CDZ Whom do you think bears the onus for marital fidelity?

[jillian]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

By my standards of personal integrity in such situations:

• Cheating partner --> Obligation to reject offers from "outsiders"
• "Outsiders"
  • Obligation to find out if the person who attracts them is already "claimed."
  • Obligation, if one's "person of interest" is "claimed," to "back-off" in accordance with "do unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself."

You either don't concur with that standard or you weren't aware it might be a extant standard. Either way, now you do know and how you manage/apply that knowledge is up to you. I'm not going to presume to suggest how you should manage/apply the knowledge.

I agree with your first bullet point. But I don't think any "outsider" has an obligation to the marital relationship. should they be cognizant of it? probably. but I don't see it as obligatory.

everyone can say no. there is no such thing as someone you can't turn down.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

And so can you.
Let me explain. What was meant was this:
If the husband cheats..it's on him, not the wife or the one he cheats with.
If the wife cheats, it is on her, not the one she cheats with, or her husband.
Do you get it now?

I agree with you, Kat, but my own standards incorporate what you've described, but they add another dimension of personal responsibility/integrity. Be that as it may, it's how I comport myself, but the only person whom I'd judge by my standard of marital fidelity would a woman whom I'd consider wedding. Such a woman would have to on her own, not because of me, embrace the same standard I do. If she doesn't, well, that is what it is, but if she doesn't, the judgment/conclusion I'd make is that there's no way I'd marry her.

With my life and career being what they are, I have to be able to trust that my wife is not going to betray me. I can handle the notion that she may want to "get with" someone else -- indeed, I may come to want the same thing -- but I expect her to do one of two things should she come to feel that way:

• Tell me and find out if I'm amenable to her having a dalliance of sorts. I don't think I would be, but I know that insofar as the "deal" when we wed includes forsaking all others, I deserve the respect of being asked/informed. If I'm not okay with it, I'll just tell her we need to divorce. If I'm provisionally okay with it, well, then we have to figure out what be the new terms of our marriage to determine whether we need to divorce or whether ours will be some sort of "new fangled" partnership.
• Simply ask for a divorce. She doesn't much need to explain why she wants one; if she wants out, far be it from me to not let her go. She's got to want to be my wife as much as I want to be her husband. I can't imagine that I'd like to divorce under such circumstances, but I don't want to be in a marriage that's not mutually desired and mutually desired to comparable extents.

Were I the one who developed feelings of wanting to "stray," I'd accord to her the same respect I've described above. At the very least, regardless of how pissed off either of us may become, neither of us will be in a position to say we were misled and had our trust betrayed. After all, while I hope my wife wouldn't want to take another, I trust that she won't lie to me. I'll recover from dashed hopes, but I'm unlikely to ever forbear being lied to on that scale by someone whom I've admitted that deeply into my life.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties have to want to make it work and have respect and love and care for one another. People who don't get along well are probably more apt to cheat. That is sometimes not any one person's fault, it's just the way it is. Some people's personalities are going to clash.

Some couples should have never married.

Yeah, but unfortunately some people get married before they really get to know one another well. Imagine having to be married to someone that you can't stand? That's probably why some people cheat anyways, because they hate each other. Lol.

I'm one of those people who got married before they knew their spouse, and did it for all the wrong reasons.

I had just made E4 in the Navy, and all my friends who had just made E4 were getting married. Well, I went on leave with a friend of mine and his girlfriend introduced me to a friend of hers. I then spent the next few days screwing my brains out. I went back to Norfolk, got drunk one night, called her up and proposed. She accepted, because she was desperate to get out of the small town she was in.

I only spent about a week of face to face time with her (the week I was having sex), and wrote a couple of letters and made a couple of phone calls. Time from meeting her to marriage was about a month.

Yeah, I know, kinda messed up, and that is the reason my marriage only lasted about 7 years.

TY for sharing. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you.

At the time, were you even sure of exactly what it meant to you to be married at all, without regard to whom you wed? I know I hadn't figured that out by my early twenties, and truly only had it figured out after about two years of being married. It so happened that my wife and I concurrently evolved our fuller understanding of what marriage meant to each of us, and fortunately we arrived at the same conception of what it was "really all about."

I can't say what may have happened had we arrived at different conclusions. I can say that even though marriages are pair bonds, the parties to them are nonetheless individuals and as such may well develop differing opinions of what a/their marriage is, what they want from it, why they're married, etc. I can identify those things for myself. I require that a potential spouse share my views in that regard, but I can't and won't tell someone else what those things should be for them. I have no place to say where on the spectrum of marital behavior and satisfaction anyone else should find it fitting to enter, remain in, or exit a marriage.

