Mel

I'm trying to make the point that betrayal is betrayal whether it's technically infidelity or not. I believe, if you give your word on something - such as sexual exclusivity - then it is incumbent on you to keep that promise. It's about your own integrity, not your right to play the field. Breaking a promise is betrayal.

If you've never formally promised sexual fidelity, then your partner would be wise to note that. But if you've been in a long-term relationship with them, if you've shared plans for a joint future, if you've made clear to friends that neither of you is available - then I think your partner might reasonably take that as a tacit promise of sexual exclusivity.

I think none of us would have been surprised if our spouse had slept with someone else after his/her first date with us. Still dating, right? But if they slept with the bridesmaid / best-man the night before the wedding? To me, that's betrayal, and the breach of an tacit promise.

I'm pointing out that many of us implicitly believe this, because we trust our partner in unprotected sex before the wedding. We DO expect a commitment from them. Or do we? Perhaps I'm on my own in this.

TA

TA, I think it is a betrayal of trust when there is a tacit promise of exclusivity and it is broken. Who is disagreeing with that? I just think that pre-marital betrayal is more on the level of a girlfriend who gossips about you than on the level of marital infidelity.

I don't think most folks hop in the sack because they implicitly trust the other person. Sure, they SHOULD, but that is not neccessarily an indication of anything other than being in heat. Heck, binder said it was only an indication that he had surpassed 5 pints! lol [what a HO-DAWG!]

TA, I'm with you. Betrayal is betrayal.

I don't think outsiders can judge what kind of betrayal is worse. It depends on the circumstances. Things like the extent of the lies and deception, the length of time the couple knew each other, the kind of understanding they had about the future, the betrayed person's feelings and sensitivities, and the couple's understanding of what M means. To me, whether they were M makes is just another factor among others.

BTW, I do know someone whose fiance betrayed her with a good friend just prior to the M. She called off the M. It took her years to recover. In some ways I don't think she is recovered, although it was 10 years ago now.

Betrayal is betrayal?…..I guess…..though all adultery is betrayal, but not all betrayal is adultery. I think there is a difference. The same way that all lying by its very definition is deception with intent to mislead. Throw in a swearing in ceremony and it becomes perjury with various subsequent sanctions.

I’m not trying to say that the “hurt” is less in being cheated on, but there is a difference once one has passed through the ceremony of marriage. Prior to marriage, I only betray you. Post marriage I betray God if I took vows or if not I breach the marriage contract and commit the legal definition of adultery.

Bob said:



I don’t think Bob disputes that betrayal is wrong. It can hurt, devastate, and create havoc, but it is not an affront to the “family unit”. Marriage must be given it’s due; if we state that couples in an “understanding” are as bound as marriage, then we must examine what marriage means to us. Maybe we don’t need to lower the value of a committed relationship outside of marriage, but raise our evaluation of what defines a marriage and makes it exceptional.

quote]I would say that until the person is married, there is no real formal committment. Maybe an informal agreement for exclusivity certainly, but it's not the same as a formal committment. I would expect complete exclusivity in the pre-marital stage, but wouldn't consider it adultery if they weren't faithful. Trust and fidelity would be an expectation while dating, but it's sure not binding until the person makes a public, legal committment. [/quote]

BINDING.....BY WHO? .....The govt, state...? God??? So, if there is cheating BEFORE the actual vows are said, this is in "essence" a lesser degree/form of cheating than with the vows said? Yes, I see there is a difference, but in the end......what the F is the difference?...cheating is cheating is cheating,,,everyone here always likes to "poo poo" character and integrity...as if there should be different levels becasuse of "formal" committment...yeah..........WHATEVER.....I think we should stop talking abouot all of this f-ing addiciton BS and EN's that are not met for the WS.....and GET REAL !!!! Lets talk about accountabioity and INTEGRITY.....or the lack of...in WAYWARD SPOUSES/PARTNERS...

Disgusting all the wat around.

I agree, LM.
Its possible to analyse details and make technical distinctions about 'greater' or 'lesser' betrayals or what is or isn't infidelity.
IMO, the significant thing is to live with integrity and be accountable.

I believe, if you give your word on something - such as sexual exclusivity

TA you gave your WORD to teenage GFs that you would remain exclusve?

And at what age are children held accountable for 'promises' made in the heat of passion ?

OK, you're adult at 21 in some states.

A promise to a GF is law then?

OK how about 18 ? Still law ?

At 16 sex is legal in the UK. How about then?

14 ? Cetain cultures allow marriage at 14. Promises made at 14, are THEY to be held accontable?

