online dating service
REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

 

     
Posted In Forum:
Home   login   MyForums  
Show ALL Forums  
 
 Author Thread: Religion and sex in dating
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 140 (view)
 
Religion and sex in dating
Posted: 11/20/2009 8:21:18 AM
There exists a fascinating study about this topic and the author does an excellent job in addressing the various applications of the Koine Greek terms that have been translated into fornication, homosexual, the sexual behavior in general, including both the Hebrew text and the writings contained in the collection known as the new testament.

The author makes some strong arguments dealing with these issues that those of the Judeo-Christian faith traditions might consider in contrast to what monologues say that these texts say and mean.

It is titled, Divine Sex: Liberating Sex from Religious Tradition by Philo Thelos.

The author engages in discussion of these issues online, so those who read and feel challenged or have the intestinal fortitude to provide substantive evidence that refutes these arguments, can enjoy the experience.

Even those who don't subscribe to those belief systems will find a great deal of information and will likely enjoy presentation of these challenges to the traditional views of human sexual behavior within the Judeo-Christian system.

The author is a Christian and his actual name is Darwin Chandler. His website can be found at libertyandlove (dot) org.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 30 (view)
 
Is collecting Naked pictures of Women considered disease
Posted: 11/20/2009 7:56:23 AM
Do these photos, the collection of these photos, and your activities with these photos interfere with your life functioning, place you at-risk of meeting your basic needs or providing for the needs of others of whom you have a responsibility?

If the answer is no, you're not sick and you don't have a problem and are normal.

If yes, you might have a problem? The sickness is unlikely related to the photos and would be more likely related to other things, still you could be quite normal.

Only you can decide, in this case, if you have a "sick mind".

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Conflict in the bedroom.
Posted: 11/20/2009 7:47:31 AM
I would add to Outmind's comments, that if she has not dealt with the issues that might be haunting her from the rape, that you completely back-off of your preferred kink of "really hard sex" until she has completely dealt with the rape trauma and gives full and non-coerced consent, along with a safe word, should she experience any discomfort or PTSD events.

If you cannot be patient and wait for her to and if your preference is something that you need and she cannot fulfill those needs, it is likely you will become bored and unhappy. Like so many things, when personal needs go unfulfilled, they tend to become obsessions until they become fulfilled. If your preference is a no-go for her, then you have to consider whether or not you're willing and able to deny your personal desires and the fulfillment of that desire in order to stay be with her or to mutually negotiate an arrangement where you can stay together and still get your needs met in different ways.

Good Luck.

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 20 (view)
 
Start off as the new partner, then become their parent
Posted: 11/19/2009 5:40:53 AM

Have you hooked up with anyone after a few dates, have this person become a regular in your life (boyfriend/girlfriend), and over time, it sometimes seems like you have become their mother or father?


The relationship you are describing is classified as "complimentary" and essentially reflects a balance in personality styles, yin/yang, if you will.

Someone mentioned that some Type A personalities tend to dominate conversations, need to be right and in control at all costs. This personality type compounded with ADHD tends to amplify these characteristics many times over. So much so, that someone with a Type B personality, which is the average personality type, or the Type AB, might simply tire of expending the energy and don't feel a need to compete for attention or the spotlight.

Type A personalities tend to be easily irritated, have little patience and are challenged with self-control issues, when the management skills for these behaviors are not acquired as a child.

The problem, it seems, is not with the other person as much as it is with the Type A personality and how it functions and is or is not, self-managed. If this is a pattern (the OP has not indicated whether or not this is a frequent experience), then the issue has everything to do with his how he interacts with others and how they respond over time.

If he wishes to alter his interactions and relationships, he will need to examine his own behavior and make adjustments so that his behavior does not become dominant and controlling. This will be necessary to sustain a collaborative complementary relationship.

The complaint of becoming like a parent to a partner is simply the result of the person adjusting to the lack of balance in the relationship. After a period of time, the partner's adjust their way of being with the other person to achieve balance. Thus, when the Type A dominates and controls, the Type B, or Type AB, takes on the role that rebalances the relationship to accommodate the Type A behavior. These, however, don't typically end well. Especially when the other is a Type AB.

The OP might even subconsciously seek out these types of partners and when they adjust to balance the relationship, he doesn't care for how it is rebalanced, which is again, perpetuating the cycle of dominance and control. Because it is subconscious, he doesn't realize that it is his behavior that is the catalyst for the shift in the relationship and believes it is a character or personality flaw in the partner who makes the balancing adjustment.

If he wishes to change the pattern, he must change his behavior.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 60 (view)
 
Possible for a man to love two women at once?
Posted: 11/14/2009 9:58:13 AM

When it comes to romance.. each person has ONE GALLON of this "love" to give.


The substantive evidence that supports this assertion is found where?

Love, hate, anger, and other emotions are not quantifiable and are not measurable. Neither are these emotions limited. There is no evidence that supports the idea that emotions are finite. Neither does their exist any substantive evidence that attachments are limited beyond each individuals personal level of satiation.

There is ample evidence to support that human beings can "love" and are capable of being "in-love" with more than one human at the same time, and even several humans at the same time.

It isn't necessary to convince another that you love them. They accept it as fact or they do not accept it. Those who do not accept the fact cannot be convinced and why would want to convince another human beyond being who they are as a person. If that is not enough, there is no reciprocity and one is best served to move forward.

Each person must determine for themselves how they choose to live their life. If one cannot bear being with someone who has relationships with others with whom they are "in-love," they should seek to develop a relationship that is compatible with their personal way of being and those involved move on toward the type of relationships that fit their personal idea of relationship.

Relationships are only defined by the people in them. They are not and should not be defined by those who are not in them.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Help Please....
Posted: 11/10/2009 4:47:58 AM
The issues is psychological and is likely related to "performance anxiety" since his penis becomes erect from normal stimulation. Now that this event has occured three times, he's likely focused on "I hope it doesn't happen again" which is fueling the loss of his erection (which is what I presume you are referring to in this case). He needs to relax and stop imposing pressure on himself to perform.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 67 (view)
 
feeling slutty, good?
Posted: 11/10/2009 4:40:50 AM

No need to get offended by someone using childish terms.
Just give him a good spanking!

If I'm a 'slut'.....(a female without puritanical morality).........because I enjoy sex without guilt,shame or regret...so be it.I laugh at little men and women who think that word is going to offend me.When I read it, I know it's coming from a very weak,ignorant,repressed, typically judgemental religious person or someone with a complex towards women's sexuality and I actually feel no anger...just pity for them.

They simply can't ATTRACT a sexually evolved woman to save thier LIVES,and they are pissed off.HAHAHA!

If we don't give it POWER....it has none. LAUGH at it!!!
The men who use that term are simply projecting thier own unhealthy attitudes towards women as sexual beings.

OT: Getting dressed to the nines and acting SEXY in a public place is damn fun....but slutty?

Not unless the man has a Madonna/Whore Complex, does he put women in two categories:Good vs.Bad Women.Dirty vs Clean.Marriage Material vs.Just SEX.

Steer clear of those guys, as they never change thier attitudes...it's WAY too engrained in them to change and the real bummer is,they marry the women they deem "PURE" to ultimately CHEAT with the women they deem "DIRTY"! LMAO!

ALL women enjoy sex and being considered sexy.Some just are less afraid to be assertive and overt about it.And if not for US....men would still be BEGGING the uptight withholders for a lil kiss before marriage! LOL


All that I can say is:
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 69 (view)
 
Stripping and relationship....
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:31:59 AM

The gal I last cited was honest enough to explain how jaded the occupation was and it's paybacks; but guess what unless there were sons of apparent tramps to support both prostitution and strippers would there be such a demeaning occupation to insult womanhood virtues?


As always, generalizations are unwise. All occupations have elements of a dark nature. The adult entertainment industry experiences elements that have positive and negative effects. Every occupation has trade-offs. Each individual must determine for themselves whether they can function within any occupational framework according to their own ethical guidelines.

It would be interesting to see the citation for the universal definition of "real man".

The contradictions that exist within society are fascinating. As one occupation is vilified and degraded as

The Gal I cited knows how the job effected her, she knows that she TRAMPED OUT MANY WEAK MINDED MALES WITH HER LIES FOR THE BANKROLL!

and yet we encourage to enter a profession that in general, is successful based on the ability to lie, believeably. Not all attorneys lie to earn their money, just not all adult entertainment professionals lie to earn their money. Yet, in both professions, there is lying and misrepresentation of the facts. One is vilified and the other is extolled as a profession to which one should aspire for prestige and economic benefit.

Fascinating.

Best.

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 170 (view)
 
COWARD ! - The Ignoring Game
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:12:36 AM

and then he does a 180 saying you are pressuring him and disappears. ... if he doesn't want me, FINE, but, find your kahunas, and face me and tell me why. Then I can move on.



It seems that he did tell you why. You wrote that he said, you were pressuring him.


I am ok now, but I had some horrible days and nights and wrestled with the entire gamut of: rejection, pain, broken heart, grief, etc.


It seems from the repetitive vitriol of this event in you life, it is more than clear that you are not okay now.