You are not at all the only person to wed before you knew your partner well. Indeed, it's possible you didn't at the time know yourself well. Indeed, it's very challenging to get to know someone else well when one doesn't know oneself well. Either of those two states of being, IMO, can augur poorly for a marriage's prospects, and yet some folks for whom one or the other was their circumstance "get lucky" and the marriage works out. For others, it doesn't.

What is there to say? At that level of interaction (emotional, financial, life progression, etc.), one has to be true to oneself before one can be true to another. So long as you learned and grew from that experience, it was a useful experience, however painful it may have been and remains.

To wit, as goes the matter of your "messing up," perhaps you didn't "mess up" at all. You've got to ask yourself whether there was another way, a less fraught way, given who you were "back then" and the circumstances/stimuli that influenced you, for you to have learned the lessons you did from your experience of marrying "too soon" and later parting ways. If there really wasn't, which is fairly likely, then you didn't mess up so much as you merely had to "drive the bumpy road," as it were, to arrive the knowledge you gained from that experience. Everybody at various times take a bumpy road to somewhere; it's merely that your bumpy road happened to be the one that included a marriage that didn't last "'til death do you part."

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

By my standards of personal integrity in such situations:

• Cheating partner --> Obligation to reject offers from "outsiders"
• "Outsiders"
  • Obligation to find out if the person who attracts them is already "claimed."
  • Obligation, if one's "person of interest" is "claimed," to "back-off" in accordance with "do unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself."

You either don't concur with that standard or you weren't aware it might be a extant standard. Either way, now you do know and how you manage/apply that knowledge is up to you. I'm not going to presume to suggest how you should manage/apply the knowledge.

I agree with your first bullet point. But I don't think any "outsider" has an obligation to the marital relationship. should they be cognizant of it? probably. but I don't see it as obligatory.

everyone can say no. there is no such thing as someone you can't turn down.

Okay. That's how your system works. You've shared that and that is what the thread topic requests. I appreciate your contribution.

I didn't create this to be "judge others' system of marital comportment and obligation" thread. I created it only to learn what be other folks' standards on the matter of marital fidelity.

If you want to know why my standard/system is as it is, I don't mind telling you, but if I do so, it's only to explain how I view the matter, not to convince others or make some sort of value assessment of the difference(s) between their system/standard and mine. I've explained part of it in post 42. If want to know more, feel free to ask provided you can pose the question(s) without "value signaling." (I'm not particularly sensitive; however, I as carefully read what others write every bit as much as I carefully write what I imagine others, others who don't know me well, will read. That's just a matter of giving someone the respect of fully considering what they took the time to express.)

 

[JoeMoma]

Can one partner in a marriage bear part of the onus of the other partner cheating? I say yes. If partner A becomes cold and detached to partner B, then partner B may fall to having an affair to someone else that satisfies the needs of partner B. A marriage takes 2 and both partners should be working in the relationship to service the needs of the other partner.

 

[jillian]

Can one partner in a marriage bear part of the onus of the other partner cheating? I say yes. If partner A becomes cold and detached to partner B, then partner B may fall to having an affair to someone else that satisfies the needs of partner B. A marriage takes 2 and both partners should be working in the relationship to service the needs of the other partner.

then it's the job of the cheating partner to leave.... not cheat.

everyone has choices, joe.

 

[JoeMoma]

Can one partner in a marriage bear part of the onus of the other partner cheating? I say yes. If partner A becomes cold and detached to partner B, then partner B may fall to having an affair to someone else that satisfies the needs of partner B. A marriage takes 2 and both partners should be working in the relationship to service the needs of the other partner.

then it's the job of the cheating partner to leave.... not cheat.

everyone has choices, joe.

In my opinion, the onus can fall on both partners. If you disagree, so be it.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

And so can you.
Let me explain. What was meant was this:
If the husband cheats..it's on him, not the wife or the one he cheats with.
If the wife cheats, it is on her, not the one she cheats with, or her husband.
Do you get it now?

I think you and jillian are of the same mind.

 

[irosie91]

the fidelity of family life is dependent on the HOUSEHOLD DOG -----
which is why all household dogs should be named FIDO.
The dog as symbol of REAL FIDELITY touches many cultures.
The faithful dog plays a major role in the Mahabharata---and the
loyalty of the man-----(whatshisname) to that faithful dog

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

By my standards of personal integrity in such situations:

• Cheating partner --> Obligation to reject offers from "outsiders"
• "Outsiders"
  • Obligation to find out if the person who attracts them is already "claimed."
  • Obligation, if one's "person of interest" is "claimed," to "back-off" in accordance with "do unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself."

