Morals of sleeping with a married person

[lavenderviolet]

[QUOTE=Barrington]

It’s just about “should Z say no?”. Please show your working, etc. I’m out of my depth here.
[/QUOTE]

Okay, getting back to the OP:
No, don’t let her visit you until she has worked things out with her family situation.

If things go well in person, you’ll probably end up feeling more attached to her than you did from just online talks, and it will be painful for you to watch her get back on the plane to go back to her hubby.
If things go bad in person, you’ll have destroyed the fun fantasy you had for nothing - except for increasing the risk that her husband will figure things out.

If her husband does figure it out, there is always the small risk that he will figure out what’s going on, track you down, and might somehow take his anger out on you. Men generally do not appreciate it when they find out that another dude is boning their wife, and you never know what extremes a guy who’s in a jealous rage might go to.

Plus there’s the whole guilt of being a “homewrecker”. I’ve always thought it was a good policy to treat other people the way I would want to be treated. Just kind of an idea I came up with all by myself.

[Belrix]

It’s been said, and resaid, and resaid. But I’ll say it again.

If you want a relationship with this woman, wait 'til her first relationship is over. You’re being a first-order dick, in my opinion, if you see this woman behind her husband’s back.

So her sex life is less than fulfilling. A marriage is based on so much more than just sex. Breaking up her marriage for the sake of some fantasy sex is pure selfishness.

Hell, you don’t even know if the sex would be good - right now you’ve been having zipperless fantasies. Dealing with a real-live person, with skin blemishes, zits, cellulite, body odor, and all that other real stuff is no where near your little fantasy game.

You haven’t mentioned if there’s children involved. There’s lives that’ll be forever colored by their mother’s infidelity.

I’m saying this from the position of “B” in this little triad.

Search threads started by me for my whole sordid (and maybe sorted) story.

[VarlosZ]

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
When did we elevate selfish sexual desires to the level of an emotional entitlement? If X wants anal and his wife isn’t into it, does that mean Z isn’t getting his “needs” met and therefore has a right to cheat on his wife?
[/QUOTE]

You’re making an arbitrary distinction. Some people apparently need a certain type and/or amount of sex. If it’s strong enough, it doesn’t matter what the nature of the desire is.

I bet that some people here who are arguing this point or something like it have been influences by sex columnist Dan Savage, who does sometimes advise readers to go ahead and screw around. From here, this is his response to a woman in a long-term relationship who’s interested in a particular guy as a fuck-buddy, and asked about the pros & cons of cheating. You could find plenty of advice from him on the topic of cheating with a Google search.

@Dan Savage

The pros? Sex, excitement, variety. The cons? Discovery, breakup, hellfire. Every idiot knows those pros and cons, SOTS, including you.

But here’s a pro that’s rarely acknowledged: Sometimes cheating can save a long-term relationship. Sometimes only cheating makes it possible for a sexually rejected partner to stay in a relationship that’s worth preserving for other good, valid reasons—like kids, for instance. And sometimes only cheating makes it possible for a person whose partner has a chronic, debilitating illness to stay put and stay sane. In these cases, cheating isn’t just the right thing to do; it’s the decent and honorable thing to do.

Some fuckwits, of course, piously insist that Cheating Is Always Wrong. To the CIAW crowd, I say this: Fuck you, you self-righteous Pollyanna fucktards. I am so sick of CIAW types insisting with one breath that sex and sexual exclusivity are hugely important. Even the contemplation of an affair, to say nothing of its consummation, represents an unforgivable betrayal. And then in the very next breath, CIAWers insist that sex is so unimportant, so colossally trivial, that a person should be able to go without—forever!—if their mate is unwilling or incapable.

You can’t have it both ways, CIAWers. If sex is hugely important, then people can’t be faulted for wanting some; if it’s unimportant, then it shouldn’t be seen as a huge betrayal when some poor fuckers, under duress, are forced to get their needs met elsewhere.