He wrote:

very soon....
but not today
zx

Whatever...............that is so manipulative and controlling as if I should just hold my breath until he decides to grace me with the privilege of speaking to him. It disgusted me to be made to feel so unimportant after all we shared.


I'm not sure what is manipulative or controlling in the words, "very soon ... but not today". The response was vague as to a time line and clear as to when a conversation would not occur.

It seems that you've assigned meanings and motives to five words that in no way reflect the definition of manipulative or controlling. It is his choice as to whether or not he will speak with you, just as it is your choice to speak with him, seek to speak with him, or choose neither and invest yourself in a different direction. Lastly, while you felt disgusted, let's not assign this individual as the cause of your feeling so unimportant. Your response to these events are your choice. You choose to feel disgusted and you chose to assign your feelings of unimportance to these events as the cause. You could also have chosen not to feel disgusted, not to assign your feelings of unimportance to these events, and chosen to feel important, secure, and self-confident. No one can make you feel anything or think anything about yourself. Only you can choose to respond in these ways.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 112 (view)
 
COWARD ! - The Ignoring Game
Posted: 10/30/2009 6:29:08 PM

Baltro ACP " don't give up your day job


Now that's funny.
Perhaps being stalked in an attempt to force someone capitulate to another person's demands might not be coercive in your reality. It is in mine.

Such activities result in emergency protective orders followed by restraining orders and legal action in the my world. Perhaps this is not so in yours. If that's the case, I prefer my world.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 111 (view)
 
COWARD ! - The Ignoring Game
Posted: 10/30/2009 6:24:37 PM

ppl who talk s l o w is a good indicator of deception,


According to this unsubstantiated assertion, my clients should never believe me and my students are being fed lies.

I wonder what spelling with spaces between the letters indicates?

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 110 (view)
 
COWARD ! - The Ignoring Game
Posted: 10/30/2009 6:21:34 PM

Where on earth did you get the impression the OP was 'terrorizing' anyone from what she said?? Your reaction is really quite overboard.



The OP wrote:

If you think you are saving our feelings and just HOPING we will fade away it doesn't always work. Some women will not leave you alone until we get an answer or our "closure".


The last sentence seems to suggest coercive behavior.


Only a selfish person who is only concerned for themself plays this silly game of ignoring people out of their life. Count yourself lucky, OP, you dodged a bad one!


Some people who choose that approach are selfish, others are self-preserving. Context provides background of understanding.

No. I'm not kidding. One's own closure should not depend on the action or inaction of another. No one is entitled to anymore than someone is willing to provide to them. Saying "goodbye" is fine and courteous. Providing a reason isn't required. Desired perhaps and yet not an entitlement.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 6 (view)
 
COWARD ! - The Ignoring Game
Posted: 10/29/2009 5:32:08 PM

If you think you are saving our feelings and just HOPING we will fade away it doesn't always work. Some women will not leave you alone until we get an answer or our "closure".


While I understand your perspective, others are not required to function according to your rules of communication. Terrorizing someone in order to coerce a desired behavior reflects a number of significant mental and emotional issues that might suggest why someone would simply end any communication and not provide any "closure". The only closure that one is entitled to is that which one provides for oneself.

Perhaps the behavior you've described might be viewed negatively and others might hold the perception that such behavior was an act of self-preservation.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 64 (view)
 
Stripping and relationship....
Posted: 10/29/2009 5:21:41 PM

You hold so many folks in such high regard. How's that workin' for ya?



I remember when I was 24 and had it all figured out, knew all that there was to know, and felt the need to inform everyone else who held a different perspective how they were wrong.

Then I experienced life and found that there was little that was black and white and the rest were variants of gray.

Youth truly is wasted on the young.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 63 (view)
 
Stripping and relationship....
Posted: 10/29/2009 5:14:57 PM

Just because something is legal does NOT mean it is either moral or ethical


True and just because you do not believe something is moral or ethical does not make those things immoral or not ethical. They are only immoral an not ethical for you.

Morality or ethics are relative terms and are not universal.

Most of the signers of the U. S. Constitutions were Deists, not Christians, and while they were wrong, those signers did not consider "slaves" to be human. Just as Hebrews do not consider "pork" to be food.

Apparently the ERA had no credibility and certainly not enough support.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 54 (view)
 
Stripping and relationship....
Posted: 10/28/2009 2:51:30 PM

That makes about as much sense as Brando's role in the GODFATHER, justifying the gangster Murders and violence and pointing out how normal and accepted their family was. REALLY?????????


Apples to oranges. The murder and violence are illegal and forced upon others against their will, exotic dancers are not illegal in most of the U.S. and no one is forcing the dancers or the patrons against their will. Your analogy fails because its premise is false.


Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 52 (view)
 
Stripping and relationship....
Posted: 10/28/2009 5:48:12 AM
I wanted to be a stripper for the longest time... and idea I have now given up because I truly love my boyfriend and he is completely against it. But is there someone out there that date a stripper and or is a stripper and have a balanced relationship?


I've worked with couples in the adult entertainment industry, these include females who disrobe, are not robed, burlesque, and others that fall under the domain of "exotic dancers". Relationship success has little to do with how either partner earn their incomes and much to do with how they mutually negotiate their lives and create their "we" approach to life as a partnership. Relationships in which one or both partners attempt to control and dominate are typically unbalanced and are likely to fail (unless being dominated and controlled is part of your mutually negotiated relationship ).

The issues that seem to emerge most often with couples where one partner is engaged in the adult entertainment field is that of the "green-eyed monster" and how s/he is allowed to take control of the relationship rather than the partners. When there are problems they also seem to be correlated with financial issues and are cyclical. As an example, Susie performs exotic dances for the ACME Gentleman's Club. She earns in wages and tips over the course of a week around $1500.00. Bob, her husband/cohabitating partner goes to the club on occasion to be near Susie and while intellectually, he understands that Susie is "just doing her job" her acting sometimes seems real to him and invites feelings of ownership, inviting a lack of control over Susie and worries that one of these patrons will take her away from him or she might like one of them more than him and fall in-love and leave him. This tends to fester in Bob's mind and he doesn't say anything, just starts to be more closed off, is argumentative, and is easily agitated by little things that Susie may and may not be doing. Finally, it becomes too much, a major argument occurs and Bob demands that Susie quit her job. Susie loves Bob and doesn't want to fight and have problems. There relationship is more important. Susie quits her job and finds something at a local shipping company making $12.00/hour. Things seem to be improving between Susie and Bob, and then Bob begins to be frustrated, agitated, again. They begin fighting over money again, Bob and Susie are having trouble meeting their financial obligations, Bob and Susie both miss going on their long weekends to the beach and enjoying themselves, free from financial worries. It occurs to both Bob and Susie that they miss the things and opportunities that Susie's work as an exotic dancer provides. Bob tells Susie he was silly for feeling so jealous and cannot understand why he gets so jealous when he knows that Susie loves him and wouldn't hurt him. He tells her it's okay with him if she goes back to the adult entertainment industry. Susie agrees and the process starts over again, in which everything that was just presented occurs again, and again, and again, until the couple learns how to communicate and mutually negotiates how the relationship functions, what the rules of the job include, and Susie's role is that of an actress and performer, that her interactions with customers are have no meaning and Bob learns that what he sees is nothing more than watching a dramatic play in which Susie is a performer and nothing she says or does has any meaning or connection to the customer(s). It is only her job. Bob learns to recognize that everything that goes on in his mind from observing Susie is of his own creation and he has assigned meanings and motives that do not exist.

As mentioned, this is a common scenario and is the typical issue with couples where one partner is an adult entertainment professional. Successful relationships in where partners work in this field function the same way as all others, clear communication and a life that is mutually negotiated and lived according the guidelines and boundaries to which both have agreed to function.

Yes, these relationships like all other can be balanced. It isn't the profession or job that creates balance or the lack thereof. It is the people in the relationship that create the environment in which balance will or will not emerge and be sustained.

With regard to some of the comments, sadly, there are far too many value judgments being placed on this idea by well-meaning folks who do not understand that not all people subscribe to their particular belief system and the source of their philosophy of life and living.

As for references to people performing in this industry as "whores" and "harlots", it is wise to consider that at some level, humans are all whores and harlots. We all sell ourselves, at some point, for a price, sex is only one service that humans can sell, there are others that are much more base. Of course, in the U.S. thanks to the heavily Puritan influenced social construction, sex, sexuality, and anything that can remotely be connected to sex, is anathema publicly, while pursued with a vengeance in private. So frightening is the concept of sex and sexuality that purveyors of the Puritan perspective go to great lengths in their propaganda to present false assertions, twist facts, to play upon the fears and concerns of an unenlightened public, in spite of the substantive evidence that destroys these false assertions. Utilizing lies and falsehoods as a means to manipulate others invites a great lack of trust and credibility to those individuals and organizations who use such tactics. The evidence of these tactics are seen in some of the individual comments on this thread and on a larger scale, with organizations at the mezzo and macro levels of society. We can only hope that truth and education will prevail.