You either don't concur with that standard or you weren't aware it might be a extant standard. Either way, now you do know and how you manage/apply that knowledge is up to you. I'm not going to presume to suggest how you should manage/apply the knowledge.

I agree with your first bullet point. But I don't think any "outsider" has an obligation to the marital relationship. should they be cognizant of it? probably. but I don't see it as obligatory.

everyone can say no. there is no such thing as someone you can't turn down.

BTW, I'm not disagreeing with your remark that "everyone can say 'no.' " I merely perceive there being more to the matter of marital fidelity than that.

For my part, I don't want to be party to someone's duplicitousness toward their spouse.

• The number one reason: I wouldn't want someone to do that to me, so I won't knowingly do it to someone else.
• I damn sure don't want to expose myself to whatever emotional "flame outs" someone's spouse might have. I can't know how stable be someone's spouse; moreover, having kids who depend on me, I can't willfully expose myself to the risk that someone's pissed-off husband might want to do me physical harm for "hooking up" with his wife. That's drama I don't need, and it's potential loss, anguish, heartbreak, etc, my kids don't deserve or need to suffer actualizing on account of my imprudence and/or selfishness.
  
  Some folks may not feel that way nor must they -- it's their kids, not mine -- but I, for as long as my kids rely on me, consider almost everything I do in terms of what impact and risks it may have on them. If must forgo something because I determine that it exposes them to unnecessary harm (physical, mental, economic, social, etc.) of some sort, then forgo it I will. I have four kids, one of whom is on his own now, so I'm nearing the end of that phase of my life, but I haven't yet reached the end of it.
• If a woman is going to lie to her spouse, of all people, I'm confident she'll lie to someone she's only recently met, namely me, sooner or later, so I'll never trust her completely. Because of that, I won't admit such a woman into my life, at least not at the personal level involved with what we're discussing. After all, once things become sexual, there're a number things one needs to know and all one can do is ask. If the other person is lying, one may well be f*cked and "screwed." I don't in my life need anyone who'll do that, who'll give me reason to distrust them, as someone with whom I'm intimate, emotionally or physically. That can work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

Because of the foregoing, if I'm the "outsider," it's my duty -- to myself because it's the kind of person I want to be, and to my kids because it's the kind of parent I want to be to them -- to find out whether a lady who captures my interest is encumbered with a spouse to whom she's pledged to forsake all others.

I should note that I married the woman whom I thought was "the one" for me, and to the day she died, she was. That said, I'm not now nor was I then naive enough ("naive" being my description for it) to think that she was the only woman on the planet whom I'd meet who could be "the one." She merely was the first "the one" whom I met.

Right now, I date three women and each of them has "the one" potential. One of them wants to get married, but I don't want to remarry just yet, though I'm not opposed to someday marrying, or even marrying her. She knows that, and she knows that "someday" may never come, and she hasn't chosen to pare back the nature of our relationship. The other two aren't pressed about marrying, but I can as well see myself being married to either of them. They all know about each other's presence in my life, but AFAIK they don't know one another. (Insofar as we all dwell in similar social circles, it's possible one of them has met the other, but being of the character they are, it's highly unlikely they'd have discussed their romantic entanglements, and but even if they did, they wouldn't have done so by mentioning my name.)

At the end of the day, my view on this matter has more to do with my living up to what it is I expect of myself, more so than it does with what anyone else should do or not do. Regardless of who enters and exits my life, I have to live with myself all day, everyday. I can handle regret, but I won't forbear or invite self-guilt.

 

[jillian]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

By my standards of personal integrity in such situations:

• Cheating partner --> Obligation to reject offers from "outsiders"
• "Outsiders"
  • Obligation to find out if the person who attracts them is already "claimed."
  • Obligation, if one's "person of interest" is "claimed," to "back-off" in accordance with "do unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself."

You either don't concur with that standard or you weren't aware it might be a extant standard. Either way, now you do know and how you manage/apply that knowledge is up to you. I'm not going to presume to suggest how you should manage/apply the knowledge.

I agree with your first bullet point. But I don't think any "outsider" has an obligation to the marital relationship. should they be cognizant of it? probably. but I don't see it as obligatory.

everyone can say no. there is no such thing as someone you can't turn down.

BTW, I'm not disagreeing with your remark that "everyone can say 'no.' " I merely perceive there being more to the matter of marital fidelity than that.

For my part, I don't want to be party to someone's duplicitousness toward their spouse.

• The number one reason: I wouldn't want someone to do that to me, so I won't knowingly do it to someone else.
• I damn sure don't want to expose myself to whatever emotional "flame outs" someone's spouse might have. I can't know how stable be someone's spouse; moreover, having kids who depend on me, I can't willfully expose myself to the risk that someone's pissed-off husband might want to do me physical harm for "hooking up" with his wife. That's drama I don't need, and it's potential loss, anguish, heartbreak, etc, my kids don't deserve or need to suffer actualizing on account of my imprudence and/or selfishness.
  
