Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you......


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... Page: <<   < prev  8 9 10 [11] 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 8:15:26 PM   
GentleLady


Posts: 356
Joined: 2/1/2005
Status: offline 		Excellent questions luvdragonx. I am looking forward to reading the answers. I believe that the other woman is morally responsible for the effects or consequences of her choice.

My second husband cheated on Me with a woman I knew casually. She was very much aware of the damage she was causing to the marriage. I will never understand how she could look Me in the eye when we met at functions. Everyone who knew any of us also knew she was sleeping with him...including her own husband.

Gentle Lady

_____________________________

All things are possible to those who have patience, try, and are willing to learn.

(in reply to luvdragonx)
Profile   Post #: 201
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 8:28:05 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		I really don't think any of those examples are comparable (except for possibly the second one) because we expect friends and family members to observe certain obligations toward us, obligations that strangers don't have. That's the difference between a friend and a stranger. I don't expect a friend to be dishonest with me.

I'm going to stay away from weighing in on the morality of all this, because it's clear that different people have different opinions about it, and I don't believe anyone is absolutely right or wrong. But at least we should be careful to get all the analogies and comparisons straight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luvdragonx

If your friend has an affair with your spouse, would you still consider that friend exempt or neutral?

If your spouse has a co-worker or friend who has an affair with your spouse, is that person still free from responsibility in the actions?

If one of your family members has an affair with your spouse, is that person morally exempt or neutral?

I'm curious to find out how many people would adopt the same stance on culpability when the Other Woman/Man is someone they know.


(in reply to luvdragonx)
Profile   Post #: 202
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 8:38:35 PM   
domtimothy46176


Posts: 670
Joined: 12/25/2004
From: Dayton, Ohio area
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

I really don't think any of those examples are comparable (except for possibly the second one) because we expect friends and family members to observe certain obligations toward us, obligations that strangers don't have. That's the difference between a friend and a stranger. I don't expect a friend to be dishonest with me.

I'm going to stay away from weighing in on the morality of all this, because it's clear that different people have different opinions about it, and I don't believe anyone is absolutely right or wrong. But at least we should be careful to get all the analogies and comparisons straight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luvdragonx

If your friend has an affair with your spouse, would you still consider that friend exempt or neutral?

If your spouse has a co-worker or friend who has an affair with your spouse, is that person still free from responsibility in the actions?

If one of your family members has an affair with your spouse, is that person morally exempt or neutral?

I'm curious to find out how many people would adopt the same stance on culpability when the Other Woman/Man is someone they know.




For the purpose of discussion, LAM, could you please explain the nature and reasoning behind the obligation, as you see it, that friends and family have to not cheat with one's spouse. In reading your post, it seems as if you're reaching beyond the honesty factor, which I don't know would be applicaple, into some deeper ethical principle.
Timothy

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 203
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 8:39:42 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		It's pretty simple. Someone who is cheating with my spouse is deceiving me. A friend has an obligation not to deceive another friend. But it's much more difficult to claim that a stranger has that same obligation.

(in reply to domtimothy46176)
Profile   Post #: 204
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 10:17:58 PM   
domtimothy46176


Posts: 670
Joined: 12/25/2004
From: Dayton, Ohio area
Status: offline 		AHH, I see your point, LAM and I don't neccessarily disagree,as I consider lies of omission to be as egregious as any other type of deception. Some would undoubtedly still argue that the "other person" is neutral and it is only the cheating spouse that is being deceptive, but I agree with you. I would still take it a step further, however, and maintain my claim that the "other person" is a party to the deception of the cheating spouse, although others may find no ethical problems inherant in that situation.
On a sidebar, I do find it interesting on a philosophical level that there exists such a schism here on collarme on the ethical question of actively aiding a member of a closed relationship to deceive their partner. One would think that those who sanction and/or abet deceptive practices within a relationship would find the emphasis on honest, open communication anathema. Perhaps what we've seen reflected in some of the posts within this thread is a selective application of principle. I have occasionally encountered those who had no qualms screwing over anyone but found it offensive as hell when they were dished a taste of their own medicine. The human capacity for hypocrisy is mindboggling.
Timothy