Regards,

ACP

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 31 (view)
 
Narcissitic Personality Disorder or Psychopath
Posted: 10/9/2009 3:42:10 PM

Dr Sam Vaknin


A little bit of research into Sam Vaknin reveals a story behind the man worth being aware of, before one assumes that Mr Vaknin has any academic credentials that would warrant the way that he touts himself as "Sam Vaknin, PhD". His trading on his alleged degree is personally offensive to me since I have personal experience in how much work it is to earn that particular degree, legitimately.

Everyone reading Mr. Vaknin should be aware that he is a self-proclaimed narcissist who makes his living by, well, being a narcissist. How narcissistic.

Mr. Vaknin has no credentials or licensure in psychology. His alleged PhD (keep reading) is supposedly in Philosophy. He has been forced, legally, to put this disclaimer on his website and other materials so that his rear doesn't get sued: " I am NOT a mental health professional - read the DISCLAIMER". Yet, he does all that he can to give the impression that he is a mental health professional of some kind.

According to Vaknin’s own biography, his education goes something like this:

“Graduated a few semesters in the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa”
Technion appears to be an accredited institution. But what about Vaknin’s wording? Did he mean that he graduated in a few semesters? Or did he mean that he completed only a few semesters? He certainly doesn’t say, and probably has reason to leave the wording vague. Again, impressions are more important than factual truth.

Ph.D. in Philosophy (major: Philosophy of Physics) – Pacific Western University, California, USA.
Pacific Western University is a “distance-learning” university that is not accredited. It is an on-line school. Vaknin claims to have earned a doctorate, although they don’t even offer a doctoral program. Academic rigor? Please! It is very well known that this 'institute' is nothing more than a diploma mill. For very little work, and a whole lot of money, nearly anyone can be awarded the degree of their choice.

“Graduate of numerous courses in Finance Theory and International Trading”
Mr. Vaknin uses “pass” and “graduate” interchangeably, which means that he likely never completed any undergraduate program at Technion, and again makes the worth of his supposed 'doctorate' highly questionable. Apparently, having taken “numerous courses” in business, he considers himself an expert— claims to be an economic advisor to Macedonia. I would like to see any kind of proof of that, as well. If his doctorate was purchased from a diploma mill online 'university', is his 'economic advising' just as contrived?

Certified E-Commerce Concepts Analyst by Brainbench.
Certified in Psychological Counselling Techniques by Brainbench.
Certified Financial Analyst by Brainbench.
When Mr. Vaknin uses the word “certified,” he means it in the same way that he “graduated courses.” Brainbench doesn’t offer certification of any sort. It’s a website with online tests that strive to offer a prediction of employee success. Saying that BrainBench “certifies” you is like saying that Quizilla can “diagnose” you. Mr. Vaknin isn’t actually certified in anything—at most, he’s reasonably well-informed in these particular issues, as are so many on this forum.

Sam Vaknin... PhD? Please! Well-respected? Pleeeaaaaze!

I found reading his writings useful only if I reminded myself continually that I was reading the writings of a self-proclaimed narcissist, who manufactured his credentials, and who now earns his living by being a narcissist.


Just FYI,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 10 (view)
 
Have you had periods of no interest in sex in committed relationship?
Posted: 9/6/2009 7:19:00 PM
At 42, you might be experiencing peri-menopaus. Additionally, BC pills can affect libido. A complete hormone panel and a physical to rule out any physiological issues. There are a variety of reasons that could be influencing your lack of interest. You have only touched on small few.

Best.

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 1 (view)
 
Missing Forum
Posted: 9/5/2009 12:48:38 PM
The "Sex and Dating" forum seems to be consistently missing form the Forum list when I log in. Any ideas as to why this might be happening?

Thanks.

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 43 (view)
 
cuckold?
Posted: 9/3/2009 11:13:27 AM

Wife swapping is another name for the 'hot wife', I think this is part of the mystique of 'swinging'. I think that is part of reason these guys enjoy seeing their wives getting done by other guys.... they just won't admit it....


Wife swapping is a forerunner to the term "Swinging and Swingers" as heterosexual couples exchanged partners. A "hotwife, sharedwife, slutwife, cuckoldress" is a separate fetish and lifestyle, although they can also be swingers, or "wife swappers", the terms are not mutually exclusive.

Her is a little article that I prepared sometime back that might bring some clarification to the discussion of cuckolds.

What is a Cuckold and Cuckoldry?

Cuckold is derived from the Old French for the cuckoo
Cuckoo

The cuckoos are a family, Cuculidae, of near passerine birds. The order Cuculiformes, in addition to the cuckoos, also includes the turacos ....
, cocu, with the pejorative
Pejorative

Words and phrases are pejorative if they imply disapproval or contempt. When used as an adjective, pejorative is synonymous with derogatory, derisive, dyslogistic, and contemptuous....
suffix -ald. The earliest written use of the Middle English derivation, cokewold, occurs in 1250. The females of certain varieties of cuckoo lay their eggs in other bird’s nests, freeing themselves from the need to nurture the eggs to hatching.

Cuckolds have sometimes been written as "wearing the horns of a cuckold" or just "wearing the horns". This refers to the fact that the man being cuckolded is the last to know of his wife's infidelity. He is wearing horns that can be seen by everybody but him. This also refers to a tradition claiming that in villages of unknown European location, the community would gather to collectively humiliate a man whose wife gives birth to a child recognizably not his own. According to this legend, a parade was held in which the hapless husband is forced to wear antlers on his head as a symbol of his wife’s infidelity. Whether this did actually happen or not is inconsequential as the phrase has survived.

In French the term is porter des cornes and is used by Molière to describe someone whose consort has been unfaithful.
Molière

Jean-Baptiste Poquelin, also known by his stage name Molire, was a French playwright and actor who is considered one of the greatest masters of comedy in Western literature....
's L'École des femmes
The School for Wives

The School for Wives is a theatrical comedy written by the 17th century French playwright Moli?re and considered by some critics to be one of his finest achievements....
(1662) is the story of a man who mocks cuckolds and becomes one at the end. In Geoffrey Chaucer

The term dates from the Roman empire, since legionaries returning from the war were given horns as a triumph or prize. So, the use of the term is a mockery of the husband, victorious in the battlefield, but defeated in his own bed.

Cultural usage
The concept occurs in Brazil, Bulgaria, Greece, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Czech Republic, Croatia, Hungary, Slovenia, Turkey, and the USA. Terminologies used in different languages include:

Spanish language

Spanish or Castilian is a Romance language that originated in northern Spain, and gradually spread in the Kingdom of Castile and evolved into the principal language of government and trade....

Arabic language

Arabic is a Central Semitic language, thus related to and classified alongside other Semitic languages such as Hebrew language and Aramaic language....
speaking countries, "horns" are a metaphor for suffering the infidelity of a partner, not limited to husbands in modern usage. The gesture of the horned hand
Corna

The sign of the horns, also corna is a hand gesture with a vulgar meaning in Mediterranean countries and a variety of meanings and uses in other cultures....
can be used to insult the cuckold.

Italian language

Italian is a Romance language spoken by about 63 million people as a first language, primarily in Italy. In Switzerland, Italian is one of four Linguistic geography of Switzerland’s....
equivalent is cornuto, sharing the same double entendre with the English word cornuted, asserting both featuring horns

A horn is a pointed projection of the skin on the head of various mammals, consisting of a covering of horn surrounding a core of living bone.... and cuckolded. Its use is playful and lightheartedly derisive, with little or no particular efficacy in scorning someone during confrontations as it is lacking earnest damning credentials, potentially leading all parties to a chuckle and smothering the feud at its inception. A pervasive metaphor

Portuguese language

Portuguese is a Romance language that originated in what is now Galicia and Portugal. It is derived from the Latin language spoken by the Romanization Pre-Roman peoples of the Iberian Peninsula around 2000 years ago.... the terms corno ("horn"), cornudo or chifrudo ("horned") are used to spite or mock the cheated male partner. The expression corno manso ("tame horned") is used to indicate those men who, although cheated by their partners, come to accept it as a fact of their lives.


Spanish language

The word cornudo is used to describe a male partner whose female partner is sexually unfaithful. A consenting cuckold, cabrón

The Chinese term for "cuckold" is literally translated to "wearing a green hat" (???, dài lu mào). It is because of this that it is extremely rare to see any Chinese man wearing a green hat. Chinese

In Trinidad & Tobago the term "horn" is used in conjunction with cuckolds, or anyone of either sex who has a cheating spouse. Other uses include "to horn" (to sleep with someone else's spouse), "horning" (the act of cheating on your spouse), "horner-man" (a man who is sleeping with someone else's spouse) and "horner-woman" (a woman who is sleeping with someone else's spouse), "to get horn", "to take (a) horn". It is usually used in a pejorative sense. Numerous calypsoes have been written about the topic; the most famous being "Horn Me Sandra" by the Calypsonian

This horn analogy extends to Turkey, where the cuckolded husband is termed boynuzlu, "horned one".