  Some folks may not feel that way nor must they -- it's their kids, not mine -- but I, for as long as my kids rely on me, consider almost everything I do in terms of what impact and risks it may have on them. If must forgo something because I determine that it exposes them to unnecessary harm (physical, mental, economic, social, etc.) of some sort, then forgo it I will. I have four kids, one of whom is on his own now, so I'm nearing the end of that phase of my life, but I haven't yet reached the end of it.
• If a woman is going to lie to her spouse, of all people, I'm confident she'll lie to someone she's only recently met, namely me, sooner or later, so I'll never trust her completely. Because of that, I won't admit such a woman into my life, at least not at the personal level involved with what we're discussing. After all, once things become sexual, there're a number things one needs to know and all one can do is ask. If the other person is lying, one may well be f*cked and "screwed." I don't in my life need anyone who'll do that, who'll give me reason to distrust them, as someone with whom I'm intimate, emotionally or physically. That can work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

Because of the foregoing, if I'm the "outsider," it's my duty -- to myself because it's the kind of person I want to be, and to my kids because it's the kind of parent I want to be to them -- to find out whether a lady who captures my interest is encumbered with a spouse to whom she's pledged to forsake all others.

I should note that I married the woman whom I thought was "the one" for me, and to the day she died, she was. That said, I'm not now nor was I then naive enough ("naive" being my description for it) to think that she was the only woman on the planet whom I'd meet who could be "the one." She merely was the first "the one" whom I met.

Right now, I date three women and each of them has "the one" potential. One of them wants to get married, but I don't want to remarry just yet, though I'm not opposed to someday marrying, or even marrying her. She knows that, and she knows that "someday" may never come, and she hasn't chosen to pare back the nature of our relationship. The other two aren't pressed about marrying, but I can as well see myself being married to either of them. They all know about each other's presence in my life, but AFAIK they don't know one another. (Insofar as we all dwell in similar social circles, it's possible one of them has met the other, but being of the character they are, it's highly unlikely they'd have discussed their romantic entanglements, and but even if they did, they wouldn't have done so by mentioning my name.)

At the end of the day, my view on this matter has more to do with my living up to what it is I expect of myself, more so than it does with what anyone else should do or not do.

that's fine. I just don't think we can blame anyone else for our own actions.

it's like the spouse abuser saying to his wife "you made me hit you because the house was messy".

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties in the marriage.

how is the non-cheating party responsible for someone cheating?

that's absurd

if you're not happy, you can leave.

By my standards of personal integrity in such situations:

• Cheating partner --> Obligation to reject offers from "outsiders"
• "Outsiders"
  • Obligation to find out if the person who attracts them is already "claimed."
  • Obligation, if one's "person of interest" is "claimed," to "back-off" in accordance with "do unto others as one'd have them do unto oneself."

You either don't concur with that standard or you weren't aware it might be a extant standard. Either way, now you do know and how you manage/apply that knowledge is up to you. I'm not going to presume to suggest how you should manage/apply the knowledge.

I agree with your first bullet point. But I don't think any "outsider" has an obligation to the marital relationship. should they be cognizant of it? probably. but I don't see it as obligatory.

everyone can say no. there is no such thing as someone you can't turn down.

BTW, I'm not disagreeing with your remark that "everyone can say 'no.' " I merely perceive there being more to the matter of marital fidelity than that.

For my part, I don't want to be party to someone's duplicitousness toward their spouse.

• The number one reason: I wouldn't want someone to do that to me, so I won't knowingly do it to someone else.
• I damn sure don't want to expose myself to whatever emotional "flame outs" someone's spouse might have. I can't know how stable be someone's spouse; moreover, having kids who depend on me, I can't willfully expose myself to the risk that someone's pissed-off husband might want to do me physical harm for "hooking up" with his wife. That's drama I don't need, and it's potential loss, anguish, heartbreak, etc, my kids don't deserve or need to suffer actualizing on account of my imprudence and/or selfishness.
  
