, and wants to make new friends in the area while the spouse is working all day (and they can't work, or drive.) And I think one spouse setting rules for the other is right out.

[Peikko 1,575]

When you say " decisions that could lead to unfaithfulness" you take the agency away from the person. Like they make a decision and are compelled to cheat and can't resist. So how is that not an issue of control?

I don't see Stephen saying it's an issue of control, but an issue of not seeking out temptation, whatever that is for you. Non-relationship example: I like eating chips and salsa much more than is good for my figure, so I don't keep them in the house. Relationship example: People who know they are likely to cheat when they go out to bars and get drunk shouldn't go out and get drunk and then say 'oops, I didn't meant to cheat, I was drunk.' It does take agency away from them, but that's why we invented the term 'weakness of will.'

That's all tangential to the control issue. As to why someone would need a new chat buddy, though, there's lots of reasons if the spouse is foreign, doesn't speak the language, and wants to make new friends in the area while the spouse is working all day (and they can't work, or drive.) And I think one spouse setting rules for the other is right out.

Again, I just don't get this notion that it is normal or acceptable to place conditions on when one can trust oneself. Weakness in this context is either not understanding what a monogomous commitment is, or at some level an unwillingness to accept that you are in a monogomous relationship. I would not marry someone who knew they could be trusted in some situations but not in others because that would show me they are not ready for that type of commitment.

As far as not wanting to create new friendships once you are married, again, I just don't understand it. This is particulary true when one partner moves into a totally new area, rather like we all do when we move to a new country. We are leaving behind all our day to day social ties and to expect that person to not be able to develop new ones or only develop new ones subject to a specific set of rules is a form of control that I can envisage would lead to problems at some point in time.

I understand that some people suggest that their partner willingly execpts the controls that are placed upon them, however, that doesn't make it right, or guarentee that at some point the person being controlled will not rebel against their constraints.

Edited March 10, 2008 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Bassi and Zainab 1]

my best friend is a guy. just TALKING isn't cheating... i agree with Kazan' Tiger, unless it turns into phone/cyber sex.

We were talking about something similar in the regional forum, and I guess the reality is not if it's right or wrong (for me, of course) but rather if it makes one of us feel uncomfortable. Sometimes you have to go with your gut and show respect for your partner's feelings. My fiance was uncomfortable with me spending time alone with one of my close male friends. So I brokered a meeting and now they are also friends. He's more comfortable now. Everything's cool. If somehow, he was uncomfortable even after meeting, I have to respect his feelings as I choose to be in a relationship with him. And vice versa. If it's online and one can't talk with the other or something secretive is occuring then there is a problem and it's inappropriate.

[Bassi and Zainab 1]

When you say " decisions that could lead to unfaithfulness" you take the agency away from the person. Like they make a decision and are compelled to cheat and can't resist. So how is that not an issue of control?

I don't see Stephen saying it's an issue of control, but an issue of not seeking out temptation, whatever that is for you. Non-relationship example: I like eating chips and salsa much more than is good for my figure, so I don't keep them in the house. Relationship example: People who know they are likely to cheat when they go out to bars and get drunk shouldn't go out and get drunk and then say 'oops, I didn't meant to cheat, I was drunk.' It does take agency away from them, but that's why we invented the term 'weakness of will.'

That's all tangential to the control issue. As to why someone would need a new chat buddy, though, there's lots of reasons if the spouse is foreign, doesn't speak the language, and wants to make new friends in the area while the spouse is working all day (and they can't work, or drive.) And I think one spouse setting rules for the other is right out.

Again, I just don't get this notion that it is normal or acceptable to place conditions on when one can trust oneself. Weakness in this context is either not understanding what a monogomous commitment is, or at some level an unwillingness to accept that you are in a monogomous relationship. I would not marry someone who knew they could be trusted in some situations but not in others because that would show me they are not ready for that type of commitment.

As far as not wanting to create new friendships once you are married, again, I just don't understand it. This is particulary true when one partner moves into a totally new area, rather like we all do when we move to a new country. We are leaving behind all our day to day social ties and to expect that person to not be able to develop new ones or only develop new ones subject to a specific set of rules is a form of control that I can envisage would lead to problems at some point in time.

I understand that some people suggest that their partner willingly execpts the controls that are placed upon them, however, that doesn't make it right, or guarentee that at some point the person being controlled will not rebel against their constraints.

It sounds like you are implying that when people are inebriated they aren't out of control. That would seem contrary to basic bodily mechanics.

[Nessa 23]

If it were me chatting with a memeber of the oppsoste sex would be an automatic divorce. I've seen this turn from innocent chatting to divorce several times with family and friends. Want a friend? Get a dog.

seriously?????????????????????????? shouldn't you trust your spouse to have FRIENDS?

I encorage her to have friends. I draw the line at chatting with other men though (relatives excluded). Call it control or what you will but I have would have a problem with her chatting with another man on a computer that I bought, over the Internet that I pay for, on the time that she has free because I support her.

I was gonna go with control, but borderline abusive seems more appropriate. Wow, I'll bet your wife feels great knowing you own everything, and ahs no right to use her time as she wishes.

Are you afraid your wife might meet someone less controlling out there and the prospect might end up being enticing?

I totally agree with you.

[nana_356 0]

Its not cheating, but it is deceitful.