knabe Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I've noticed a lot of relationship forums (in fact most of them) have sections for dating and cheating in a relationship. And yet some people believe as long as you are not married, you cannot cheat. Like "until that ring is on, he/she is fair game/I'm a free agent." I've heard both men and women say it, or live it. I don't agree, but I wondered what others thought. If you are in what any normal person would consider a serious or significant relationship, would you be okay with your boyfriend or girlfriend getting close physically or emotionally with someone else, I mean, since they haven't "put a ring on it?" Link to post Share on other sites
RecentChange Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Ahhhh no. Being as my husband and we're together for 14 years before we got married - getting any extra before the rings was certainly cheating. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
preraph Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 No, unmarried does not mean that. If one is single but has made an agreement to be exclusive and only see the person they're dating and they flirt or go out with someone else, that's cheating. Because of the agreement. Many times the man fails to ask for exclusivity but the woman assumes they are because he says something like "I'm not seeing anybody else," by which he means "at the moment but I will if I get the chance." So it's important for women to eventually bring up the question of commitment and exclusivity if the man hasn't and never to just assume -- and not to stop dating other people if there is no agreement in place either. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Author knabe Posted June 22, 2017 Author Share Posted June 22, 2017 No, unmarried does not mean that. If one is single but has made an agreement to be exclusive and only see the person they're dating and they flirt or go out with someone else, that's cheating. Because of the agreement. Many times the man fails to ask for exclusivity but the woman assumes they are because he says something like "I'm not seeing anybody else," by which he means "at the moment but I will if I get the chance." So it's important for women to eventually bring up the question of commitment and exclusivity if the man hasn't and never to just assume -- and not to stop dating other people if there is no agreement in place either. I do agree with this. However, some people hide behind the technicality if they have been dating awhile but didn't actually have the talk, blah blah. There are certain types of dating relationships in certain circumstances that - if you are adult enough to be hones - ARE serious, ARE exclusive, and ARE probably headed for marriage, talk or no talk. To hide behind the "it wasn't official" to minimize cheating to me is even more pathetic than just owning it. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
preraph Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I do agree with this. However, some people hide behind the technicality if they have been dating awhile but didn't actually have the talk, blah blah. There are certain types of dating relationships in certain circumstances that - if you are adult enough to be hones - ARE serious, ARE exclusive, and ARE probably headed for marriage, talk or no talk. To hide behind the "it wasn't official" to minimize cheating to me is even more pathetic than just owning it. It is. It's lying by omission. But it's a common phenomenon. The man doesn't commit or ask to be exclusive but the woman is POSITIVE they are exclusive and committed because she's sure he's not seeing anyone. As if you could ever know. It takes 15 minutes to ring up a prostitute and have her there and not much longer for desperate women for quickies. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
aileD Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 if you both agree to be boyfriend/girlfriend and exclusive then yeah...it's cheating and a friggin excuse. Because they don't say that till AFTER they cheat. Oh "FAIR GAME"! ....yeah, you didn't mention that and totally wouldn't have when you were asking me to become your girlfriend, did ya?.... it's only fair game after the fact. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
somanymistakes Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I do agree with this. However, some people hide behind the technicality if they have been dating awhile but didn't actually have the talk, blah blah. There are certain types of dating relationships in certain circumstances that - if you are adult enough to be hones - ARE serious, ARE exclusive, and ARE probably headed for marriage, talk or no talk. To hide behind the "it wasn't official" to minimize cheating to me is even more pathetic than just owning it. In many cases you're probably correct and people are just taking advantage of "well you never actually SAID I couldn't..." when they knew perfectly well their partner would disapprove However since there really are people with different ideas of what's appropriate behavior who may miss out on what you'd think would be obvious clues, it's still best to get everything out in the open when you have a chance and make sure you're both on the same page 1 Link to post Share on other sites
spiderowl Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 It depends what you mean by 'single'. If someone is in relationship with someone else, even if not married, that should mean they are taken. If they are girlfriend/boyfriend but not living together, that might mean they are not as committed but one cannot be sure. As long as a couple are out and about together and being affectionate with each other, they are not really fair game for interlopers. Just my feelings on the subject anyway. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