  Some folks may not feel that way nor must they -- it's their kids, not mine -- but I, for as long as my kids rely on me, consider almost everything I do in terms of what impact and risks it may have on them. If must forgo something because I determine that it exposes them to unnecessary harm (physical, mental, economic, social, etc.) of some sort, then forgo it I will. I have four kids, one of whom is on his own now, so I'm nearing the end of that phase of my life, but I haven't yet reached the end of it.
• If a woman is going to lie to her spouse, of all people, I'm confident she'll lie to someone she's only recently met, namely me, sooner or later, so I'll never trust her completely. Because of that, I won't admit such a woman into my life, at least not at the personal level involved with what we're discussing. After all, once things become sexual, there're a number things one needs to know and all one can do is ask. If the other person is lying, one may well be f*cked and "screwed." I don't in my life need anyone who'll do that, who'll give me reason to distrust them, as someone with whom I'm intimate, emotionally or physically. That can work for others, but it doesn't work for me.

Because of the foregoing, if I'm the "outsider," it's my duty -- to myself because it's the kind of person I want to be, and to my kids because it's the kind of parent I want to be to them -- to find out whether a lady who captures my interest is encumbered with a spouse to whom she's pledged to forsake all others.

I should note that I married the woman whom I thought was "the one" for me, and to the day she died, she was. That said, I'm not now nor was I then naive enough ("naive" being my description for it) to think that she was the only woman on the planet whom I'd meet who could be "the one." She merely was the first "the one" whom I met.

Right now, I date three women and each of them has "the one" potential. One of them wants to get married, but I don't want to remarry just yet, though I'm not opposed to someday marrying, or even marrying her. She knows that, and she knows that "someday" may never come, and she hasn't chosen to pare back the nature of our relationship. The other two aren't pressed about marrying, but I can as well see myself being married to either of them. They all know about each other's presence in my life, but AFAIK they don't know one another. (Insofar as we all dwell in similar social circles, it's possible one of them has met the other, but being of the character they are, it's highly unlikely they'd have discussed their romantic entanglements, and but even if they did, they wouldn't have done so by mentioning my name.)

At the end of the day, my view on this matter has more to do with my living up to what it is I expect of myself, more so than it does with what anyone else should do or not do.

that's fine. I just don't think we can blame anyone else for our own actions.

it's like the spouse abuser saying to his wife "you made me hit you because the house was messy".

I just don't think we can blame anyone else for our own actions.

I agree.

it's like the spouse abuser saying to his wife "you made me hit you because the house was messy".

I don't understand how to apply the above comment in this context.

 

[usmbguest5318]

the fidelity of family life is dependent on the HOUSEHOLD DOG -----
which is why all household dogs should be named FIDO.
The dog as symbol of REAL FIDELITY touches many cultures.
The faithful dog plays a major role in the Mahabharata---and the
loyalty of the man-----(whatshisname) to that faithful dog

Well, now. That's a response/perspective I hadn't anticipated. Neither have I considered a dog in that regard.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Both parties have to want to make it work and have respect and love and care for one another. People who don't get along well are probably more apt to cheat. That is sometimes not any one person's fault, it's just the way it is. Some people's personalities are going to clash.

Some couples should have never married.

Yeah, but unfortunately some people get married before they really get to know one another well. Imagine having to be married to someone that you can't stand? That's probably why some people cheat anyways, because they hate each other. Lol.

I'm one of those people who got married before they knew their spouse, and did it for all the wrong reasons.

I had just made E4 in the Navy, and all my friends who had just made E4 were getting married. Well, I went on leave with a friend of mine and his girlfriend introduced me to a friend of hers. I then spent the next few days screwing my brains out. I went back to Norfolk, got drunk one night, called her up and proposed. She accepted, because she was desperate to get out of the small town she was in.

I only spent about a week of face to face time with her (the week I was having sex), and wrote a couple of letters and made a couple of phone calls. Time from meeting her to marriage was about a month.

Yeah, I know, kinda messed up, and that is the reason my marriage only lasted about 7 years.

TY for sharing. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you.

At the time, were you even sure of exactly what it meant to you to be married at all, without regard to whom you wed? I know I hadn't figured that out by my early twenties, and truly only had it figured out after about two years of being married. It so happened that my wife and I concurrently evolved our fuller understanding of what marriage meant to each of us, and fortunately we arrived at the same conception of what it was "really all about."

I can't say what may have happened had we arrived at different conclusions. I can say that even though marriages are pair bonds, the parties to them are nonetheless individuals and as such may well develop differing opinions of what a/their marriage is, what they want from it, why they're married, etc. I can identify those things for myself. I require that a potential spouse share my views in that regard, but I can't and won't tell someone else what those things should be for them. I have no place to say where on the spectrum of marital behavior and satisfaction anyone else should find it fitting to enter, remain in, or exit a marriage.

You are not at all the only person to wed before you knew your partner well. Indeed, it's possible you didn't at the time know yourself well. Indeed, it's very challenging to get to know someone else well when one doesn't know oneself well. Either of those two states of being, IMO, can augur poorly for a marriage's prospects, and yet some folks for whom one or the other was their circumstance "get lucky" and the marriage works out. For others, it doesn't.