That said, SOTS, I’m not gonna give you a pass. You’re not done with sex, he’s not dying, you don’t have kids—cheating under your particular circumstances can’t be justified. Regardless of what happens with your coworker, SOTS, you need to end this relationship. You’re not all that attracted to your boyfriend emotionally or physically, and you don’t have the kind of entanglements—biological or durational—to rationalize having a fuckbuddy. You need to do the right thing, SOTS, and break up with this guy.

[Rilchiam]

[QUOTE=Belrix]
You haven’t mentioned if there’s children involved. There’s lives that’ll be forever colored by their mother’s infidelity.

[/QUOTE]

He said there are no children. Or at least, he said she said there are no children.

[ShibbOleth]

[QUOTE=VarlosZ]
You’re making an arbitrary distinction. Some people apparently need a certain type and/or amount of sex. If it’s strong enough, it doesn’t matter what the nature of the desire is.

I bet that some people here who are arguing this point or something like it have been influences by sex columnist Dan Savage, who does sometimes advise readers to go ahead and screw around. From here, this is his response to a woman in a long-term relationship who’s interested in a particular guy as a fuck-buddy, and asked about the pros & cons of cheating. You could find plenty of advice from him on the topic of cheating with a Google search.
[/QUOTE]

There’s a flaw in Savage’s argument. He’s conflating sex and fidelity. Those who are in the CIAW camp can simultaneously believe that SEX is not that importand and that FIDELITY is uber-important.

[Chessic_Sense]

[QUOTE=brazil84]
It’s like selling somebody a gun that you know will be used in a robbery.

[QUOTE]

What’s wrong with that?

Look, I won’t tell you it’s right or wrong, I’ll just tell you what it means.

1. You will hurt the husband. Whether you care about that is up to you.
2. You’ll be a wife stealer. That’s a guy that can’t be trusted by other men. Whether you care about that is up to you.
3. You’ll surely have some fun.
4. You’ll realize you don’t love this virtual woman. You just wanted to do her.
5. If you save the woman from herself, that’s a moral victory. If you let her fall, that’s not bad, it’s neutral…like not stopping a murder in Kenya. Not your job.

So weigh all those out. Do you care about being a good guy? I surely wouldn’t hold it against you if you did her. I would also tell my female friends to stay away from you. If that doesn’t matter (and I’m not trying to say it should), then go for it. Invite her over.

[Fish]

[QUOTE=ShibbOleth]
There’s a flaw in Savage’s argument. He’s conflating sex and fidelity.
[/QUOTE]

Pretty much. Extra-marital sex? No problem — if that’s what the couple wants, and agreed to. It’s their genitals, who am I to say? Breaking your promise, saying you want fidelity at first and secretly fucking like monkeys in the back seat of a stranger’s car? That’s not cool.

[essell]

[QUOTE=Testy]
essell

Did you think that was too harsh? Maybe so. The OP (to me) came across as someone determined to do something and simply wanted some people to tell him it was OK to do so. He almost inevitably knows this is a very messed-up thing to do so why even ask the question?

Regards

Testy
[/QUOTE]

Well, I agreed with your interpretation of the OP. I thought it came across that way too. But I didn’t think talking about it on a message board to get support meant he was weak or amoral. Lots of people need reassurance to do something even if they know what’s right.

[Sarahfeena]

[QUOTE=Sunspace]
But from the viewpoint of the functioning of the marriage, it doesn’t matter what the unfulfilled desire is. Either they bring it out into the open and discuss it, and come to some sort of agreement, or it festers in the background.
[/QUOTE]
Of course it matters…a relationship with no sex at all is one thing…a relationship without one particular “sexual adventure” is quite another. People sacrifice much more than that to keep a family together all the time.

Restricting the discussion of desires to something one personally does not like is muddying the argument, IMHO. The only thing that counts is what the people in the marriage want, and aren’t getting. If your spouse doesn’t want something and you do, it does not matter whether it’s some uncommon sexual activity or something as mundane as applesause.

It has nothing to do with whether I personally like it or not…I don’t even know what “it” is. Marriage is about way more than getting what you want. It’s about mutual love, respect, and committment. Sometimes we have to live with things we don’t like or don’t make us completely happy, for the good of the marriage.

