|
|
|
|
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/5/2007 2:04:55 PM |
Statics say...90 % of men (and i'm only interested in the men) in marriages...will CHEAT, given the chance hopefully you mean STATISTICS and not STATICS (wouldn't want such a pessimistic outlook to stay fixed like that!). care to elaborate where those "statistics" came from? what's the source? i'm curious to learn if these researchers found that females cheat at such a high ratio as well.  | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:05:19 PM | Bikeman...."i'm curious to learn if these researchers found that females cheat at such a high ratio as well. "
It's a given that the morals of human kind have diminished over time, in our world....we all know SOME men and women who cheat on their significant other, whiter in a committed relationship or married .......but you know what.....
I can only speak for myself.....I DON'T WANT OR PLAN TO BE ONE OF THEM, NOR DO I WANT TO BE IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEONE WHO JUSTIFIES IT BY SAYING.....WELL HELL EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING IT, SO ITS OK FOR ME TO DO IT ALSO.......It is never OK...to make a promise, give your word to someone else....and not be man or woman enough to keep the promise....
A PERSONS CHARACTOR.....PREDICTS THEIR FUTURE SUCESS OR FAILURE!!!!!!
And I also believe a persons character is demonstrated on HOW GOOD THEIR WORD IS...TO OTHERS. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:14:38 PM |
I DON'T WANT OR PLAN TO BE ONE OF THEM, NOR DO I WANT TO BE IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH SOMEONE WHO JUSTIFIES IT BY SAYING.....WELL HELL EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING IT, SO ITS OK FOR ME TO DO IT ALSO.......It is never OK...to make a promise, give your word to someone else....and not be man or woman enough to keep the promise.... I totally agree, but you didn't read Msg 1 very carefully. There was NO PROMISE of exclusivity given to the OP. She NEVER asked that guy if he planned to meet any other women, she just ASS-U-ME-d that he wouldn't. In this instance the guy's words were good. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:23:09 PM | Well...my ex girlfriend did that with me to see if I would cheat. She did this because in her past she was cheated on a few times by the same guy so shee just wanted to see if I would too. It didn't work because I just don't beleive in cheating. She did it twice infact to see if I would bite elsewhere, but I stayed true and again, when you have the right values in your heart , then one would not cheat. It takes integrity and I will even say that I would rather get cheated on then actually do the cheating. I would not be able to deal with the guilt that would come from that.
So personally I think it may be ok to see if the other person is truly faithful like they should be. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:33:03 PM | Did this guy make a claim to be exclusive to you? Did you two just go on one or two dates before you did this? It sounds more like he hasn't made any commitment and is just "dating" right now.
So what exactly is there that you cannot trust about him? If this was the case I would be really annoyed at what you did. You have proven not to be trusting and a little bit psychotic. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 1:49:06 PM |
90 % of men (and i'm only interested in the men) in marriages...will CHEAT, given the chance...Doesn't mean all men will cheat....just the majority
I hope you can provide some sources for that one, because I don't believe it.
http://www.nomarriage.com/women_cheat.shtml
http://www.nomarriage.com/women_cheating1.shtml
http://www.nomarriage.com/article_statistics.html
http://www.nomarriage.com/articlecheating.html
http://edtech.mcc.edu/~gknapp/winter05/cheaters2/
I was in a molecular biology course once and the subject of genetic testing for disease came up. My instructor, at the time, informed us they used to include paternity results between the parents and child. Well the facts would show that about 1/3 of all the men, were not the father. Paternity test results, these days, now must be asked for. I would later look into this and confirm my Professors statements.
http://www.nomarriage.com/paternity_test.shtml
So we have a situation were we have absolute proof (a child), of women cheating. How many extra women out there are cheating and not getting pregnant? I would propose that number would push the ratio to 1 out of every 2 women will cheat.