History of Cuckoldry
Cuckoldry as a fetish has been around since at least the time of Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

Leopold von Sacher-Masoch

Leopold Ritter von Sacher-Masoch was an Austrian writer and journalist, who gained renown at his time for his stories of Galicia life and Romanticism novels....
(the writer after whom the term masochism is coined). Sacher-Masoch's wife, Aurora Rümelin, recounts in her memoirs multiple instances of Sacher-Masoch asking, begging and even threatening her to make her cuckold him so he could experience the pain and humiliation of the act. To that end, Sacher-Masoch created multiple opportunities for the adulterous act to occur, none of which were successful. While Rümelin indulged her husband in many of his masochistic requests, due in large part because of her dependence on him to financially support her and her children, she steadfastly refused to cuckold him. Rümelin's refusal to succumb to Sacher-Masoch's cuckolding fantasies was one of the causes of their separation and her subsequent descent into poverty.

The term has acquired additional meanings within certain sub-cultures, referring to couples wherein the female is dominant and she takes on additional partners, while the male takes on a submissive role where he is monogamous to her, or only becoming involved sexually when it is felt to be emotionally supportive of her and her lover, or remaining altogether celibate.

Cuckoldry as a fetish

"By definition, a cuckold is a married man whose wife cheats on him behind his back. A cuckold fetishist, on the other hand, not only knows about his wife's dalliances, but often enjoys the humiliation of being forced to watch and often help "clean up".." says Tristan Taormino, columnist, pornographer, and author. [3] In this subculture the female is sexually dominant and she takes on additional partners, while the male takes on a submissive role where he is monogamous to her, or only becoming involved sexually when it is felt to be emotionally supportive of her and her lover, or remaining altogether celibate.
The desire for the male to enjoy being cuckolded is more related to sexual gratification and less about interpersonal ideals (respect, commissary, between the partners). Sometimes this is part of the sexual fantasy because they gain sexual arousal through being humiliated. Other times the husband finds pleasure through that of his wife. In a broader context, the contrast between a cuckold and the additional male participant is sometimes used to summarize an individual's personality or behavior and the variability commonly seen in male libidos: the cuckold or beta male suggesting a lack of masculinity or alpha male representing that missing masculinity
The wife and extramarital participant may both enjoy attempting to actively include him in the act of cuckolding as much as possible through serving her. Some common themes include praising her appearance, attempting to stimulate her sexually at the same time as the additional participant, and generally being engrossed in her enjoyment. It is common for the male to be more absorbed with the female's pleasure than his own.
The wife who enjoys cuckoldry is sometimes referred to as a hotwife, slutwife, sharedwife, or a cuckoldress

Swinging

Swinging, sometimes referred to as the swinging lifestyle, is "non-monogamous sexual activity, treated much like any other social activity that can be experienced as a couple." The phenomenon of swinging may be seen as part of the Sexual Revolution of recent decades, which occurred after the upsurge in sexual activity made possible by...
or cuckoldress. In a broader context, the contrast between a cuckold and the additional male participant is sometimes used to summarize an individual's personality or behavior and the variability commonly seen in male libidos: the cuckold or beta male suggesting a lack of masculinity or alpha male

Cuckolding among female-dominant couples differs from the original definition of cuckolding in that many of these men are willing to be cuckolded by their wives, sometimes as part of the their sexual fantasy.

Sexual fantasy

A sexual fantasy, also called an erotic fantasy, is a deliberate Fantasy or pattern of thoughts with the goal of creating or enhancing sexual feelings; it is mental imagery that an individual considers Eroticism.... and sometimes because they gain genuine sexual arousal

Sexual arousal

Sexual arousal is the arousal of sexual desires in preparation for sexual behavior....
through being humiliated by his wife being better sexually fulfilled with a potentially superior male, or by the wife domination of her husband making him give her oral satisfaction after she returns fresh from her lover’s side.

The desire for the male to enjoy being cuckolded is more related to sexual gratification and less about interpersonal ideals (respect, commissary, between the partners).

In most modern cases of cuckolding, the husband usually finds pleasure in compersion.

Compersion

Compersion is a term used by practitioners of polyamory to describe the experience of taking pleasure that one's partner is experiencing pleasure, even if the source of their pleasure is other than yourself.... through that of his wife and they (the wife and extramarital participant) may both enjoy attempting to actively include him in the act of cuckolding as much as possible through serving her. Some common themes include praising her appearance, attempting to stimulate her sexually at the same time as the additional participant, and generally being engrossed in her enjoyment. It is common for the male to be more absorbed with the female’s pleasure than his own.

While the word defines the cuckold husband as being submissive, powerless and/or in need of humiliation to receive stimulation, contemporary practice suggests that many in such a relationship are experiencing something altogether different than cuckoldry. Rather than passively acceding to the infidelity and desires of an errant wife, this cuckold is more in keeping with the male partners defined in polyamory

Polyamory

Polyamory is the desire, practice, or acceptance of having more than one loving, intimate relationship at a time with the full knowledge and consent of everyone involved....an open relationship.

Open Relationship

An open relationship denotes a relationship in which the participants are free to have sexual intercourse with other partners. If the couples making this agreement are married, it is an open marriage, or swinging


Cuckquean

The term "cuckold" is exclusively used for a male whose wife takes other partners; a woman whose husband strays in such fashion is known as a cuckquean.

Wittol

The term “wittol” is used husbands who consent to their wife's extramarital sex, and non-married couples in analogous situations.

Understanding of the Phenomenon

There is a dearth of research available about this phenomenon. Recent information suggests that “sperm competition” might play a role as an influencing variable. Research conducted by Shackleford and Goetz (2007) offers this as one suggestion among others. It is anticipated that further research will be conducted to better understand this phenomenon and the influences that motivates the behavior.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 362 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 9/3/2009 9:48:49 AM

What it comes down to is that we don't 'need' sex - we 'want' sex. Many make the mistake, especially men, of saying "I need sex". But the only time we actually need it is in order to pro-create. I have spent years inbetween relationships being celibate, and did not die. Therefore sex is a want, a desire - not a need. So the excuse "I needed sex" doesn't really wash imo.


Abraham Maslow and his research would strongly disagree with your asserted opinion.

Best,
ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 344 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 8/31/2009 9:06:11 PM

am in the heat of a fight with my husband...I am not feeling love, or honor, etc......I am feeling hurt and angry. Does that mean because I failed at that at that time, my contract with him is broken and all other aspects void??????????? ( still between the two of us....not bringing in a third party)


Each relationship agreement is mutually negotiated by the partners involved. Each relationship functions in the ways that those involved deem best. If an aspect of the contract is broken, the other partner certainly can give the violation a pass, issue a warning, etc. How each couple chooses to enforce their mutually negotiated contract is between them.


Give me a break. Infidelity is a big NO NO...........


Agreed. Any violation of a marital contract is infidelity (violation of trust/agreement).


Why not just say they didn't fulfill the contract. In that senario.........hell leaving the toliet seat up would be grounds for dismissal!!!!!!!!


Only if it is clearly stipulated in the agreement. If not something is not defined, it cannot be violated. "Traditional" vows as you call them are quite vague or ambiguous. There is no specificity and much generality open to a multitude of interpretations.


What do they tell these people that believe them and then find out it is a fling, a cheap F*ck...........whatever the occasion for the lies and deception????


You would have to ask these people. You seem to have ascribed meanings to my comments that do not exist. I have not advocated cheating.

As for the lies and deception, the circumstances of the lie or deception are no different than any other. It seems to me that any wise adult would perform due diligence as their caveat emptor.

Lies are never justified. Relationships should always be built on truth so all involved can make informed decisions.

Agreed. There is no good reason to cheat and as long as the mutual agreement that organizes the relationship is intact, it is wrong to cheat. Once that agreement is void, there is no cheating.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 343 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 8/31/2009 8:49:18 PM

Do you agree that both the communication of terms as well as of violations of terms plays a role? If she called me right before the penetration and said "I am about to fornicate and you are not here." I would not call it cheating, because I can react accordingly.


I understand your point. In your scenario, she may and may not be "cheating". If you violated you agreement, ethically, she should inform you that the agreement is void. In your same scenario, if she violates the agreement through extra-marital sexual activity without your permission, then you would be free to do likewise without "cheating". In reality, one can only cheat once, after the initial breaking of the the agreement, it no longer exists.

Secondly, in your scenario, your wife cannot be fornicating as that act is commonly referred to as sex prior to marriage. However, in the strictest sense of the word which is etymologically rooted in the Greek pornea, refers to all "sexual immorality" whatever that means as defined in by cultural context.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 324 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 8/30/2009 7:23:43 PM
I read all of your replys to my post.............however long...and I stand BEHIND all of what I wrote before.


Yes, having faith in one's own opinion is important and at the same time, ignoring facts that contradict that same faith in one's opinion leads to an unsubstantiated and unsustainable opinion.


but NOTHING, NOTHING justifies cheating, going outside of the relationship for one's own gratification.


I agree. As long as the mutually agreed upon relationship contract is mutually maintained, there is no justification for cheating ( breaking any vow) contained within. At the same time, once the mutual agreement has been violated in any form, there is no longer a valid agreement and as a consequence, any actions taken can no longer be defined as "cheating" or "infidelity". One cannot violate a contract that is no longer in force.

I'm really not sure about the comments regarding your "get out" statement and my response beyond clarifying that depth of intimacy is not related solely to sexual interaction, therefore your reference to sexual activity as being "that intimate" is an invalid measure since equal and more depth of intimacy can and is achieved outside of sexual interaction.


