Why Men Cheat

[donnamaybe]

Looking at this thread - since that's what the TOS say we should restrict ourselves to - I make it 3 each. Not exactly a "vast majority", unless you subscribe to the George Bush school of electoral victories where it's possible to garner fewer votes but still "win"

 

The same topic comes up over and over. Most people can see the obvious.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

Okay he's dealt with serial cheaters & narcissists, who I always separate as those who will always be prone to cheat.....

 

Exactly. And his sampling strategy determined that he was only going to get more of the same.

 

He gave two examples of the reason I always point to...... A dead bed at home (almost always the wife) and one who put on a lot of weight (and a sad story of a sick child).

 

What I'd like in these fluff pieces (and they are fluff, as there is no substance at all) is some stats..... How many are multiple cheaters who will continue to cheat regardless, how many have wives who've shut down at home, and how many have wives who went into mommy mode or put on significant weight or stopped wanting to be sexy/sexual????

 

Then we have a story imo...... Yes I am being harsh......

 

Not harsh, just critical. I don't think it's too much to expect substance from journalism.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

The same topic comes up over and over. Most people can see the obvious.

 

Some of us prefer looking beyond the obvious, for the truth.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

And of the few that do leave of their own accord (and not just because the BS kicked the WS to the curb), they did the right thing.

 

dumping the "older, uglier BW"? Isn't that being a bit mean?

[donnamaybe]

dumping the "older, uglier BW"? Isn't that being a bit mean?

 

What makes you think that? Maybe the OW is just willing to put up with his childish behavior where the BS has too much self esteem to kiss his arse.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

This has gotten a bit catty hasn't it?

 

This is just an article that was interesting reading and not about what the OW/W all look like. Trust women to focus on the looks part.

 

Quite! Out of this response:

 

Interesting article. It suggests that the women who get cheated on are those who derive their sense of their own value from the "love" or attention of their H, rather than from an innate sense of their own worth. I'm not sure I'd agree with that - though I'm sure it's correct in some cases, I don't think it's correct in all. I'm sure there are many different scenarios, many different types of MM and many different types of BW. I don't think all BW peg their self-esteem on their H fancying them.

 

I think the "snowball" sampling method used in this "study" compromises its claims of representativity, too. It's unsurprising that the same patterns emerged so strongly, with such few exceptions, since these men were all a peer group, friends and friends of friends, who self-selected. It's thus unsurprising that such men - shallow, selfish and egocentric - all went for pretty but brainless types of OW. But to assume, on the basis of this skewed sample, that all MM are serial cheats, that all MM are shallow, untroubled egomaniacs or that all OWs are younger, pretty but brainless specimens would be mistaken. It may be a solid sample of a particular type of MM, or A, but it's not representative of the full spectrum of MMs or As that are out there.

 

...which, in passing, took issue with the article's erroneous assumption that all OWs are younger, pretty airheads, someone chose to make an issue out of looks and age! Clearly an area of insecurity for some...

 

I don't believe all OWs are younger, or prettier, or dumber... because I think only a certain type of MM would go for that, and that type of MM (shallow, egotistical, serial philanderer) is only one of many kinds. I think this article is severely limited by its very narrow focus, and its inability to recognise the narrowness of that focus and the ungeneralisability of its findings as a result.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

What makes you think that?

 

This:

 

And of the few that do leave of their own accord (and not just because the BS kicked the WS to the curb), they did the right thing.

 

Which stated that those who choose the OW who is so much better than the W are doing the right thing, as is clear from the conversational thread.

 

Some do :love: :love: :love: :love:

 

Makes sense if some other woman is SO much better than the W, wouldn't a MM leave the "horrible" W and be with the OW full time?

 

I still think it's a bit mean to claim that MM who stay with Ws instead of leaving for the "so much better OW" are doing the wrong thing. They may be staying out of compassion for the "horrible W", or for the kids, or some other good reason. Dissing them because they don't jump at a good thing when they see it isn't very nice, IMO.

[donnamaybe]

This:

 

 

 

Which stated that those who choose the OW who is so much better than the W are doing the right thing, as is clear from the conversational thread.