What is there to say? At that level of interaction (emotional, financial, life progression, etc.), one has to be true to oneself before one can be true to another. So long as you learned and grew from that experience, it was a useful experience, however painful it may have been and remains.

To wit, as goes the matter of your "messing up," perhaps you didn't "mess up" at all. You've got to ask yourself whether there was another way, a less fraught way, given who you were "back then" and the circumstances/stimuli that influenced you, for you to have learned the lessons you did from your experience of marrying "too soon" and later parting ways. If there really wasn't, which is fairly likely, then you didn't mess up so much as you merely had to "drive the bumpy road," as it were, to arrive the knowledge you gained from that experience. Everybody at various times take a bumpy road to somewhere; it's merely that your bumpy road happened to be the one that included a marriage that didn't last "'til death do you part."

You know, I came to those conclusions in my late 20's, after I'd gotten divorced and had to "grow up" a bit and actually get to know myself.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right. And yeah, I got married when I was around 20, and didn't really know squat about what it meant to be an adult (had been in for 2 years), and also had zero clue about what a long lasting meaningful relationship is.

But, since I "grew up" and learned who I really am, things got a whole lot better, and I started attracting quality women who were into me for me.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Both parties have to want to make it work and have respect and love and care for one another. People who don't get along well are probably more apt to cheat. That is sometimes not any one person's fault, it's just the way it is. Some people's personalities are going to clash.

Some couples should have never married.

Yeah, but unfortunately some people get married before they really get to know one another well. Imagine having to be married to someone that you can't stand? That's probably why some people cheat anyways, because they hate each other. Lol.

I'm one of those people who got married before they knew their spouse, and did it for all the wrong reasons.

I had just made E4 in the Navy, and all my friends who had just made E4 were getting married. Well, I went on leave with a friend of mine and his girlfriend introduced me to a friend of hers. I then spent the next few days screwing my brains out. I went back to Norfolk, got drunk one night, called her up and proposed. She accepted, because she was desperate to get out of the small town she was in.

I only spent about a week of face to face time with her (the week I was having sex), and wrote a couple of letters and made a couple of phone calls. Time from meeting her to marriage was about a month.

Yeah, I know, kinda messed up, and that is the reason my marriage only lasted about 7 years.

TY for sharing. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you.

At the time, were you even sure of exactly what it meant to you to be married at all, without regard to whom you wed? I know I hadn't figured that out by my early twenties, and truly only had it figured out after about two years of being married. It so happened that my wife and I concurrently evolved our fuller understanding of what marriage meant to each of us, and fortunately we arrived at the same conception of what it was "really all about."

I can't say what may have happened had we arrived at different conclusions. I can say that even though marriages are pair bonds, the parties to them are nonetheless individuals and as such may well develop differing opinions of what a/their marriage is, what they want from it, why they're married, etc. I can identify those things for myself. I require that a potential spouse share my views in that regard, but I can't and won't tell someone else what those things should be for them. I have no place to say where on the spectrum of marital behavior and satisfaction anyone else should find it fitting to enter, remain in, or exit a marriage.

You are not at all the only person to wed before you knew your partner well. Indeed, it's possible you didn't at the time know yourself well. Indeed, it's very challenging to get to know someone else well when one doesn't know oneself well. Either of those two states of being, IMO, can augur poorly for a marriage's prospects, and yet some folks for whom one or the other was their circumstance "get lucky" and the marriage works out. For others, it doesn't.

What is there to say? At that level of interaction (emotional, financial, life progression, etc.), one has to be true to oneself before one can be true to another. So long as you learned and grew from that experience, it was a useful experience, however painful it may have been and remains.

To wit, as goes the matter of your "messing up," perhaps you didn't "mess up" at all. You've got to ask yourself whether there was another way, a less fraught way, given who you were "back then" and the circumstances/stimuli that influenced you, for you to have learned the lessons you did from your experience of marrying "too soon" and later parting ways. If there really wasn't, which is fairly likely, then you didn't mess up so much as you merely had to "drive the bumpy road," as it were, to arrive the knowledge you gained from that experience. Everybody at various times take a bumpy road to somewhere; it's merely that your bumpy road happened to be the one that included a marriage that didn't last "'til death do you part."

You know, I came to those conclusions in my late 20's, after I'd gotten divorced and had to "grow up" a bit and actually get to know myself.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right. And yeah, I got married when I was around 20, and didn't really know squat about what it meant to be an adult (had been in for 2 years), and also had zero clue about what a long lasting meaningful relationship is.

But, since I "grew up" and learned who I really am, things got a whole lot better, and I started attracting quality women who were into me for me.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right.