I am not so sure about what you were trying to convey about the differences in how a man and a woman interact.....or if you were trying to say that sex can be fullfilling without emotional attachment.??? I for one have never found that to be true. My husbands were not the only men I was ever with........ I however have never been with one...or for that matter ever even met one that can have a one night stand, a short relationship, fling....whatever without SOME emotion. I don't care what ANYONE says........I don't buy it.


Let's not confuse emotions and emotional attachment. They are different things. Humans are emotional beings and while humans emote, it is not mutually exclusive to attachment. Your experience is limited to your reality and while your experience suggests that emotion at some level is required for sex to be fulfilling for you. Your individual experience is not generalizable to all human beings. It is only valid for you and a percentage of the human population that experience emotions and sex similarly. Yet, you again have confused "emotions" and "emotional attachment" and sexual interaction. If humans did not emote, sexual interaction would be quite boring and more of a chore than a pleasure. Experiencing emotion is significantly different from experiencing emotional attachment.

You are quite free to not "buy it" the world refused to buy that the earth was round for centuries despite the empirical evidence that proved otherwise. Some people don't want to be confused by the facts others find no confusion in facts. People generally align with the views that help them feel safe within their personal worldview.


The other thing is the
integrity of one's word....when they took thoses VOWS.


You seem to be confused. I am not advocating that any one should violate their contractual agreement or "vows" as you write. At the same time, the "vows" are only valid as long as they mutually maintained. When one partner violates one, they have violated all at which point, there is nothing left to break and there is no violation of one's integrity. So if your verbal agreement (vows) contain the commitment to never withhold sex from your partner and you violate that vow, the entire verbal agreement is void--Game over as they say.

Let's not forget that not every relationship includes "vows".

There are a multitude of ways for "cheating" to occur. It is not limited to sex.

One should stand by their opinion and should only alter it when they are convinced by the evidence that change is warranted.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 303 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 8/30/2009 7:36:31 AM

All I have to say is this.People take vows before GOD ALMIGHTY


Some do. Some do not. It is only applicable to those who subscribe to a views that include a monotheistic paradigm. Other's do not. regardless, whether one does or does not, break one vow, break them all. For those who follow a Judeo-Christian philosophy, it seems that this is not a new idea, e.g. if you break one commandment, you have broken them all.

Thus, the contract is null and void and those involved are now at-risk of experiencing the natural consequences for that violation (s).

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 302 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 8/30/2009 7:25:29 AM
My husband was very ill for several years before he died. No sex really since I was in my middle forties.........he died when I was fifty


My condolences on your loss. Loss of a partner death or divorce is very difficult.


He has been gone for over three years and I still miss him more than I can say. We had a very active sex life until his illness made it impossible to have sex. Did I cheat.......not on your life.
I loved him with all my heart. There was sooooooooooo much more to our marriage than the sex. I love sex, as much and definitely a lot more than many people. I missed it, but I loved him with or without it. The intimacy of a relationship or marriage is not all about the sex, but the closeness, the caring, being half of a whole.


Having sexual needs and desires without an acceptable outlet is challenging for most people. When libido is inhibited, due to illness, emotional and psychological influences, or the natural progression of human development in the lifespan that affects libido temporarily or permanently, the challenge is less complicated. When one partner is not experiencing any of these challenges, it becomes exceptionally challenging. While masturbation is an acceptable outlet for some, research indicates that it is a short term solution as the experience is much less fulfilling as those experiences that include intercourse with a partner.

It is true that marriage is not all about sex. At the same time, sexual interaction, sexual intercourse is an integral component in a relationship regardless of the legal status. It is primarily through sexual intercourse and sexual interaction that men connect (attach and reattach) to their partner, more so than than females who seek emotional connection (attachment and reattachment) before sexual activity.

While sexual interaction and intimacy are requirements at some level in relationships between partners, love and sexual activity are not mutually exclusive. One can love without sex or with sex. One can have have sexual interaction without love or with love.

They function as elements of boundaries and are connected and not connected through each individual's intellectual capacity to do so. Some individuals recognize and make a distinction between love (emotional attachment) and sex (physical interaction with body parts between individuals). In most relationships, regardless of legal status, there is a combination of emotional attachment (love) and physical interaction (sex). Society has created and promoted myths around love and sex promoting the idea that they are inextricably intertwined. This idea continues to be promoted despite the fact that empirical evidence clearly falsifies these myths.

The idea that "cheating" only occurs around sexual behavior is a falsehood. Cheating, by definition, is an intentional violation of the rules of fair play. The rules of a relationship include much more than mouths, breasts, penises, anuses, and vaginas. They include all of those elements to which partners have agreed. It is both humorous and fascinating how violations of the elements of these agreements made by partners in relationships are more or less egregious based on some invisible barometer contained in the minds of those making the agreement. Sadly, most relationships have few clearly defined elements and rely on ambiguously worded verbal contracts called "vows". The fascinating aspect of "vows" is that seemingly, the aspect that seems to be invoked as a non-negotiable violation is that of sexual infidelity. Yet, the rest of those elements contained in predominantly traditional wedding vows that broken and are the elements that tend to lead to sexual infidelity are ignored or overlooked. With few exceptions, if sexual infidelity occurs (without a partners permission) one will find several other elements of those "vows" were violated prior to the "act".

In my opinion, too much emphasis is placed on the depth of intimacy and physical interaction (sex) in contrast to the emotional attachment, and friendship, which is what research suggests is the glue for successful long term relationships (if that is your measure of success).

Sex and emotional attachment is indescribable. Sex without emotional attachment is fantastic release with a host of emotional, psychological, and physical health benefits for all involved.


SELFISHNESS is why people cheat........the h*ll with all the " reasons". There are none....if the love is still intact.


This is patently false. There are a variety of reasons people break their multiple relationship commitment vows of which selfishness is only one of several. The attribution of selfishness to the cheater in this suggestion fails to recognize the selfishness that exists in the other partner that encourages the violation of one or more of the elements of the vows. Further, there are a myriad of behaviors by one or both partners that invite seeking to have needs met outside of the primary relationship. Love (emotional attachment) does not eliminate or substitute for these needs. Love (emotional attachment) is but one context through which needs can be met and is not the sole mechanism or context in which they must be met.


LOVE GONE.......???.......get out, or get out as soon as possible. I know people fall out of love, fire gone out at home, no intimacy, live like brother and sister, yaduh, yaduh.......but to have a man or woman proclaim to LOVE the one at home, and yet still be able to share such an intimate act with someone else is at best B u l l s h i t!!


Again, an assertion with not basis in fact. Depth of intimacy is not measured by any specific act along the spectrum of intimacy. Any intimate encounter, regardless of where it falls on the spectrum can be "such an intimate act" and is not exclusive to physical sexual interaction.

Partners "fall in and out of love" frequently. The foundations of relationships that are mutually fulfilling and are lasting are those that are based on a strong friendships and understanding and accepting their partner(s) as people. Emotional highs and lows (in and out of love) are not good indicators emotional attachment and relationship success.

While your personal opinion is that sexual interaction and love are inextricably intertwined and that is how you function as a human being and in your relationship does not translate as a template or way of being for all other human beings. There's nothing wrong with holding your personal view and viewing your relationship functioning preferences as the best for you and considering having a relationship that separates love (emotional attachment) and sex (physical sexual interaction ) as "B u l l s h i t". Imposing your belief held through your personal lens of bias on other individuals is not okay. Every relationship is unique, is mutually constructed and negotiated by the individuals in them. Those relationships that are constructed and negotiated differently than your preferred relationship construction are not "B u l l s h i t". They are only "B u l l s h i t" to you and those who hold views that similarly align with your own.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 74 (view)
 
Please explain Love
Posted: 8/10/2009 7:21:13 AM

Love is the absence of fear and spans all aspects of life.


I think that this is close. I would alter it to say that, "Love is the giving over of one's self to, or on behalf of, another, while consciously putting aside one's fears."

A colleague of mine is working on a theory of love. I'll let you know how develops.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 426 (view)
 
How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/7/2009 7:29:07 AM

ACP...interesting.
1. Did you do your own editing? What your interpretation was?


I'm not sure what you mean by editing. I did condense and summarize the observations of the authors. The summary contained the observations of the authors along with the historical contest of each of the transitions of American courtship from the 18th century through the 21st century. The observations and interpretations post 1960s and 70s are predominantly my own and those of colleagues in the fields of social psychology, psychology, social work, marriage and family therapy, sociology, education, and others.

In fact, I have engaged in many conversations and discussions around this topic with two colleagues in particular who conducted research a few years ago around attraction, relationships, and love. These conversations centered around male/female attractions, dating/courtship and the myriad of challenges that males in particular have faced with the disintegration of the separate spheres ideology. In a sense, without a socially accepted unified process, males have experienced a sense of lostness in several areas, one area that is quite apparent is that of dating/courtship. It was especially difficult for males born between 1950 through early 70s. Why? I'm glad you asked.