This line of "men will do it given the chance," I think is bunk and nothing more than an undfounded, sexist statement. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 2:34:30 PM | http://www.nomarriage.com/article_statistics.html
I hope this is not true, the stuff I read in that I hope are just made up otherwise it is HORRIBLY sadistic to say the least that people would be like that. I think that is a fake site (I hope so anyways) because it doesn't look like a true site. But nontheless if those statistics are true then that really brings a horrible ugly look into many of the people in the west, I mean it can destroy ones trust on others and just really not want to trust anyone after reading that. But again that is IF this is indeed true, then there are alot of people that act ina very cold hearted, silly, hypocritical manner out there, that are deceivers and act inhumane in terms of how they act and treat others and they show no mercy or compassion at all.
Again that is IF that is totally true what I read on that site. I felt almost crushed when I read it. I pray it's not true and if it is, I pray it stops quickly before things get really bad!!.
Notice I use the word "people" and not focusing on any gender, but again, whoever the heck is like this, these people better get a good conscience because it seems like they are destroying theirs. Obviously not all women and guys are like that, but those that are better get their game together quick because NO ONE wins in these situations, they only are kidding themselves. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 2:50:29 PM | Absolutely not,it is wrong to set them up and get them in trouble but most times men deserve it, they like to cheat not all of them but the majority.
Usually until a man reaches about 30 or even later, dont know what they fully want in a woman and tend to get ahold of any "piece" they can in the meantime.. It isnt wrong to just set them up with a friend undercover as a date and see if they make any gestures towards sex or whatever, or if theyre honest and state theyre talking to somebody..
Men who do that, dont like to tell the truth they'd rather shit on your heart the hard way around.. why?? I dont know. Its in their blood I assume, but if they do that you dont need them. Women underestimate their power in relataionships, women should be the backbone for a change, stand up for what you want, and dont settle for anything less than that, cause if you do youll be unhappy. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 2:55:48 PM | Living it up.....I didn't look at the sites he gave....we all know that surveys can be tainted to reach any conclusion the taker wants....prove or disprove.....Also we all know that human kind is becoming much more immoral as civilization progresses.....and we wonder why our kids have such a difficult time...knowing the difference between right and wrong...people find ways to justify any behavior they wish to justify, it only takes seconds....
None of us can speak for anyone other than ourselves.....our value systems, our moral ethics....All I know is my beliefs......I WON'T BE A CHEATER, I WILL KEEP MY WORD AND PROMISES AND I DON'T WISH TO FALL IN LOVE OR LIVE WITH SOMEONE LACKING CHARACTOR....
I can only be responsible for myself and my behavior....that keeps me busy enough... but I will watch, check and reinforce....that if I give my attention to a man I care about....He will be deserving of that trust.... | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 2:59:13 PM |
All I know is my beliefs......I WON'T BE A CHEATER, I WILL KEEP MY WORD AND PROMISES AND I DON'T WISH TO FALL IN LOVE OR LIVE WITH SOMEONE LACKING CHARACTOR....
 that alleviates some of the heaviness in my heart.....thanks....it's always good to hear stuff like that. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 3:20:32 PM | [qoute] Living it up.....I didn't look at the sites he gave....we all know that surveys can be tainted to reach any conclusion the taker wants....prove or disprove.....Also we all know that human kind is becoming much more immoral as civilization progresses.....[/qoute]
Now there lies my frustration of how ethical it is to make such a claim (90% of married men cheat) without citing an actual study. Who are these 90% of married men cheating with? There can't just be one woman out there that has had her odometer of partners turnover a few times. Saying 90%, is the equivalent of saying all. Five percent are probably paralyzed and incapable, right? Surveys can be strewed to lead towards or away from a survey takers ideal. However, I gave multiple sources that seem to show the same percentages.
When one third of paternity tests show that the man who thought he was the dad, is not; how exactly do you "taint" those numbers?
I do agree that we are becomming increasingly immoral as a civilization. (Throwing babies in dumpsters, etc.) I wish it would stop. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 3:35:17 PM | Wrong is wrong, yes, and gotcha games are wrong.
But I have to respond to the idea that people are becoming much more immoral as civilization progresses.