(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 205
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/21/2005 11:35:33 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		It doesn't have to do with hypocrisy, and there are a few non-sequiturs in your post. As I tried to explain, my principle is simple: friends are obliged to be honest with each other (and I agree that lies of omission are a form of dishonesty), but it's not obvious that strangers are obliged to be honest with each other. Now, I recognize that some people think all strangers owe each other complete honesty all the time, but that's a much more difficult claim for the rest of humanity to swallow--whereas I think most people would intuitively agree that friends who deceive each other are not really friends.

(in reply to domtimothy46176)
Profile   Post #: 206
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 4:14:46 AM   
thelight


Posts: 82
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: luvdragonx

Ok here's a question (or 3) for those of you who feel the Other Woman is in a morally neutral position:

If your friend has an affair with your spouse, would you still consider that friend exempt or neutral?

If your spouse has a co-worker or friend who has an affair with your spouse, is that person still free from responsibility in the actions?

If one of your family members has an affair with your spouse, is that person morally exempt or neutral?

I'm curious to find out how many people would adopt the same stance on culpability when the Other Woman/Man is someone they know.

And before anyone chimes in with 'No friend of mine would do that' or 'Anyone who would do that isn't a real friend' - not the point of the questions. I wholeheartedly agree that the choice to cheat lies in the hands of the spouse, but once that choice is made, the cheater can't cheat alone. Someone else may knowingly agree to assist in said cheating. Yet that person is supposed to be faultless/blameless/not involved/unaccountable/neutral?


very good question. i would say that my friends and my family members owe me the courtesy of not sleeping with my wife. her co-worker, who does not know me, owes me no such courtesy.

_____________________________

thelight is forbidden to shine

(in reply to luvdragonx)
Profile   Post #: 207
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 4:54:17 AM   
ElektraUkM


Posts: 309
Joined: 2/19/2005
Status: offline 		I agree with LAM's point regarding friends and family having an obligation not to deceive...

However, isn't the result of the action (a damaged marriage, or whatever result we're contemplating) exactly the same, whether the 'other person' knows the wife/husband being cheated on, or not?

It seems to me that what being known to the wife/husband being cheated on does is compound the 'error'. Rather than it being a case of OK if you don't know them, not-OK if you do.

In fact, I'd go back to luvdragon's poser, and remove the issue of being known by the wife/husband ~ since that seems to me to have introduced another level of moral question that is complicating the issue.

I'd rephrase luvdragon's question to say: "For all those saying the 'other woman' is in a morally neutral position... how would you feel about someone (anyone) your wife/husband was cheating with? Would you still find them 'morally neutral'?"

Most stories of affairs I've ever heard, the 'other woman/man' is in NO way seen to be neutral, in fact, they're usually apportioned most of the blame. Is that solely a result of the person in the marriage being blind to the culpability of their other half..?

~ Elektra

< Message edited by ElektraUkM -- 8/22/2005 4:55:34 AM >

(in reply to thelight)
Profile   Post #: 208
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 5:10:13 AM   
thelight


Posts: 82
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ElektraUkM

I agree with LAM's point regarding friends and family having an obligation not to deceive...

However, isn't the result of the action (a damaged marriage, or whatever result we're contemplating) exactly the same, whether the 'other person' knows the wife/husband being cheated on, or not?

It seems to me that what being known to the wife/husband being cheated on does is compound the 'error'. Rather than it being a case of OK if you don't know them, not-OK if you do.

In fact, I'd go back to luvdragon's poser, and remove the issue of being known by the wife/husband ~ since that seems to me to have introduced another level of moral question that is complicating the issue.

I'd rephrase luvdragon's question to say: "For all those saying the 'other woman' is in a morally neutral position... how would you feel about someone (anyone) your wife/husband was cheating with? Would you still find them 'morally neutral'?"