The difference of desire is the issue, and either a) the person who doesn’t want something will have to put up with it, b) the person who does want that thing will have to put up with its abscence, or c) everyone will have to make other arrangements.

(c) is an unacceptable option, as far as I’m concerned, morally or ethically.

And this doesn’t hold just for sexual activities. It’s everything from watching football to shopping. All is subject to negotiation.

Only if those things are interfering with being able to lead a reasonably normal and happy life. I can’t imagine a “sexual adventure” that would be worth breaking up a marriage for, especially when there are kids involved.

[Justin_Bailey]

[QUOTE=VarlosZ]
I bet that some people here who are arguing this point or something like it have been influences by sex columnist Dan Savage, who does sometimes advise readers to go ahead and screw around. From here, this is his response to a woman in a long-term relationship who’s interested in a particular guy as a fuck-buddy, and asked about the pros & cons of cheating. You could find plenty of advice from him on the topic of cheating with a Google search.
[/QUOTE]

Wow, I just lost all respect for Dan Savage.

[VarlosZ]

You seem very prickly about this issue, Justin. Would you mind if I asked whether you’ve been cheated on before?

[Justin_Bailey]

I’d prefer not to discuss the reasons for my feelings.

[sturmhauke]

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
Some seem to think that getting a divorce would be the more moral thing to do, I guess.
[/QUOTE]

If a couple can work out their problems openly and honestly, that’s great. But it’s better to get a divorce than to allow the marriage to devolve to a point where they clearly don’t love each other anymore, or even openly hate each other. I know one couple that perhaps loved each other at first. Now, decades later, they constantly snipe at each other in full view of everyone.

[brazil84]

[QUOTE=IntelSoldier]

What’s wrong with that?
[/quote]

A lot of the time, it’s wrong to help somebody do something that is itself wrong. (I’m sure there are exceptions to this rule.)

[robardin]

[QUOTE=Barrington]
Neither A nor Z can resist the temptation, despite the risks involved, and despite being acutely aware that a stable marriage is in danger of being badly damaged or even destroyed by the meeting.

The question is simply this: should Z say “no, don’t come” to A for the sake of B, or even to protect A and B’s marriage against A’s express wishes?

…I’m out of my depth here. (And yes, I am Z.)
[/QUOTE]

Does this pass the mirror test? When the fun is done, and A returns to Z, will you look in the mirror and respect yourself? Or will you feel… empty, like you sold a piece of yourself for something you’re not sure was worth it?

Does this pass the reciprocity test? If you were B, how would you feel if A did this to you? Can you personally reconcile your own self-respect with being a party to this?

Doesn’t your respect for A go down for suggesting a clandestine tryst in a supposedly healthy and stable marriage with B?

My opinion: if your love for A is strong and reciprocated, then she must tell B of you first. Either he gives it his blessing, or not, and then the next move is up to her. But A is trying to use you to have her cake and eat it too.

As for this Dan Savage fellow, I don’t know what to say. No, strike that, I know exactly what to say.

He completely misses the point of what “cheating” is when he writes: You can’t have it both ways, CIAWers. If sex is hugely important, then people can’t be faulted for wanting some; if it’s unimportant, then it shouldn’t be seen as a huge betrayal when some poor fuckers, under duress, are forced to get their needs met elsewhere.

Inherent in the act of “cheating” is clearly the act of lying: an attempt to hide, cover up or deny what is going on behind the other person’s back.

If one’s sexual needs are so important that it is worth going outside a stable monogamous relationship to get, then it needs to be made a fulcrum point of the relationship. Either the other party participates, allows the other person to explore elsewhere, or the relationship ends. Trying to claim that “cheating saves the relationship” in that it allows A to continue carrying on with B by basically not telling him about Z because A knows it would be a deal-breaker for B, is simply dishonest, an attempt to get what one could not otherwise get by honest means. B trusts A not to do this. Which means doing so is theft of trust.