It's nonsense, but understandable nonsense, at least when it comes from nice folks who grew up in nice homes. Their early, sheltered experience is bound to contrast with their adult exposure to adult behavior. It feels, as time passes, like people are doing more and more bad things than before.
But it's just not true. I'll give you a single example, but, before I do, riddle me this: If people have been doing more and more bad things as time goes by, then what possible use were the Ten Commandments to anyone 3,000 years ago? If we've been getting steadily worse and worse since then, then hardly anyone was lying, cheating, stealing, killing, or - that old favorite - commiting adultery way back then when we were sooooooo much better behaved than now.
Not persuaded by that? Well, let me roll the clock forward 2,700 years. Marriage and birth records in colonial America, which have been subjected to computerized tabulation over the last thirty years or so, reveal a mighty interesting statistic. One in five firstborn children to married couples, throughout the colonies, were born less than nine months after the parents' wedding.
Hard as it is to believe, young people then, just as today, were aware of their juicy bits and just as impatient to rock in their socks. Besides, without television and skateboards, really engaging entertainment was much harder to come by. Naturally - and I mean naturally! - that which simmers will often come to a boil.
Don't forget! Not all of the fornicating colonial kids produced offspring. The ratio of fornicators was even shorter than one in five.
From my point of view, nothing is so immoral as pretending to be other people's judge, whether in setting deceitful little "tests" for one person or declaring the whole lot of them (I mean us! You!) to be corrupt on no evidence worth the name.
Cheers!
Vulf  | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/8/2007 4:34:27 PM | It's nonsense, but understandable nonsense, at least when it comes from nice folks who grew up in nice homes. Their early, sheltered experience is bound to contrast with their adult exposure to adult behavior. It feels, as time passes, like people are doing more and more bad things than before.
But it's just not true. I'll give you a single example, but, before I do, riddle me this: If people have been doing more and more bad things as time goes by, then what possible use were the Ten Commandments to anyone 3,000 years ago? If we've been getting steadily worse and worse since then, then hardly anyone was lying, cheating, stealing, killing, or - that old favorite - commiting adultery way back then when we were sooooooo much better behaved than now.
Not persuaded by that? Well, let me roll the clock forward 2,700 years. Marriage and birth records in colonial America, which have been subjected to computerized tabulation over the last thirty years or so, reveal a mighty interesting statistic. One in five firstborn children to married couples, throughout the colonies, were born less than nine months after the parents' wedding.
Hard as it is to believe, young people then, just as today, were aware of their juicy bits and just as impatient to rock in their socks. Besides, without television and skateboards, really engaging entertainment was much harder to come by. Naturally - and I mean naturally! - that which simmers will often come to a boil.
Don't forget! Not all of the fornicating colonial kids produced offspring. The ratio of fornicators was even shorter than one in five.
From my point of view, nothing is so immoral as pretending to be other people's judge, whether in setting deceitful little "tests" for one person or declaring the whole lot of them (I mean us! You!) to be corrupt on no evidence worth the name.
Cheers!
You are way out in left field and frankly I take your statment as a joke because thats what I feel it was meant to be, because it is just flat out bull Cr@P. You made no sense and you frankly are ignorant of the Bible and therefore have no clue what you said and what they actual meaning is.
Also you must be out to lunch if you don't feel things are getting worse. Pal... get your head together because again you made no sense.
Fact is things ARE getting worse and people are getting more and more cold hearted, acting horribly with no sense of compassion, and not caring about others, hypocritical flat out to lunch. Cruelty is on the rise, deceit and uncaring, Unafectionate bevaiour is way on the rise, selfishness and all the rest is on the rise and these are reasons that people fall apart and that people get into depressions and bad things happen.
Either way obviously it's wrong to cheat and it's wrong to deceive, and it's REALLY wrong to take people for granted and to use them in some ways and to be presumptious.....that is dangerous!!. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO INFORM A MAN TO STRAIGHTEN HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/9/2007 7:49:43 AM | I had no idea I would freak anyone out so badly, Liv-Up. Let me reassure you now that you're free to believe anything you want to, regardless of the evidence. I have no interest in changing your mind. I'm only interested in correcting the written record, so that those who want to learn have the opportunity.