Or is it all a mater of personal morality until you make a formal public and civil promise of exclusivity when you boith feel ready for it?

TT Dawn DID contact me though "FR". <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Her life took a path I'd never have dreamed for her.

Ah well.

I know a couple of people who have had relationships with early loves through FR. I guess the dynamics as to 'why' are easy to calculate.

The way I feel isn't anything to do with whether I can be held 'accountable' for promises I made to my young BF (I don't even recall that I made a promise to him anyway, it was just an assumption between us).

It's how I feel about myself that matters, surely? And how my WH feels about himself. Society may frown much more severely upon a man who leaves his wife and kids for another woman than it does for a 21-year-old girl who dumps her BF for another guy, but as my WH is the most entitled person I've ever known, and has decided that marriage and his commitment to me isn't important any more - what difference does it make?

My behaviour towards BF was bad and cruel. Yes, WH's behaviour is worse. But he doesn't care. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Alph.

Alphin, I understand. I feel the same way.

IMO its up to each person to come to terms with their own lives and to live according to their principles and standards.
Well done for looking hard at yourself and acknowledging all of the parts that have made up the Alphin we know today.

I hope you can forgive yourself now.
((Alphin))

Smur, it IS up to each individual. The question is not WHO "gets to make the choices," it is WHOSE "principles and standards" would be best for someone to choose to embrace as their own?

For Christians, it is God's "principles and standards." For nonChristians, it's whatever they feel they want it to be for themselves.

MARRIAGE was instituted by God for one man and one woman. Sex outside of marriage, whether married or unmarried, is a sin and is outside of God's "principles and standards."

One is called Fornication and the other is called Adultery. Both are wrong. But both "can" be "justified" by anyone who chooses to ignore God's "principles and standards." But if NOT God's....then who's standards are really being embrace regardless of the fine "embroidery?" There are only two sources for human "principles and standards," God and Satan.

It's why Joshua stated the age old truism, "Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve, but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." If we don't choose "service to God," then we choose the only other alternative, "service to Satan."

Dress up a "pig" all you want, put lipstick and pretty clothes on it, and it's still a pig.

Thou shalt not commit adultery....don't you know that some who joins himself with a prostitute has made himself "one" with her....

If we are not committed to God, why should we "expect" commitment to anyone else? Either God is 'on the throne of our life,' or we are sitting there ouselves, sovereign, and able to do whatever WE decide we want to do regardless of anyone else. Relativistic morality is whatever the individual wants it to be...in order to serve his own desire first and always.

Hi FH,

I admire those who have always held themselves accountable for their own actions, whether they have accepted God's standards as theirs, or not.

It has beauty, grace and dignity.

I am not there yet.

Sure you are. We are all "there" because there is no escaping the need to make choices.

I admire those who have always held themselves accountable for their own actions, whether they have accepted God's standards as theirs, or not.

Okay, so what does this mean? I would submit that everyone holds themselves "accountable" for their actions. It's not the "accountability" that is in question, it's the chosen Standards that is in question and WHO or WHAT determines that YOUR standards are applicable to anyone else.

You imply that there is "beauty, grace and dignity" in "accountability" for whatever Standards someone chooses. You place the emphasis on "personal choice and acceptance of the consequences of their chosen Standards" as to what defines "beauty, grace and dignity." Tell that to Jeffey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Joran van der Snoot, etc.. They hold/held themselves accountable for their actions and seem(ed) quite comfortable with their choices.

But I don't see much "beauty, grace and dignity" in their chosen Standards. I do see selfish self-interest and a callous disgregard for anyone else and THEIR chosen Standards.

But I suspect you are talking more about people who choose to live by something like the "Golden Rule." I have no problem with someone choosing to incorporate biblical principles into their life even if they don't believe in God. I, personally, would prefer to have more people choosing to live according to God's standards, even if they reject God Himself. But unfortunately, that's not likely to be the "choice" of many. Selfish self-interest IS human nature and without surrendering one's life to God, people will only choose to follow God's standards (if they have not accepted Jesus Christ) so long as it is "expedient" for them. But let their "wants and desires" for something that is "not godly" come up in intensity, and they will abandon their "standards" and choose "new standards" that allow them to do whatever it is that they want to do.

I also agree with Mulan’s take on this. However, sex outside marriage is wrong and sinful no matter if it takes place with a steady BF/GF or with someone else. In both cases God call this “fornication”.

Betrayal is betrayal no matter if it takes place before or after M although I do think that betrayal after M is the worst form of infidelity and much more serious because there is a formal committment and views has been made in front of God, witnesses and the altar.