Males born during that span were, for the most part, trained by their mothers (primarily) in the art of gentlemanly behavior, e.g. manners, etiquette, and most importantly how to treat a lady, as described in my summary as "protector" with the behavior that many have labeled "chivalry" and indirectly through the observation of their fathers and how they treated their mothers and other ladies. A second area that I have observed more often than not and is being perpetuated still confusion by males born in the post Boomers generations of manhood and the art of manliness and while there is, I believe a connection, that's another topic altogether.

Imagine for a moment how confusing and puzzled a young man must feel when everything that he was taught to practice and was told was the proper way to treat a lady in polite society was suddenly incorrect, chauvinistic, domineering, etc. and often when these behaviors were exhibited, the male was verbally rent by a female whom he was greatly interested. Suddenly the rules changed and there were no longer any unifying process.

As a result, these males became lost and are still lost. When they applied the practices they might receive a thank you or a smile and they might as easily receive severe chastisement and a scowl. Opening a door for a lady became emotional and ultimately a relationship risk. Each women was different. It was difficult to tell which female would appreciate the protecting and honoring gestures and which female would attempt to verbally emasculate him for doing what his parents drilled into him as a child. Many males in that age group have shared with me that the latter occurred more frequently than the former and when they encountered a female who was appreciative, after having a diet of the emasculating types, they pursued them with all of their power and did everything they could to marry them. Understand that this is not generalization of all males and all females, simply the predominant theme of many interviews that I have conducted with males who were born between 1950 to the very early 70s.


2. I noticed that the books/works were 1984-1989. Do you feel that at that time there was a generalized vein of thought from women who wrote books on themes like this?
I just noticed that they were all women and this was in the midst the "trendy" gender behaviour re-structuring thinking that was going on.


I absolutely believe that that these were a generalized vein of thought since, especially the historical presentation of social norms around courtship and dating. Because many a number of people in their late 30s through 40s grew up directly observing the those established norms and expected behaviors in their parent's interactions and on through the entertainment on the television. The 1950s were a popular genre throughout the 60s and into the early 70s. The television show, "Happy Days" presented many of the established and socially accepted practices surrounding courtship and dating. Even "the Fonz" had these skills and practiced them--despite his being "all that".

Yes, they are all women. Despite the belief that there is great intellectual freedom in academia to research and publish, any foray in the area of historical gender roles, especially men and masculine studies is exceedingly dangerous to one's career if one has not yet established tenure, and even then, they must have crocodile hide for skin. I have been cautioned numerous times by supportive and caring colleagues and mentors to be extremely careful in how I approach and present any work in this area prior to attaining tenure. Of course, if I don't want to teach at any college or university prior to attaining tenure, I can have at it. The thinking behind the dearth of male authors is the political backlash and negative publicity that would likely occur as a result. Publishers want to sell books and do not want to be labeled as chauvinistic or holding an covert male bias.



3. Can you give this post at little bit more balance? Something that was written quite recently by recognized scientists in the field of human behaviour? Maybe some writings from anthropologists, biologists and other studies that encompass the behavior of people? Behaviour is not limited to "social behaviour". It is studied by the academic disciplines of evolutionary psychology, social work, sociology, economics, and anthropology.


I believe that the summary, including my own observations and interpretations were balanced. I wish I had the time to conduct such a study and perhaps someday, I'll write a book on the subject after attaining tenure. I think it would be interesting to conduct a meta-analysis across disciplines on the subject. If my dissertation research wasn't already set, I might have considered it myself and might conduct it later.


I know it's alot to ask, but I think these gestures are not NOT learned social behaviours that pop out every so once in awhile in generations because of some trendy thinking.
I watch how males naturally guard the females from danger in every aspect of the animal kingdom....except...lol...the preying mantis or the black widow spider.
JMO:


Yes, it is a lot to ask. Males do not naturally guard the females from danger in every aspect of the animal kingdom, there are a great many exceptions. In fact, there seems to be a consensus that males are not protecting their females as much as they are protecting their territory. In other words, the fierceness that one might observe in a male lion attacking another predator who is attempting to attack lioness or another member of the pride, attacks just as fiercely if it observes any competitive predator enter its established territory with no lioness or pride member present.

Tigers are not being protecting of the a tigress because they care, they are protecting their breeding property from other competitors and will kill their own male cubs if given the opportunity in an effort to reduce future competition.

The idea of natural protection of females by males in the human species appears to be rooted primarily in toward protecting and/or defending their breeding rights over the female as a means to propagate the species. If a male holds an emotional attachment, it is reasonable to presume that protective behavior could also be exhibited. With that said, while at one time, pre-civilization, I think that any male would have defended his breeding rights from any other male as it was truly a survival instinct. In this present age, I believe that this no longer holds true and males are as apt to yield to a any danger they deem as more dominant or threatening as they are to attempt any type of protective action.

Good ideas and thoughts regarding the various disciplines. Perhaps someone with more available time might look into them.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 425 (view)
 
How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/7/2009 6:03:38 AM

Great Post ACP....thanks...


Thank you Zangie! As usual, a bit long winded.

Warmly,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 83 (view)
 
Sucks in bed and making out but is a good guy
Posted: 8/6/2009 10:23:38 AM

yes you can be happy with someone that is awful in bed and cant kiss!
this successful relationship is called "FRIENDSHIP"
You will never be happy with anything more then that!


Very nice.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 416 (view)
 
How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 8/6/2009 7:54:16 AM
While this has been a thread on chivalry, the descriptors of what most observe as chivalric behavior, seems to reflect behavior more characteristic of "Courtship". Which evolved from a a practice wherein suitability was more important than love, which was believed to manifest later after a marriage occurred.

Interestingly, the romanticism that so many often opine emerged primarily during the early 19th century and gave birth to new genre of fiction known as "romance". What is often overlooked is that this view of romance was constructed on the the concept of a "separate spheres ideology" that perceived a woman's proper sphere of influence as being in the home and a man's proper sphere of influence in the public domain.

Those separate spheres of ideology were maintained for quite some time before they slowly began to be breached after the Civil War and then began to disintegrate during W.W. I.

Courtship then transitioned to "dating" with the creation of more public venues for young singles to attend away from the home. By 1925, dating was in vogue. Males initiated the dates and since they now cost money, males paid for the outings. Interestingly, with this transition, the sexual morality changed as well. In the past under "courtship", acceptable behavior included "kissing and caressing" above the neck. Under the new paradigm, the terminology and behavior changed to "necking and petting" referring to the same, only below the neck. During this time, it was common for singles to date widely and continue the concept of "competition" that was fairly common under "courtship" as many men would vie for the focused attention of a single woman.

After W.W. II, another shift occurred and the practice of wide competition transitioned into single focused dating or as it began being referred to as "going steady". It is in this phase where the concept and practices of what many refer to as "chivalry" came into vogue under the societal expectation of dating etiquette in which boys "protected" girls, exercising control by exercising control by opening car doors, ordering in restaurants, and taking responsibility for asking girls for dates, while girls behaved submissively to help their dates feel like men. It is also interesting that during this paradigm shift, Americans began marrying younger and more often that at any point in the century, and these couples had more children.

In the late 60s and early 70s, the most recent partnering paradigm shift, as I tend to refer to the transitions, occurred and seems to still be driving the process in the present occurred after the sexual revolution or more accurately a revolution in societal mores. The dating "rules" of 40s and 50s were all but dead, woman began initiating dates, men no longer automatically reached for the check, the "protectors" were no longer needed or desired and consequently there no longer any unifying rules for partnering.

The partnering process now, more than any previous time, is wholly individualistic with no rules. Individuals are responsible for initiating the process of finding a mate and do so on their own terms.

The process has become a delicate dance. The rules of courting behavior such as those practices many have referred to as "chivalry" no longer exist as a unifying practice of behavior and under the new paradigm have become individualistic as both a practice and a preference, or so it seems.

The bottom line is that chivalrous behavior is nice, romance is enjoyable, sustaining a continuous high level of either is difficult, and loving people is hard work.

The sustained romance in fiction is simply fiction, 24/7 courtship and romance is a myth, there is no knight in shining armor who will conduct a rescue and live happily ever after, she doesn't rescue the knight right back, if rescue is involved from either partner, might appear romantic on the surface and the difficulties and pain yet to be are boiling beneath that surface.

Relationships, ll relationships are hard work! Like the tide, relationships ebb and flow. Sometimes that water is relatively calm, sometimes the waves become rough and even dangerous, and occasionally a Tsunami comes along that threatens or succeeds in destroying all in its path. That is the nature of life. Only those relationships that understand this reality have the capacity to successfully navigate all of these different seas that they might encounter in their journey. Neither of them will successfully navigate these seas alone as it will require both of them working in partnership to survive any of them. If the time should come that either of them no longer will help or desires the help of the other, it might be time to consider relocating to different ships before their individual unwillingness to work as partners destroys all aboard this drifting ship.