I couldn't agree more nor nor could I have said it better!

 

[ABikerSailor]

Some couples should have never married.

Yeah, but unfortunately some people get married before they really get to know one another well. Imagine having to be married to someone that you can't stand? That's probably why some people cheat anyways, because they hate each other. Lol.

I'm one of those people who got married before they knew their spouse, and did it for all the wrong reasons.

I had just made E4 in the Navy, and all my friends who had just made E4 were getting married. Well, I went on leave with a friend of mine and his girlfriend introduced me to a friend of hers. I then spent the next few days screwing my brains out. I went back to Norfolk, got drunk one night, called her up and proposed. She accepted, because she was desperate to get out of the small town she was in.

I only spent about a week of face to face time with her (the week I was having sex), and wrote a couple of letters and made a couple of phone calls. Time from meeting her to marriage was about a month.

Yeah, I know, kinda messed up, and that is the reason my marriage only lasted about 7 years.

TY for sharing. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you.

At the time, were you even sure of exactly what it meant to you to be married at all, without regard to whom you wed? I know I hadn't figured that out by my early twenties, and truly only had it figured out after about two years of being married. It so happened that my wife and I concurrently evolved our fuller understanding of what marriage meant to each of us, and fortunately we arrived at the same conception of what it was "really all about."

I can't say what may have happened had we arrived at different conclusions. I can say that even though marriages are pair bonds, the parties to them are nonetheless individuals and as such may well develop differing opinions of what a/their marriage is, what they want from it, why they're married, etc. I can identify those things for myself. I require that a potential spouse share my views in that regard, but I can't and won't tell someone else what those things should be for them. I have no place to say where on the spectrum of marital behavior and satisfaction anyone else should find it fitting to enter, remain in, or exit a marriage.

You are not at all the only person to wed before you knew your partner well. Indeed, it's possible you didn't at the time know yourself well. Indeed, it's very challenging to get to know someone else well when one doesn't know oneself well. Either of those two states of being, IMO, can augur poorly for a marriage's prospects, and yet some folks for whom one or the other was their circumstance "get lucky" and the marriage works out. For others, it doesn't.

What is there to say? At that level of interaction (emotional, financial, life progression, etc.), one has to be true to oneself before one can be true to another. So long as you learned and grew from that experience, it was a useful experience, however painful it may have been and remains.

To wit, as goes the matter of your "messing up," perhaps you didn't "mess up" at all. You've got to ask yourself whether there was another way, a less fraught way, given who you were "back then" and the circumstances/stimuli that influenced you, for you to have learned the lessons you did from your experience of marrying "too soon" and later parting ways. If there really wasn't, which is fairly likely, then you didn't mess up so much as you merely had to "drive the bumpy road," as it were, to arrive the knowledge you gained from that experience. Everybody at various times take a bumpy road to somewhere; it's merely that your bumpy road happened to be the one that included a marriage that didn't last "'til death do you part."

You know, I came to those conclusions in my late 20's, after I'd gotten divorced and had to "grow up" a bit and actually get to know myself.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right. And yeah, I got married when I was around 20, and didn't really know squat about what it meant to be an adult (had been in for 2 years), and also had zero clue about what a long lasting meaningful relationship is.

But, since I "grew up" and learned who I really am, things got a whole lot better, and I started attracting quality women who were into me for me.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right.

I couldn't agree more nor nor could I have said it better!

He also taught me 3 rules to apply to every relationship that has never failed me.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Yeah, but unfortunately some people get married before they really get to know one another well. Imagine having to be married to someone that you can't stand? That's probably why some people cheat anyways, because they hate each other. Lol.

I'm one of those people who got married before they knew their spouse, and did it for all the wrong reasons.

I had just made E4 in the Navy, and all my friends who had just made E4 were getting married. Well, I went on leave with a friend of mine and his girlfriend introduced me to a friend of hers. I then spent the next few days screwing my brains out. I went back to Norfolk, got drunk one night, called her up and proposed. She accepted, because she was desperate to get out of the small town she was in.

I only spent about a week of face to face time with her (the week I was having sex), and wrote a couple of letters and made a couple of phone calls. Time from meeting her to marriage was about a month.

Yeah, I know, kinda messed up, and that is the reason my marriage only lasted about 7 years.

TY for sharing. Sorry to hear it didn't work out for you.

At the time, were you even sure of exactly what it meant to you to be married at all, without regard to whom you wed? I know I hadn't figured that out by my early twenties, and truly only had it figured out after about two years of being married. It so happened that my wife and I concurrently evolved our fuller understanding of what marriage meant to each of us, and fortunately we arrived at the same conception of what it was "really all about."