But you might want to reconsider the personal attacks. I talked about the question. In reply, you talked about me, and not at all respectfully. That is not debate. It isn't even adult behavior. Perhaps, when you're calm, you will see what others see in your text.
As for the question, well! You did say, among the personal remarks, that "things ARE getting worse and people are getting more and more cold hearted, acting horribly with no sense of compassion, and not caring about others."
A few counter examples may help you see your factual error. More people on earth are related to Ghengis Khan than to any other historical figure, because of his practice of ritually raping all the women he fancied among the people he conquered. Vlad the Impaler lined the roads with captured soldiers impaled alive through the crotch, the poles set in the ground, so that hundreds of men writhed there like so many screaming, bleeding popsicles. The public entertainments in ancient Rome included battles to the death and sacrifice to lions and worse, while the crowds cheered and screwed their whores in the stands. Henry the Eighth beheaded his wife because she didn't give him a male heir. Then he did it again. The Catholic Church burned hundreds, maybe thousands of people alive at the stake, in public ceremonies, because they disagreed with the church. The church perfected all manner of other torture techniques, as well, and used them enthusiastically. European fortune seekers murdered hundreds of thousands of Native Americans, Africans, Arabs, East Indians, and Asians in deliberately genocidal wars. Then there's all that enslavement of other human beings throughout history.
And how about the pharoah who ordered every male infant among the Jews to be executed? Or the Nazis who had lampshades and book covers made from the skin of Jews? Or the hundreds of years of ritual clitorectomies of infant girls with sharp stones or broken glass and without antiseptic or anesthesia?
No, people have treated each other horribly throughout history. In fact, today, we have many long-standing legal protections in place, including habeas corpus, the Geneva Conventions, and the strict separation of legal authority in the State from moral guidance in the churches. Much of the worst people have historically done to each other has ended or is on the decline. All in all, we treat one another less badly than every before in history. Not well, I suppose, but better than all that.
Or do you see horrors equal to these in your neighborhood? Do you?
Cheeers!
Vulf
Oh, and gotcha games are bad. I think we agree there, at least? | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO INFORM A MAN TO STRAIGHTEN HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 9:20:11 AM | | wow...i find it interesting how many people think what she did was so wrong - testing him-, but seem to find it okay that he fell for the bait and went to meet 'another woman'. "wow"... | |
|
| |
tort2
|
Joined: 11/21/2005
Msg: 267 | |
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 9:42:33 AM | For what its worth, I did the same thing to catch my long term gf. As far as I am concerned, if a relationship reaches the point where it is more than just casual dating and has 'officially' entered the serious comittment stage, then any ethical means (in my case, I created an online profile with a fake picture and personal facts and attempted to contact my ex-just to chat, mind you. Within an hour or so of chatting, I asked her if she had a boyfriend, I told her it was my policy not to share. She found it humorous and said that she DIDN'T have a boyfriend. Once I read that [and mind you, we had been going out for 6 months and she was making plans for our future], I had no alternative other then to terminate her) may be used to alleviate any doubts a person may have is fine (my opinion).
The key is to realize that a wrong decision (marrying a person with no integrity) can be calamitous to your psychological well being as well as bank account. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 9:52:38 AM | | tort the difference between what you did and what the OP di si that they were only dating. When it turns exclusive or committed then a whole new set of rules apply. In your case I can agree with it, In the OPs case no way. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 1:02:56 PM | Lets face facts, the Internet is full of folks who lie and play games with others emotions....why allow yourself to fall emotionally for someone who has no character?? ... We all test in many ways...the questions we ask, the observations we make, the gut feelings we have and the red flags we look for.....
The fact remains...if he had been seriously up front with her....HE WOULD NOT HAVE GONE ON LOOKING AND TAKEN THE BAIT.....I don't care, at what point, the interaction is at, between two people.....I want to know whats inside the other persons mind and heart...and if they are still searching, after finding me.....I'd just as soon know it as soon as possible and move on....