Best,

ACP

References
E.S. Turner , A History of Courting, 1954.
Ellen K. Rothman , Hands and Hearts: A History of Courtship in America, 1984.
Kathy Peiss , Cheap Amusements: Working Women and Leisure in Turn‐of‐the‐Century New York, 1986.
Beth L. Bailey , From Front Porch to Back Seat: Courtship in Twentieth‐Century America, 1988.
Karen Lystra , Searching the Heart: Women, Men, and Romantic Love in Nineteenth‐Century America, 1989.
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 350 (view)
 
How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 7/26/2009 8:20:55 PM
From Wikipedia (not the most reliable source and yet quick)

Classifications of Chivalry in Literature

When examining medieval literature, chivalry can be classified into three basic but overlapping areas:

1. Duties to countrymen and fellow Christians: this contains virtues such as mercy, courage, valor, fairness, protection of the weak and the poor, and in the servant-hood of the knight to his lord. This also brings with it the idea of being willing to give one’s life for another’s; whether he would be giving his life for a poor man or his lord.
2. Duties to God: this would contain being faithful to God, protecting the innocent, being faithful to the church, being the champion of good against evil, being generous and obeying God above the feudal lord.
3. Duties to women: this is probably the most familiar aspect of chivalry. This would contain what is often called courtly love, the idea that the knight is to serve a lady, and after her all other ladies. Most especially in this category is a general gentleness and graciousness to all women.

These three areas obviously overlap quite frequently in chivalry, and are often indistinguishable.

Different weight given to different areas produced different strands of chivalry:

1. warrior chivalry, in which a knight's chief duty is to his lord, as exemplified by Sir Gawain in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight and The Wedding of Sir Gawain and Dame Ragnelle
2. religious chivalry, in which a knight's chief duty is to protect the innocent and serve God, as exemplified by Sir Galahad or Sir Percival in the Grail legends.
3. courtly love chivalry, in which a knight's chief duty is to his own lady, and after her, all ladies, as exemplified by Sir Lancelot in his love for Queen Guinevere or Sir Tristan in his for Iseult

One particular similarity between all three of these categories is honour. Honour is the foundational and guiding principle of chivalry. Thus, for the knight, honour would be one of the guides of action.

The core foundation is honor in all of these classifications. A challenge to 21st century thinking is a the lack of a universal code of honor, which was much easier to accomplish when the world was much smaller.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 349 (view)
 
How important is chivalry in an relationship to you?
Posted: 7/26/2009 8:08:48 PM

If you aren't naturally a gentleman, then it will show up loud and clear when you fake it.


There's nothing natural about being a gentleman. It is learned behavior taught both directly and indirectly. If you encountered a "natural male" you might find yourself being dragged by your hair to the nearest cave for breeding and then left to your own devices, unless you somehow proved to be an asset and not a liability to the male's personal survival.

Perhaps you are referring to those who pretend to be gentlemen as a means of manipulation toward a certain end. That is more reflective of the raw "natural man" who has been an observer and not a practitioner of the art of manliness and being a gentleman as learned from teachers and mentors.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 278 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/21/2009 7:41:40 PM

Whatever happened to the 'golden rule'?


Those that have the gold make the rules?

Self -respect is subjective. What makes you think that lies must be involved? It seems in all of these issues, what is agreed upon is established by the those involved. If the agreement is not to leave the toilet seat up, and it is left up, the agreement is broken, she is no longer bound to the agreement. Harsh? Perhaps. Yet, when the agreement is clear, there are no surprised and you keep or violate the agreement with full knowledge of the potential consequences.

Whether or not the arrangement is or is not charming is up to those involved. It is of no consequence to those outside.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 276 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/20/2009 1:04:31 PM
I can't believe this stupid unfeeling lawyer crap.
What happened to doing what is right simply for the sake that it is the right thing to do?


I agree. The right thing to do is for both partners to follow their mutual agreement and if it needs to change, mutually make the changes and agree to the new. The right thing to do is for neither partner to break their agreement, regardless of what it is. When is component is broken, there is no longer an agreement.

Yes, breaking any of components of that were originally agreed upon is a violation of trust. Sexual or emotional infidelity, contrary to popular belief, is not the only way infidelity occurs, any component of the agreement that is broken with out mutual agreement is infidelity or "vow breaking".

It is better to be very specific in the agreement from the beginning and while those wonderful vows steeped religious traditions are nice, they are also quite vague. Better to be clear than be vague, that way there is no confusion what is expected.

Lastly, who decides what is the right thing? It seems that the decision as to what is or is not the right thing is to be made by the individual making it. That you or others deem something as "not the right thing" in no way makes it not right. It is simply "not right" for you.


Best,
ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 164 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/20/2009 10:46:37 AM

... according Rubin's metastudy of previous research, "there was no evidence that swinging [a form of open relationship] is harmful to marital or family stability." Based on another study by Rubin, Dr. Geri Weitzman wrote, "after several years, there was no significant difference in marital stability (i.e. breaking up vs. staying together) between those couples who had been polyamorous versus those whose marriages had been exclusive." (See source list for links to papers)."


Fascinating. A meta-study would be a light undertaking with regard to polyamorous relationships. It seems, however, that you have made an unwarranted assumption in comparing "swinging couples" and "polyamorous" and "open relationships". They are all quite different things. One would need to see how Rubin, and his citation of Dr. Weitzman defined each of these and how he determined they are connected (what commonalities were involved in the three besides that they were forms of relationships). Additionally, there is a dearth of research on polyamorous relationship and what is there has the same problem with swinging couples and couples in open relationships, social consequences prohibit obtaining a truly useful sample to begin make any generalizations such as Dr. Weitman has been quoted.

Not all swingers are married, Polyamory does not require swinging and many polyamorous relationships do not swing, some follow polyfidelity (faithful to the group), some polyarmous relationships do not include sexual relationships, and "open relationships" are defined by the people in them and do not necessarily include "swinging" or even a sexual relationship.

Or course, the standard of measurement s/he is using, it seems is "lifetime" which was more sustainable in the not so distant past when the average life expectancy was late 30s and early 40s. People were not expected to and didn't have to maintain their sexual virginity until they were well into their 20s since marriage could occur at 13, 14, 15, school ended at the 8th grade, anda shift in social views and roles of males and females, A lot of things have entered society that influence the process and make it more difficult to sustain a marriage for a lifetime, including the ease with which divorce could occur and the acceptance of women during that time who ignored and were often relieved by the sexual behavior of their husbands outside of the home. It was too often considered a sad and tortuous duty to endure sex and have children and once the desired number of children were attained, the sex tended to be over from the wife's perspective--her duty was done.

What the meta-study does say, and not with much validity, is that polyamorous relationships work as well as monogmous relationships.

What does that mean? Not much at this point outside the fact that an equal number of polyamorous relationships have as much chance to succeed as monogamous relationships.

Your allusion to "swinging" to the study is flawed and to use the meta-study to support the idea that swinging couples are not successful is apples and oranges in this case. The studies must compare "swinging couples"( still married and those divorced with "non-swinging" couples, (still married and those divorced). The problem will still be generalizabililty because of the ability to get a useful sample of swinging couples and obtaining couples who were "swingers and divorced". What is anecdotally interesting is the many people who were in "swinging" as part of a married couple, who divorced and are still "swingers" as singles or with a new partner. Which suggests that the swinging and honesty were not necessarily the cause of the relationship ending. However, this is an observation and not generalizable to those who define themselves as swingers.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 163 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/20/2009 10:13:46 AM

We laugh and scorn those in a successful swinging lifestyle, but these couples don't leave each other -- in fact, they grow stronger.


Any stats that exist, and I'm sure they do. I just haven't had the time to do a lit review through the university libraries, will likely be strong on rigor and short on validity. Not because the approach was invalid, the sample will lack the power necessary to provide a clear picture?

Why? Simple. Even though we are 230 years plus a country and have long left behind the full social and governing approach of the Puritans, their ghost and influence on human sexuality still pervades U.S. social culture. Thus, sex and any reference to a normal human biological function must be secreted if it is outside that of that worldview to avoid the repercussions imposed by those who are still under the hypnosis of the Puritans worldview. Consequently, any sample will not be a true reflection of because of fear and could not be generalized to with any degree of honesty.

One thing does seem to be clear. That there is a positive relationship between open, honest, and clear communication between partners, and relationship success, whether they choose a monogamous lifestyle or practice a non-monogamous lifestyle. Just as there is a negative relationship between partners who have close, poor, and unclear communication.


Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 162 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/20/2009 9:52:07 AM

First of all, 400 some years ago Marriage was considered a contract under the Statutes of Frauds, but is no longer today for plenty of good reasons, the top most of which is marriage is a domestic concern, not an economic one. Second, if you were to compare marriage to a contractual arrangment, it would most likely be deemed a service contract, not a contract for the sale of good as you have given an example.


True, I'm not a lawyer, I don't play one on tv, and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night

You did get my point and it was that for which I was aiming.

Thanks for the clarification.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 271 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/20/2009 9:36:43 AM
So why hang around long enough to cheat?


It seems you miss the point. There is no cheating. The agreement is void and therefore, there is no blame to be assigned for cheating as "cheating" did not occur.

I realize that for some folks, it's tough to get their head around the idea that sexual fidelity is only one component of most marriage vows. In some, sexual fidelity doesn't exist, and that's entirely different topic. Fidelity in a marriage is inclusive of all of that was agreed upon. None of them are assigned any more weight than another. When one is broken they are all broken.