Most stories of affairs I've ever heard, the 'other woman/man' is in NO way seen to be neutral, in fact, they're usually apportioned most of the blame. Is that solely a result of the person in the marriage being blind to the culpability of their other half..?

~ Elektra


to me it is a case of o.k. if you don't know them, not o.k. if you do. the obvious counter argument is that a deed that is wrong when done to a friend cannot be neutral when done to a stranger. but i disagree with this position.

for example, suppose a friend of mine needed a place to crash or the night, and i told my friend that he coudn't stay with me, even if he would otherwise have to sleep on the street. this would violate my moral code.

however, i do not believe that it wold be moraly wrong to refuse a stranger under the same circumstances, because i do not trust this stranger enough to alow him to sleep in my house.

to me, the wrong in a friend of mine sleeping with my wife lies in the breaking of a bond of trust. a stranger and i have no such bond.

so yes, i would hold a stranger who slept with my wife morally neutral. i might hate his guts, but it woudn't be because i considered him immoral.



_____________________________

thelight is forbidden to shine

(in reply to ElektraUkM)
Profile   Post #: 209
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 7:05:50 AM   
kyakitten


Posts: 145
Joined: 11/21/2004
Status: offline 		Hi Luvdragon,

I believe you misunderstood me. I didn't say the two situations were equivalent, I brought up the job example to illustrate my point that people are not always responsible for the consequences of their actions, even if they knowingly hurt other people.

Your point beautifully demonstrates the fact that responsibility is contextual - acting within the job realm does not necessarily bear the same responsibility level as in the relationship realm. Your "family and friends" question (sounds like a phone plan!) simply highlights the importance of context even more sharply. To put it bluntly, some situations are ok and some aren't. It's all about context.


quote:

ORIGINAL: luvdragonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: kyakitten

Angel -
Accepting a result is not the same as accepting responsibility for the result. I accept that Joe Smith is hurt by my taking the job, but I don't accept the blame for his depression. If, God forbid, your friends left their kids under a tree and walked away to talk and a branch fell and hurt a kid, that wouldn't make it your responsibility because you refused to babysit them in your home, even though their being there was the direct outcome of your action.

Like you in the situation you described, any person outside a relationship can only weigh the likely benefits and costs to himself, consider the interests of others, and decide accordingly. The responsibility is to oneself.



I see where the similarities lie, but the difference between competitively seeking a job and participating in an affair is that the employer is not 'cheating' on Joe Smith by giving you the job. Unless things have radically changed overnight, seeing someone behind your spouse's back is not the same as looking for the most qualified applicant. Or is it?



< Message edited by kyakitten -- 10/5/2005 9:09:56 PM >

(in reply to luvdragonx)
Profile   Post #: 210
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 7:19:21 AM   
pinkpleasures


Posts: 1114
Status: offline
quote:

Your point beautifully demonstrates the fact that responsibility is contextual - acting within the job realm does not necessarily bear the same responsibility level as in the relationship realm. Your "family and friends" question (sounds like a phone plan!) simply highlights the importance of context even more sharply. To put it bluntly, some situations are ok and some aren't. It's all about context.

Liana


Not when the action to be "put in context" is the lying, adulterous, affair.

pinkpleasures

_____________________________



(in reply to kyakitten)
Profile   Post #: 211
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 7:41:42 AM   
thelight


Posts: 82
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		the more i think about it, the sillier this whole thread seems.

morality is entirely subjective, and, like any other subjective matter, it is not really an appropriate topic for argument. suppose you think red is prettier than black and i think black is prettier than red, there's no point in arguing it, because there is no way either of us could ever be right. but that's what we're doing here.

_____________________________

thelight is forbidden to shine

(in reply to thelight)
Profile   Post #: 212
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 7:50:51 AM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		I don't think you are going to get answers to your questions luvdragonx ... because I think the people that took the morally neutral postion for the third party, were responding to a post concerning socially dating a married person.