Also with so many deviate sexual kinkies out there....I had one gal friend who would do a sexy bi swingers profile and find out if there was anything a guy, she was chatting with, who wanted to meet her in person, had anything she should know about....like swinging, bi or s/M....you would be surprised how many have their closets full of JUNK......
People who have nothing to hide......hide nothing.....and find it intelligent on the woman's part to check out, potential dates/mates.....its the responsible thing to do....I would think those who would object.....might be the ones not being up front about who they really are..... | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 1:10:15 PM | whisper if there was a reasonable expectation of commitment or exclusive on both parts then you would be right. Anything else is pure parnoia and high school games.
As far as my being upfront on who I am. That is the only way you will ever find me. | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 1:36:52 PM | Hey!!! I found this thread by threading to your profile....holy crap...this is bizarre stuff...if someone has to set someone up, there is not much hope for anyone as I see it. If a person can't stay away from dating sites when seeing someone, they're not worth seeing.
You have some good insight...and you're on some good forums..
have a great day! | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO INFORM A MAN TO STRAIGHTEN HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 1:47:07 PM | Vulf - thanks for setting the record straight - phew!
I think it's so easy to focus on how awful the world has become, and so challenging to make changes to what we don't like.
Case in point is the topic of this thread. It's much easier to entrap people than it is to confront them directly, or to examine the reasons we don't trust them. It's also much easier to cheat (for some people) than to try to work on what's wrong with a relationship or even to end it. It's human nature to take the easy road, but it shows true depth of character to take the high road.
I'm in no way suggesting I'm infallible when it comes to choosing the easy road or the high road... | |
|
| IS IT WRONG TO SET A MAN UP TO CHECK HIM OUT??
Posted: 3/11/2007 2:06:10 PM | Whisper offers a window into the minds of those who set traps while they withhold trust, and I appreciate her candor. To take a sensible line from her post, the "questions [I] ask, the observations [I] make, the gut feelings [I] have and the red flags [I] look for" have my warning bells ringing up a storm. It appears - on the scant evidence of forum posts and no more - that whisper, among others, has a kink of her own, a kink that drives and governs her coupling behavior even more than does the simple desire for company. (That's a good working definition of kink, isn't it?)
Whisper mistrusts, and tests, and sets traps, while withholding her candor, affection, and trust. I have to wonder if she understands that trusting means accepting that we are all human and imperfect, and that even with the best intentions any of us might wander, if only to some naughty conversation or a stolen kiss. Trusting means believing someone despite scant evidence to the contrary. Whisper thinks that trusting means getting a 101% guarantee, which is silly, isn't it? If you have a guarantee, your trust isn't worth much, is it? There's nothing to test it.
No, whisper gets hers off by "catching" some fella she doesn't trust, some guy whom she is guarding her feelings from, whom she keeps at armslength while she conspires to be disappointed in him. And that is bent. Very, very kinky, except for one thing.
Forthright kinky people (the other kind) learn very quickly that, to make things work, they have to be candid with one another about what they want and what they don't. Kinky people get nowhere unless and until they absolutely trust one other with their most vulnerable and private selves. There's no guesswork in kink, and no "testing" of other people. The menu is far too long and complicated to throw darts at it and hope for a lucky strike. No, happy kinky people have bared their souls to one another and cultivated a most extraordinary trust in one another. They have no other choice if they don't want to be alone.
Which is troublesome for whisper, OPie, and so many others (who I suspect outnumber the forthright kinky, btw). Because, to organize one's intimate life around mistrust of and revulsion for other people makes for quite a knotty problem. Just how do you get close when your very modus operandi is to push other people into traps, categories, and, variously, away? It's like trying to farm by burning the crops to see how hardy they are.
To sum all this up, trust is never the result of a test, because, in life, no test is the final one, is it? Test me once, you'll test me again, because you don't choose to trust.
And that's it. Trust is a choice, a choice to be compassionate, accepting, and believing. It is not never nohow a test score.
And thank you sama! Let's save the world, shall we?
Cheers!
Vulf | |
|
| |
| |
|
| Page 11 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