 

 

 

I still think it's a bit mean to claim that MM who stay with Ws instead of leaving for the "so much better OW" are doing the wrong thing. They may be staying out of compassion for the "horrible W", or for the kids, or some other good reason. Dissing them because they don't jump at a good thing when they see it isn't very nice, IMO.

AH HA HA HAAA! Great spin doctoring!

[Elizabeth Southerns]

AH HA HA HAAA! Great spin doctoring!

 

Nope - simply following the thread of the conversation, post by post. Each post quoted there was a direct response to the post quoted next, so the flow is direct. If you don't believe me, you're free to check for yourself. That's what was said, verbatim, in response to what was said before.

 

Nice attempt at denial, though - pity the evidence is there for everyone to see

[carhill]

Why Men Cheat

"Aged from 25 to 65, some were handsome, some were downright ugly, but most were successful"

 

The successful part has been a common denominator amongst the men I've known personally who cheat. They're popular, their lives are busy, they come into contact with a lot of people who admire their success. Opportunities present themselves. I saw this personally while M, though I didn't/wouldn't consider myself a part of that socio-economic strata.

 

From your OP:

 

"If anything, it makes me feel less alone and is almost laughable at how everyone feels that their situation is unique somehow. People have been doing this for years and years and there is almost a formula to it."

 

Yeah, though I felt more 'unique' when a young and naive OM decades ago. With more life experience, I learned better and you're right, there is a pattern/formula, IMO.

 

"You see the best in each other, fall into some kind of dysfunctional form of love, the OW or OM want more and then they are left at the curb with their head spinning."

 

Though I did experience this personally (as an erstwhile OM many years ago), I haven't seen it to be consistent enough with others to call it guaranteed. I've seen relationships and M's grow out of such inappropriate associations. For those who are of the right psychology for the process, generally more pragmatic than I am, I think it can work for them. It certainly didn't work for me.

 

"If you tell the spouse, they will usually take them back and then after the dust settles they will go out and do it again."

 

I would generally agree, though it didn't work that way in my case, where voluntary disclosure brought divorce, though after a goodly period of MC. Most of my data points did in fact reconcile in the short term, as did my MW many years ago. Long term, meaning those a decade out or more from reconciliation, it's running about 50/50. Some have D'd, some are still together. Some did have repeat affairs. Obviously, only the people inside the M know the true health of the M.

 

I think men tell themselves a plethora of reasons for 'why' they cheat/are unfaithful but it comes down to one common reason; they want to. It's a choice, made consciously. The price for that choice, the responsibility, is what it is.

Edited February 12, 2012 by carhill
Fix quote

[Elizabeth Southerns]

Obviously, only the people inside the M know the true health of the M.

 

Not always. When my H and his then-W went for MC as a condition for him taking her back after their separation, she refused to accept that there was anything at all wrong with their M. This despite the fact that her then-H let it be known that he was deeply unhappy; that she bullied him openly in MC and was called on her behaviour several times by the MC; that all of their mutual friends remarked to them both that he seemed so much happier during the separation, while she appeared so much more unhappy.

 

If the M suits one party at the expense of the other, chances are that the advantaged party will see everything as just great, while the disadvantaged party will see things as less than optimal (and be told by the advantaged party that they're "imagining" their unhappiness, because things _are_ just great!)

[carhill]

I wrote imprecisely; my apologies...

 

'Only the people in the M know the true health of the M - better than any outsider to the M -'

 

My assertion is that we, as outsiders, only know what we are told, and nothing more specific than that. If the tellers are deluded, that's in their mind. If their delusions invade the M, they do. As outsiders, we are unaware. If they perform a public action, like being seen in public with someone other than their spouse and acting in ways which contradict marital accord, or the spouses divorce, those are data points supporting/refuting words heard.

[FelicityShot]

I wrote imprecisely; my apologies...

 

'Only the people in the M know the true health of the M - better than any outsider to the M -'

 

My assertion is that we, as outsiders, only know what we are told, and nothing more specific than that. If the tellers are deluded, that's in their mind. If their delusions invade the M, they do. As outsiders, we are unaware. If they perform a public action, like being seen in public with someone other than their spouse and acting in ways which contradict marital accord, or the spouses divorce, those are data points supporting/refuting words heard.