You use words like "affair", and "cheating" ... which are completely outside the scope of what anyone said. You are asking people to defend a position they never took in the first place.

_____________________________

I wish I could buy back ...
the woman you stole.

(in reply to pinkpleasures)
Profile   Post #: 213
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 8:17:26 AM   
kyakitten


Posts: 145
Joined: 11/21/2004
Status: offline 		Light - nice, trenchant, true. Before I read your reality check I just wasted all the time writing the below, so I'll post it anyway ... then I'll go start a thread called "Black is better!"


quote:

ORIGINAL: pinkpleasures

Not when the action to be "put in context" is the lying, adulterous, affair.

pinkpleasures


Pink,

Here are some contexts for you.

A woman tricks a guy into marrying her by deliberately getting pregnant, then after the nuptuals aborts the kid, tells him to rot in hell, and goes off to Rome to spend his money with another man. He lives for the 10 cherished prize horses he inherited from his mother which he will lose to his scalawag brother unless he remains married (let's say she was deeply religious and ill and the psychotic wife induced her to put that clause in her will. There's already been a legal challenge that was defeated.) He never wants to or feels he can marry again.... so, he has a "lying, adulterous, affair". The lying occurs because when the psycho wife calls to taunt him, he denies it to protect the innocent third party.

A woman marries a guy who has an aneurism and is in a coma for 19 years. Think Terry Schiavo. She won't divorce him because he'll lose the insurance that pays for his care. She hasn't had sex for 19 years. Finally, the poor woman has a "lying, adulterous, affair".

Are you going to condemn the people in these situations? I'm not. Sure these situations are imaginary, but real life is even more complicated. The world isn't so black-and-white.


< Message edited by kyakitten -- 10/5/2005 9:09:09 PM >

(in reply to pinkpleasures)
Profile   Post #: 214
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 8:45:43 AM   
pinkpleasures


Posts: 1114
Status: offline
Liana; it's an example of the maxim:

"The exception that proves the rule."

pinkpleasures

< Message edited by pinkpleasures -- 8/22/2005 9:50:04 AM >

_____________________________



(in reply to kyakitten)
Profile   Post #: 215
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 12:15:07 PM   
luvdragonx


Posts: 388
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline 		Sigh, I guess I'm one of the few who actually stuck with the original idea of this thread, which was lying, deceitful, cheating. Not social outings. I know that's how you responded, caitlyn, and I mostly agreed with what you said in the context of social outings, but not everyone responded in that same context. I wasn't trying to change anyone's mind, I genuinely wanted to know what the others thought the difference would be between a stranger and an aquaintance being the Other Person.

I'm one of those people who believes that line about 'Doing unto others'; I also believe in the one that says you reap what you sow. I won't knowingly be a party to deception like that. I don't want it on my conscience. Yes, there are many many shades of gray where the person cheating has an arguably good reason for it, like the railroaded husband, or the spouse of the one in the coma. Those situatons are rare though.

The interesting conclusion I've drawn from the answers I got is that the ethical obligation ends with familiarity. In other words, if we don't know each other, you don't owe me the courtesy or consideration of not seeing or sleeping with my spoiuse behind my back.

_____________________________

Never Without Love

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 216
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 12:39:16 PM   
luvdragonx


Posts: 388
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kyakitten

Hi Luvdragon,

I believe you misunderstood me. I didn't say the two situations were equivalent, I brought up the job example to illustrate my point that people are not always responsible for the consequences of their actions, even if they knowingly hurt other people.

Your point beautifully demonstrates the fact that responsibility is contextual - acting within the job realm does not necessarily bear the same responsibility level as in the relationship realm. Your "family and friends" question (sounds like a phone plan!) simply highlights the importance of context even more sharply. To put it bluntly, some situations are ok and some aren't. It's all about context.

Liana



I think I understood what you were saying, Liana. My postion all along has been that once you choose to take an action, you become part of whatever it is. If John Smith becomes depressed and chooses to commit suicide, you are no more responsible than the Other Woman when the man's wife decides to kill herself. Except in very specific instances, and while other people can contribute greatly to another persons state of mind, how they choose to act is ultimately their choice.