It's up to the individuals involved how they wish to continue or discontinue, if they continue to go forward in their relationship, it is functioning without an enforceable contract. If it is renegotiated, and I personally recommend an annual review of the status of the relationship and a discussion of any changes that might need to be considered and perhaps mutually agree to change those or amend.

At the same time, I don't advocate being dishonest and I don't necessarily feel that it is necessary to be overt beyond the initial reminder that agreements were made and are to be honored or none of them are binding any longer. It seems at that point, the individual who is breaking or considering breaking one of the several components of the agreement has been put on notice. They have the choice to honor the contract and fulfill their obligations to the other, they also have the obligation to terminate the legal status of the contract with a divorce, or to agree that the party is released from his/her obligations and can do as they please and they continue to remain under the legal protections and benefits of the state.

Why is the person who has not broken the contract held to a higher standard than they one who has done so? Why must they (seek an end to the relationship through divorce if they are content to stay in that relationship and seek to satisfy their needs elsewhere?
Why is it "okay" and "acceptable" for one person to violate the contract in multiple ways and yet when that occurs, the evil villain is the person who seeks to have those areas satisfied outside of that relationship in another relationship?

Again, it becomes more clear some couples and other choosing to establish their legal status under limited liability companies rather than marriage under family law.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 32 (view)
 
Moms and young men
Posted: 7/20/2009 9:15:31 AM

If some MILF went after my son I'd go after her like a cougar and not the kind she is!


Clearly, those involved should be of legal age.

Children should be off limits to all adults, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 29 (view)
 
Moms and young men
Posted: 7/19/2009 10:55:29 AM
Way back before MILFS, TILFS, and Cougars were a fad, the gifts shared by older women to a young men was something to treasure. Both knew that a transaction was taking place. The woman was trading her expertise--skill, knowledge, poise, attention, and sex without the games typically required by females in his age group to the younger male and in return, he exchanged his exuberance, short refractory periods, eagerness to please, and spontaneity to be rewarded by her compliments as his skills improved. These compliments are then reinforced by the compliments of his female partners afterward who were the recipients of the gifts that were bestowed upon him.

As an 18 to 24-year-old male, I was privileged to be a beneficiary of such gifts from some incredibly generous older women and I have a number of fond memories and the occasional dream of many years past getting to re-experience some of those special moments.

For some reason, the treasured gift has turned into another mechanism to express some male bravado and brag to his buddies about who he's "hitting". In the pre-fad days, one kept his mouth shut. One did not want to invite competition and risk a great thing. Part of those experiences including being taught to be a gentleman. Sadly, it seems that along wit the loss of the these experiences being a treasured gift, becoming a gentleman has also gone the same way.

Very sad. I smile often when I recall these incredible women and their beneficence and I hope that those who are still living smile as well when they recall those moments.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 261 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/18/2009 11:49:52 AM
There is no justification! only a lack of communication, compromise and honesty! I see absolutly NO reason to cheat if you love someone.


That blade cuts all ways. Is it cheating when any agreement of the the marital contract is violated be it verbally (vows) or written such as the traditional Jewish wedding contract/covenant (kettubah)?


If not, why not?

In any other contractual agreement, if one item of the contract is altered or broken without mutual consent, the entire contract becomes void.

Cheating, a better term would be contract breaking, or in ye olde English form of what we have **stardized into adultery, "Advowtry" = Vow Breaking, is the violation of any component of the mutually agreed upon marriage contract.

Thus, when that occurs, it really isn't cheating anymore since the contract has been voided by the breaking of any one of the mutually agreed upon elements contained within that contract.

Personally, I encourage folks in pre-marital counseling as well as those for whom I serve as a celebrant official to have their marital contract written and that they use them as their official public vows. This way their expectations are clear and it is an agreement that removes any assumptions by either person. At the conclusion there are four copies. One for each of them, one that they file with the county recorder, and one that I keep. Human nature being what it is, sometimes the contract "gets lost".

If there needs to be a change or a renegotiation of that contract, there is language contained within the vow that specifies how it is to occur, how it gets added, and the process by which it is recorded so that there is no confusion and clearly indicates that both individuals were involved in and have agreed to the changes.

It's tough to refute that the contract wasn't broken when things go to court and someone is accused of "cheating" and yet many times, the contractual agreement reveals that there was no longer a contract as the other person had already violated one or more of the agreed upon components.

I like it, my client's like it, and so far judges and lawyers have liked it.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 260 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/18/2009 11:34:40 AM
People cheat because they have an inability to face their fears.


Wow! Just Wow! This assertion is supported by what evidence?


The percentage of people that actually were strong enough to use therapy to it's conclusion is minuscule.


Another assertion provided with no evidence to support it.


People cheat because they are weak.


Again, wow! This assertion is supported by what evidence?


what people hear is "I tried." Then ask what that means. "Oh, therapy didn't work." is a common reply.


They also could be clear and honest when that statement is made. Therapy isn't a guaranteed cure. Sometimes things are not fixable. Sometimes, people should not have been together from the beginning and yet outside pressures influenced their choice to marry or remain married when they knew they should have run.


People have to stay in therapy to face their fears, show there deepest level of vulnerability, really work together - that's hard stuff. People fail therapy, not the other way around.


I'm curious, was there a core component of 60 or more hours of psychotherapy training and education required at the culinary school as a part of your training to be a baker?

This is truly amazing insight from a baker. I cannot wait for the book to come out, what will it be called, " A Baker's Dozen Ways to Prevent Infidelity and Save Your Marriage" (instantly copyrighted by ACP AKA licensed relationship professional). Oops, can't use that title, but I might. LOL.


It's best to refrain from making sweeping assertions and generalizations about why human beings behave and stick to making the donuts.

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 259 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/18/2009 11:19:44 AM

They always, always, always get caught



No, they don't always get caught. Some get caught, some never are caught and there is history that documents these secret affairs of some who are now deceased and the information was revealed. There are also so those who do not care whether or not they are caught.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 156 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/18/2009 11:12:34 AM

I'm shocked what some people do in their spare time


Nothing shocks me anymore. Stunned at times by some of the levels of bigotry aimed at others who are different from someones worldview. Shock, however, left the moment I recognized that humans have an infinite capacity for love and hate motivating their language and behavior toward other humans.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 155 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/18/2009 11:06:22 AM

There is something to be said about honor and dignity. There's never an excuse to betray even if your SO puts on a chastity belt and throws away the key.


Help me understand how, "if your SO puts on a chastity belt and throws away the key," is any less a betrayal than the SO who feels released from his contractual agreement since the contract has already been broken by the now permanent chastity belt wearing SO. What is there to betray at that point? The contract has been broken and the deal is over. The contract no longer exists.

It is quite confusing how contracts are viewed. If this had been a contract between two business, e.g. a lumber supplier and a builder, and the transport company told the builder he wasn't delivering the lumber any more and he was locking all of his/her trucks loaded with lumber into a permanent structure and throwing a way the key, and the builder contacts another lumber supplier and obtains the lumber s/he needs from them, would you view the builder as "betraying" the lumber supplier?


It boggles the man how we view contractual agreements, treating them concept differently when it comes to marital contracts vs. business contracts.

Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 154 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/18/2009 10:55:56 AM

All in all it was a pretty funny experiment.


I wouldn't classify it as an experiment as it lacks the rigor of an experimental design. At best it is a non-experimental design and is loosely an informational or descriptive study. It still lacks the rigor descriptive of any type of qualitative design method and at best is a fully biased, unstructured interview, filled with subjective conclusions with no substantive evidence to support the poster's opinion and generalizations implied by the posters reporting of "her take".

It was fun though and according the Six Flags Fun Scale (an unscientific and invalid scale) I give it 1 flag.


Best,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 105 (view)
 
Infidelity and the public perception
Posted: 7/1/2009 1:39:46 PM

How about putting a public notice in the local paper:

To whom it may be of interest,

My spouse has decided that they are no longer interested in having a sexual relationship with me. It has been many months since I have had sexual satisfaction with my spouse. Therefore, please understand that when you observe me dating someone other than my spouse, it is because my needs are not being met at home.


I like it! Truth in advertising at its best!

Regards,

ACP
 Argentum Crinis Philogus
Joined: 4/3/2007
Msg: 56 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 7/1/2009 1:27:43 PM

There is no excuse for cheating and no justification for it either. I have heard guys say that as well, that he'll loose everything, blah, blah, but I don't buy it. Rather than cheat on his wife and degrade her and his family he should look within and work to resolve issues within himself that are driving him to seek companionship outside his marriage for it is the cheater with the problems.


Having spent uncountable hours with couples in relationships in various states of destruction, I can unequivocally assert that it is NOT just the cheater with the problem (s).
It is rarely a one-sided issue. It's very easy to sit in judgment outside of the daily reality,of others it's quite another to endure living it.

A marital contract can be violated in a variety of ways and having a relationship outside of the marriage, whether or emotional, physical, or both is no more of a violation of the contract than any other agreement contained within that the two parties have included for the relationship that they negotiated.

There are a variety of excuses and reasons for the justification. No one is required to accept either. The only person who needs whatever justification is given is the one who acted on that justification. They do not need or necessarily desire any approval outside of their own.

Best,

ACP
 
Show ALL Forums