For some people, I guess honor and honesty are just words beginning with an unaspirated H, whose Need To Fuck Like I Just Gotta Fuck is stronger than valuing a sentiment like I meant what I said, and I said what I meant. An elephant’s faithful, one hundred per cent!

[jackelope]

This is very, very simple. Here is what you tell A:

Sure! Come on over and we’ll spend a weekend fucking each other silly! Be sure to bring a note from your husband saying it’s OK, though.

[CarnalK]

Originally posted by robardin
For some people, I guess honor and honesty are just words beginning with an unaspirated H, whose Need To Fuck Like I Just Gotta Fuck is stronger than valuing a sentiment like I meant what I said, and I said what I meant. An elephant’s faithful, one hundred per cent!

Come on, dial it down a notch. No one is saying “Hey if you gots to cheat then go right ahead”. I think what was suggested was that if the discrepancy in sexual expectations is big enough, if a compromise is stalemated or impossible, and if the breakup of the marriage would be a “very bad thing” then some discreet cheating/lying/dishonor may be the lesser of two evils and not completely unexpected.

I wonder how people feel about the commonly asked question that A would be facing shortly after meeting up with Z. Namely, if the cheating is a fait accompli, let’s say with no plans for a repetition, are you now honour-bound to confess all?

[Jodi]

[QUOTE=CarnalK]
Come on, dial it down a notch. No one is saying “Hey if you gots to cheat then go right ahead”. I think what was suggested was that if the discrepancy in sexual expectations is big enough, if a compromise is stalemated or impossible, and if the breakup of the marriage would be a “very bad thing” then some discreet cheating/lying/dishonor may be the lesser of two evils and not completely unexpected.
[/QUOTE]

Except that this is not the potential adulterer’s unilateral decision to make. IOW, it’s “the lesser of two evils” according to whom?

When you make a bargain with a spouse that includes sexual fidelity and the trust that is required to make that work and to believe it works, then you have an obligation to fulfill both parts of that bargain (being faithful AND being trustworthy) unless or until the bargain changes. It is dishonest, and dishonorable, to allow your spouse to believe you are keeping your bargain – being faithful – while in reality you’re getting a bit on the side without their knowledge or consent. It’s a fundamental betrayal of the trust and fidelity that most people expect to be part of a marriage, and there are many people – and I am one of them – who would NOT consider it “the lesser of two evils” to discover that I was married to a lying, cheating weasel who believed that our marriage vows were really only binding on me, not him.

[robardin]

…What Jodi said.

CarnalK (whose username is strikingly apropos for the sentiments expressed ;)) wrote: Come on, dial it down a notch. No one is saying “Hey if you gots to cheat then go right ahead”. I think what was suggested was that if the discrepancy in sexual expectations is big enough, if a compromise is stalemated or impossible, and if the breakup of the marriage would be a “very bad thing” then some discreet cheating/lying/dishonor may be the lesser of two evils and not completely unexpected.

I’m sorry, but in my book there is no “dial” for honesty when it comes to this sort of thing. I would not consider you as being honest with me if you are “well, like 95% honest, except for the 5% that I really didn’t want you to know 'cause I knew you’d get upset about it, but what you don’t know won’t hurt you, right?”.

If it’s that important to you to get your kink on in this way, and you swear up and down that going outside the relationship to fulfill it will in no way diminish your feelings, respect, or commitment to your partner, then great, I fully believe that is possible and true. In which case the only honorable thing to do is to tell this not to the SDMB or Second Life or any other proxy group of anonymous people, but to your partner. Convince your partner that it’s true and hey, buffet’s open, feed all you like. But if you can’t convince your partner then you have a choice to make. Avoiding a choice is not making one. And denying your partner the choice is making it an unequal relationship. It will come out soon in other ways as well.

[robardin]

[QUOTE=jackelope]
This is very, very simple. Here is what you tell A:

Sure! Come on over and we’ll spend a weekend fucking each other silly! Be sure to bring a note from your husband saying it’s OK, though.
[/QUOTE]

Or, please bring a large framed poster of A that we can place on the wall above the bed/wall/bench/stove/hoop or whatever kinky scenario is in the works.