I speak from experience: When I was so distraught over being lied to and cheated on and finally abandoned, I decided to take my own life. Was it my husbands fault? To a degree, but not entirely. He didn't sit in a tub with me or use the knife on my wrists. That was MY actions and MY choice on how to deal with what I was feeling. It was also MY choice to get help and learn to deal constructively with my emotions so when/if it happened again, I had a game plan. Do I blame the other woman? Not for my suicide attempt. But I do hold her responsible for her part in that whole business because she knew that seeing my husband was causing problems and she didn't care because she wanted him for herself. I asked her to back off for a while, I told her how he'd lied to the both of us. She chose to continue doing it because she wanted me out of the picture.

Would she have been solely responsible for the break up of my marriage? Nope. But she had a part in his activities and she knew about it. She condoned it. She facilitated it, however you want to say it.

In the promotion scenario, you have a choice to apply for a job that will better your financial position, possibly the future of your family. Or, not apply to spare someone else's feelings. In the cheating scenario, you have a choice to go out, have fun with a man who will lavish you with attention and hospitality, maybe great sex too. Or you could choose not to, to spare someone else's feelings. In the first scenario you aren't actively interfering with an established relationship. In the second, you likely are interfering. It's all about choices. Everyone is different and how they see things will affect their choices. That doesn't mean that once the choice is made, they are exempt from credit in participation, just because they don't care about the outcome.

_____________________________

Never Without Love

(in reply to kyakitten)
Profile   Post #: 217
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 12:53:10 PM   
luvdragonx


Posts: 388
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline 		I think your response has made a little hole for me to see through. I see where you're coming from and now I think I get why so many people have argued a similar position to yours.

While I personally would regard a woman who sleeps with my husband and knows it's behind my back as a low-life, other people don't have that luxury. In other words, some people don't want to be bothered with judgements of that nature. They reserve the harsher judgements for people in black/white situations - like the car jacker who kills a single father of 3. Or the drunk driver who causes a school bus to roll over. Those are easier and simpler to look at and say 'Yeah, that's wrong.'

In other situations where it's not so cut and dried, at least as far as an outsider can tell, it's more complicated and time consuming to come to a decent conclusion. So the best thing is, don't come to one at all, unless it directly involves you.

So, in the instance of an aquaintance seeing or sleeping with your spouse, that person also has a relationship with you so he/she brings it to you based on that relationship. In the case of a stranger, the only connection that person has is through your spouse, so you won't necessarily take as much issue with that person.

I don't operate that way, but now I think i understand where we differ, and your position makes sense. I'm just glad you stuck it out and offered explanations because I genuinely wanted to know how other people viewed it. Thank you.

_____________________________

Never Without Love

(in reply to thelight)
Profile   Post #: 218
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 12:56:35 PM   
caitlyn


Posts: 3473
Joined: 12/22/2004
Status: offline 		Two things make me laugh about this whole thread.

For all the beating I took over this, both here in the board and in my email box ... not a single person asked me how I came to the decision, that I would go out with a married man, as long as he told me he was married.

Even funnier, not a single person saw the way that was worded and asked the obvious question.

_____________________________

I wish I could buy back ...
the woman you stole.

(in reply to luvdragonx)
Profile   Post #: 219
RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... - 8/22/2005 12:59:43 PM   
luvdragonx


Posts: 388
Joined: 6/22/2005
Status: offline 		Actually I did, only now I see I didn't phrase it in a very neutral way. When I first responded to you, I said that at a minimum, you're choosing to associate with a dishonest person, and I asked why? I would still like to know, if you're willing to share.

_____________________________

Never Without Love

(in reply to caitlyn)
Profile   Post #: 220
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 10 [11] 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion >> RE: I seem to care more about your SO than you...... Page: <<   < prev  8 9 10 [11] 12   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094