 

 

This is fascinating. How do you decipher delusion?

 

I like your posts, and I wondered if you have a default setting for what is delusion?

[carhill]

For myself, our psychologist suggested it be an altered and inaccurate perspective due to the emotional stress of caregiving. The stress and sleep deprivation were causing physical and emotional changes not relevant to actual events. My perception was skewed and deluded, relative to my natural and normal emotional setpoint. Not 'getting that' was part of my responsibility in the breakdown of the M. The EA was the other part. When the thoughts of that person, someone I hadn't thought about in years, first entered my mind, it was in the midst of that period of delusion. The lesson is recognizing the process and avoiding the triggers. The therapy facilitated seeing the same circumstances through different eyes and making different, healthier choices. The time spent away from relationships was purposely meant to solidify these changes.

 

Each person is different, as are their backgrounds, triggers and emotional/mental states. Hence, each story will be different and unique. My error, in the distant past as an OM, was seeing one spouse's truth as *the* truth, rather than a singular perspective. Living it taught that lesson in a way I won't forget.

[sunyoyo]

I have been doing nothing but a heck of a lot of reading recently to try to make sense of my situation and normalise what is going through my head.

 

If anything, it makes me feel less alone and is almost laughable at how everyone feels that their situation is unique somehow. People have been doing this for years and years and there is almost a formula to it.

 

You see the best in each other, fall into some kind of disfunctional form of love, the OW or OM want more and then they are left at the curb with their head spinning.

 

If you tell the spouse, they will usually take them back and then after the dust settles they will go out and do it again.

 

This is the formula that I have come up with.

 

Anyway I really found this article interesting and wanted to share it with everyone.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1288748/What-EVERY-woman-needs-know-men-cheat--man-spent-years-talking-hundreds-unfaithful-husbands.html

interesting story.

[NoIDidn't]

Interesting article.

 

The things that stood out to me where that the wives were always "at loggerheads" with the cheating husbands and the children grew up INSECURE.

 

Also, the part where the W's were at least as attractive as the mistresses, but a "great deal more intelligent", but lacked confidence.

 

I haven't finished reading it yet, but will be back when I do.

[Permenthri]

Has anyone read "The Monogamy Gap" by Eric Anderson? I heard an interview with him on the radio yesterday and it sounded interesting.

[Permenthri]

Has anyone read "The Monogamy Gap" by Eric Anderson? I heard an interview with him on the radio yesterday and it sounded interesting.

 

Here is a description.

 

Whether straight or gay, most men start their relationships desiring monogamy. This is rooted in the pervasive notion that monogamy exists as a sign of true love. Yet despite this deeply held cultural ideal, cheating remains rampant. In this accessible book, Eric Anderson investigates why 78% of men he interviewed have cheated despite their desire not to. Combining 120 interviews with research from the fields of sociology, biology, and psychology, Anderson identifies cheating as a product of wanting emotional passion for one's partner, along with a steadily growing desire for emotionally-detached recreational sex with others. Anderson coins the term "the monogamy gap" to describe this phenomenon. Anderson suggests that monogamy is an irrational ideal because it fails to fulfil a lifetime of sexual desires. Cheating therefore becomes the rational response to an irrational situation. <I>The Monogamy Gap</I> draws on a range of concepts, theories, and disciplines to highlight the biological compulsion of our sexual urges, the social construction of the monogamous ideal, and the devastating chasm that lies between them. Whether single or married, monogamous or open, straight or gay, readers will find <I>The Monogamy Gap</I> to be an enlightening, intellectually compelling, and provocative book.

[MissBee]

The opposite of monogamy is not "cheating," it's polyandry or polygamy or open marriage.

 

Monogamy = sex with only one other person.

 

Cheating involves betrayal and lying.

 

If someone declines to be monogamous they can either get consent to an open marriage or else get divorced and screw as many people as they can manage.

 

People who cheat on their spouses aren't simply desirous of sexual variety. They are generally either extremely bent/emotionally broken in some way or just plain selfish. That selfishness and brokeness reflects itself throughout their lives, not just who they have sex with.

 

Excellent post!