In my view, a person who cheats on his/her BF/GF before M can not be trusted and will probably cheat after M as well if the character, moral and/or other issues of the person who've committed the betrayal, are not addressed and corrected.

Bob, I don't quite get your point, but I think you're saying that whether a person keeps promises or not is a personal matter unless they've made the promise formally and publicly?

For me, the 'personal morality' you mention, is the whole point. The formal promise, to me, is less important than whether a person holds themselves accountable for keeping their word - at all times.

Yes, I think it is the responsibility of each person to hold to any promise or commitment they make, whether they're 14 or 64. Your word is your word. Either you mean it or you don't. If you make a commitment to another person, YOU know that you've made it. If you break it, something in YOU gets lessened. If you get into the habit of excusing yourself for breaking commitments - and there's an infinity of rationalisations that can be made - you teach yourself that your promise is not a solid thing, and you teach others that you cannot be trusted.

This is exactly the thinking that made my H into a serial cheater - he got used to making or implying promises to others (and getting the benefits thereof), but then reneging on those promises if they were too uncomfortable for him to keep. He learned to make excuses; he was too young, it was a promise he couldn't be expected to keep, he 'tried'. Eventually he rationalised that he was simply 'weak', as if it were an organic disease.

On d-day, I learned that even at the altar, making his vows before God, he was thinking "I've no idea whether I can keep these vows. But I'm Weak, so it'll be OK if I break them." The actual, sacred process of making a solemn promise became just another breakable commitment, because he had no history of holding himself accountable for keeping promises. This suggests to me that the quality of the promise you make in marriage, is directly linked to the quality of promises you make in normal life.

This thread has been very enlightening. There seems to be a surprisingly wide range of standards of personal integrity, and each of us assumes our own standards are the norm.

I begin to see why ICs and MCs described me as 'strong'. What baffles me is why everyone isn't as 'strong' as me. I guess I'll have to think about that.

TA

I think you're saying that whether a person keeps promises or not is a personal matter unless they've made the promise formally and publicly

No more than you seem to be saying that any undertaking however slight, nive and unsubstantiated should be slavishly upheld until death.

My point is that you don't have to divorce your BF or GF because there is no commonly regarded commitment keeping you together other than your personal behaviour standards.

Both parties in a BF/GF relationship know this.

Just as in a marriage both parties know they are expected by their spouse to be faithful and behave in accordance with the rules of a commited relationship.

People remain as BF & GF because they are not ready for the extra commitent step of marriage IMO for whatver reason.

That by DEFINITION means that there is not teh same expectation of committed behaviour from a BF or GF as there is from a spouse.

IMO a spouse has the right to expect commitment from their spouse, but a BF/GF has only the HOPE of commitment.

You seem to assume that BF/GFs give each other their 'word' in a earnest sense in every case. That may or may not be true. I never promised a GF anything I did not intend to deliver on, speaking personally.

I had several GFs ( no sex) before marriage and broke a couple of hearts, yet I went on to be a faithful husbnd. Your H is ONE example of an approach to fidelity not the template TA.

Bob

Let's assume your GF requests that you be sexually monogamous while you're dating, and you agree. Then you break that promise, without telling your GF.

This isn't infidelity, because you weren't married.

Is that therefore OK? Is it morally acceptable to break your promise because you hadn't taken a legally binding oath? Is you GF just a sucker for trusting you?

I should point out that this has happened to me TWICE. Before I met H, I had my heart broken by someone who was working far from home, and who turned out (after 18 months) to have been engaged to a girl back where he lived. When he eventually told me, it was clear he couldn't quite work out whether it was OK because he wasn't actually married. He knew that I had assumed he was free - he just didn't disabuse me, and carefully avoided all the awkward questions I asked. To me, it was simply dishonest, and a measure of his worth.

Then I met Mr. Honourable. Ho, ho, ho. Nobody could have seemed more candid and trustworthy. Can I pick 'em?

I have absolutely no idea how I could have told that either of these men was lying to me. Because to each of them, lying-during-dating was quite acceptable. They didn't feel particularly guilty about it, so no discomfort showed. I was playing by different rules, and I have been burned twice.

So I'm VERY sensitive on this issue.

Have I said ANYWHERE that its OK to cheat of your BF GF ?

I just think that by DEFINITION the position of a BF /GF is less secure than a spouse. The received commitment is different. You disagree. Fair enough.

Bob, did you break the GF's hearts by betraying them with someone else while still going steady with them? Or did you break their hears by losing interest in them and breaking it of with them before you have carried on a relationship with someone else you were interested in? There is a big difference and I only consider the first one to be unfaithfull and deceptive/betraying behavior.

I agree with you, as well, Bob