I can't say what may have happened had we arrived at different conclusions. I can say that even though marriages are pair bonds, the parties to them are nonetheless individuals and as such may well develop differing opinions of what a/their marriage is, what they want from it, why they're married, etc. I can identify those things for myself. I require that a potential spouse share my views in that regard, but I can't and won't tell someone else what those things should be for them. I have no place to say where on the spectrum of marital behavior and satisfaction anyone else should find it fitting to enter, remain in, or exit a marriage.

You are not at all the only person to wed before you knew your partner well. Indeed, it's possible you didn't at the time know yourself well. Indeed, it's very challenging to get to know someone else well when one doesn't know oneself well. Either of those two states of being, IMO, can augur poorly for a marriage's prospects, and yet some folks for whom one or the other was their circumstance "get lucky" and the marriage works out. For others, it doesn't.

What is there to say? At that level of interaction (emotional, financial, life progression, etc.), one has to be true to oneself before one can be true to another. So long as you learned and grew from that experience, it was a useful experience, however painful it may have been and remains.

To wit, as goes the matter of your "messing up," perhaps you didn't "mess up" at all. You've got to ask yourself whether there was another way, a less fraught way, given who you were "back then" and the circumstances/stimuli that influenced you, for you to have learned the lessons you did from your experience of marrying "too soon" and later parting ways. If there really wasn't, which is fairly likely, then you didn't mess up so much as you merely had to "drive the bumpy road," as it were, to arrive the knowledge you gained from that experience. Everybody at various times take a bumpy road to somewhere; it's merely that your bumpy road happened to be the one that included a marriage that didn't last "'til death do you part."

You know, I came to those conclusions in my late 20's, after I'd gotten divorced and had to "grow up" a bit and actually get to know myself.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right. And yeah, I got married when I was around 20, and didn't really know squat about what it meant to be an adult (had been in for 2 years), and also had zero clue about what a long lasting meaningful relationship is.

But, since I "grew up" and learned who I really am, things got a whole lot better, and I started attracting quality women who were into me for me.

A friend of mine who helped me through the tough times once told me something that has stuck with me about relationships. He told me "Rob, true love isn't about FINDING the right person, true love is about BECOMING the right person. Become the kind of person you would like to attract and see what happens.

He was right.

I couldn't agree more nor nor could I have said it better!

He also taught me 3 rules to apply to every relationship that has never failed me.

Mentors like that are good to have.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You're right. Mentors like that are good to have.

Only problem is that they are few and far between and very few that see them are willing to listen.

 

[usmbguest5318]

You're right. Mentors like that are good to have.

Only problem is that they are few and far between and very few that see them are willing to listen.

Agree on both counts, but my personal experience as both mentor and mentee suggests that the latter is the bigger impediment. It's rather bizarre that it seems to work that way, but there's something about adulthood that imbues one with a sense of "I know better."

The message I deliver to my mentees is the same one I was given:

The advice I'm giving you may not be the optimal way for "you" to achieve XYZ; however, it's a proven way to achieve XYZ in the timeframe you have in mind. Use it to accomplish XYZ, and then, after you've gotten XYZ, apply the principles, the basic strategy, to achieving your next goal, but tweak the tactics to better suit what works best for you. Manage the process that way because you can't aptly tweak something until you fully understand how it works, how all the pieces fit together, what are the relevant key success factors, etc. from start to finish, and to do that you have to see it all the way through at least once.
​

As you might imagine from the above, I'm not a "warm and fuzzy" type of mentor; I'm structured problem solver type of mentor. I don't mentor people who need "warm and fuzzy;" I introduce them to friends/associates who are that type of mentor. It's every bit as important for a mentor to take and not take on mentees to whom they're unsuited as it is for mentees to seek out mentors who are suited to them. Since it's a rewarding journey for each party -- totally different types of rewards for mentor and mentee, to be sure, but rewarding all the same -- it must be win-win for both, for it's a chore for one, the other or both if it's not. And that's the last thing mentoring should be.

 

[ChrisL]

Can one partner in a marriage bear part of the onus of the other partner cheating? I say yes. If partner A becomes cold and detached to partner B, then partner B may fall to having an affair to someone else that satisfies the needs of partner B. A marriage takes 2 and both partners should be working in the relationship to service the needs of the other partner.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Jillian. At that point, you don't cheat, you file for a divorce or, if your relationship is important to you at all, perhaps marriage counseling or something to get to the bottom of the issue. Cheating is rarely going to end up well. Even if you ended up with the person you cheated on, there will always be a level of distrust there because of the cheating. Kind of like, if you cheated on her, you will cheat on me too. A good relationship has to be based on trust and mutual respect at the very least.