mikeylo Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Well, I always believed that once you've committed yourself to another person , before getting married , you are no longer single and available. If either of them steps out, it's cheating. It really is that simple! 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Arieswoman Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 In order for cheating to take place there has to be an agreement to renege on. If it isn't clear to both parties what the agreement actually is all sorts of confusion can occur. I dated a guy for a year and in that time, we got together regularly, met each others' friends, discussed living together and made plans in that direction. I thought we were in a committed relationship, even though we didn't have "The Talk". Then suddenly he confessed he'd been cheating, not with one woman but with 3 (including his ex-wife) His excuses/reasons were " I didn't promise you anything", "I wouldn't have done it if I'd known it meant losing you" ( wtf ?) By this time in my life I had learned about the language known as "cheaterspeak" and kicked his sorry @r$e into touch. Many justifications for cheating are applied retrospectively. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author knabe Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 It's amazing how many Ross Gellars are on the internet lol Especially retroactively Grownups own their stuff. Link to post Share on other sites
Bastile Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I've had a lot of problems with defining exactly what some reasonable expectations are with regards to this. I've had exclusive relationships with women that seemed committed while actually staying in contact secretly with ex's or other men. At first I thought that it was just one bad apple. Yet it happened too many times to be put down as such. Then I read studies which suggest that 50% of women do this. So, if that's the case, do I need to accept the sensory data of my own experience, and that of general experience? Or do I stick to my old fashioned view of what a relationship should be? Emotional cheating, as it's referred to, does seem commonplace. Outside of exclusivity, I've had women putting on a perfect girlfriend act, and starting to hammer me (trying to make me feel bad for dating others) to later find that they had various options the entire time. If I'd just jumped straight into the relationship, I'd likely have been none the wiser. The hypocrisy is completely crazy. A part of me does believe that monogamy is limited and not really sensible. The marriage statistics also seem to go in that direction. With half of couples getting divorced. And many that aren't divorced, staying in unhappy marriages. I'm thinking I need to either change my own paradigm somewhat moving forward regarding monogamous relationships, or lower my standards, or just stick to casual non-committed relationships. So, I think that probably your original post is correct. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 If you can't stay faithful while dating you won't stay faithful during marriage. For those who are marriage minded dating is sort of an audition for marriage and cheaters fail miserably. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 After a lifetime of watching the goings on, I think the 16th century poet was right. Link to post Share on other sites
understand50 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Well, from my own experience, my then G/F, now wife, ONS was cheating. We both agreed now and then that is was just that. We had not had a "talk", and She did not have a ring. This idea, that if you did not have a "talk" or do not have a ring is bogus. If you are both acting like you are in a committed relationship, that you are in a committed relationship. If you are not sure then ask, but to keep one person on a string and go out a fool around is not morally right. My two cents. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Chilli Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 A gf or bf is not just dating , it's the start of a possible life together, of course you don't cheat. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author knabe Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 If you can't stay faithful while dating you won't stay faithful during marriage. For those who are marriage minded dating is sort of an audition for marriage and cheaters fail miserably. Yep, and if you'll find justifications to do it while dating, you'll find justifications to do it while married. Like I said, I can respect a cheater who owns their crap mopre than one who denies and rewrites the story afterward. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Yep, and if you'll find justifications to do it while dating, you'll find justifications to do it while married. Like I said, I can respect a cheater who owns their crap mopre than one who denies and rewrites the story afterward. I can respect somebody who realizes monogamy isn't for them and honestly messes around but I don't respect a cheater. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Author knabe Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 I can respect somebody who realizes monogamy isn't for them and honestly messes around but I don't respect a cheater. That too We tend to paint ourselves in the best possible light. When humility and sorrow gives us the moral high ground, we play that card. When we need to keep our particular personality traits standing by denying (I did not have sexual relations with that woman) then that is what we do. Well, I mean, not honorable people, but people who are led by their egos and not their ethics. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I've long wondered how #35 would answer this since his free agent peccadilloes were well known, both prior to and after marriage, and even after his ascendancy and validation by millions. Then there's #42 From my own history, I didn't start becoming successful with women until I threw out the rulebook that had hamstrung me for at least a solid decade. All that religious moral stuff and parental role model stuff. It was laughable. Free agents were everywhere, both unmarried and married. They were living life while I was following rules. Great way to waste a young life. In the end no one really cares. We all die. Look at 35 and 42 and how they're remembered, even with their obvious and public indiscretions. Typical. Pragmatism wins. Link to post Share on other sites
Author knabe Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 I think #35 thought he was somewhat discreet, but he didn't go out of his way to deny either. #42 stood up and officially lied by technicality. Even though the cheating was wrong for both of them, I'm not as annoyed by #35 lol. Yeah, more and more in our society, there seems to be a bigger (or dcertainly more public) payoff for NOT following the rules than for following them. That makes me a little sad. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts