# Do people think cheating is okay nowdays?



## No-Sturm-und-Drang (Jan 21, 2009)

I've just noticed a lot of people defending Tiger Woods and i was wondering what peoples thoughts are on this. Ive noticed a lot of people think its okay to cheat what do you think?
Wow my poll didnt work again! 
Anyway some of the people have been saying things like it is in men/womens biology to cheat it is only about sex it has nothing to do with if you love your partner. 
Ive also heard, everyone cheats get with the times. 
Is this true? I hope not but it seems to be being that I see a lot of cheaters.


----------



## caflme (Jun 7, 2009)

No - it's never ok... it is dishonest and it breaks the trust of a relationship. It is disrespectful to yourself, the person you cheat on and the person you cheat with.


----------



## LostPancake (Apr 8, 2009)

God I hope not. The last two women who came onto me (a few years ago) already had boyfriends. It made me sick. 

I've always wanted a relationship, not just sex. And here they had relationships, and just wanted something extra? uke


----------



## Ambivert (Jan 16, 2010)

I hope not...


----------



## Lasair (Jan 25, 2010)

No, no, no and no - What ever happened to trust and loyalty!


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

No, it is not ok.

In my opinion, if I am doing my job (not just sexually, but emotionally as well) in the relationship then my man will not cheat.

I don't say that to put any blame on people who have their partners cheat on them. There are unfortunately some people in this world that will cheat no matter how good they are being treated in their relationship. They just don't have the morals not to. But I like to think that I can spot this kind of man and avoid him.

Again, like I said, I am not putting any blame on the victim of cheating. This is just how I have to think about it so that I won't worry about it. It also helps me to be the best girlfriend I can be.


----------



## Perfectionist (Mar 19, 2004)

No. And it saddens me that people are starting to accept/expect it.


----------



## hatepickingnames (May 14, 2010)

Unforgivable, and in the case of married people should result in (if the victim wishes) instant divorce with all assets and custody of children being surrendered to the spouse who was cheated on. I would also not be opposed to the cheater being required to wear a scarlet "A" around for the rest of their life either...and I am not joking about that.


----------



## Kathe (May 17, 2010)

Only if all persons involved are aware of the cheating and are okay with it.

But maybe in that sense it really isn't cheating.


----------



## Jnmcda0 (Nov 28, 2003)

I don't think cheating is okay. It is dishonest and can have terrible emotional consequences. 

That being said, I don't think Tiger Woods has anybody to apologize to except for his family.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

Kathe said:


> Only if all persons involved are aware of the cheating and are okay with it.
> 
> But maybe in that sense it really isn't cheating.


There are some people who have "open relationships" or "open marriages." I could never do anything like that, but if they are happy with it then go ahead.


----------



## Shauna The Dead (Jun 16, 2005)

I will never think its ok to cheat. I've been cheated on and its not a good feeling. At least dump the person before you cheat. 
Of course some people are ignorant so those people think its fine to cheat


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

caflme said:


> No - it's never ok... it is dishonest and it breaks the trust of a relationship. It is disrespectful to yourself, the person you cheat on and the person you cheat with.


^In agreement with this!

Those people have obviously forgotten, or worse yet - have never been shown, what a good relationship is. Society has done it's best to get away from what it should be.

If it feels good, do it. :no

Three frownies for people who DON'T KNOW what a good relationship is or try to keep it going.


----------



## SilentLoner (Jan 30, 2006)

Its been happening througout history, it just seems more common nowadays due to media and people openly discussing the subject. For example, JFK got way more women than Clinton but the only difference was media attention. 
I believe very little really changes in society, the only thing different is the context of how it happens.
And its not accpetable, back then or now.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

I wonder if it is really more common now, or if it is just more public.


----------



## hatepickingnames (May 14, 2010)

Nothing is anymore common now than before...cheating, earthquakes, wars etc. It's just stuff is more public thanks to 24 hour "news" channels and communication means being better..gossip travels farther faster.


----------



## Just Lurking (Feb 8, 2007)

People will say it's OK until it happens to them. But that's people for you.


----------



## No-Sturm-und-Drang (Jan 21, 2009)

I'm glad to hear some people think its still not okay, I've just seen so many people cheat on each other and say its normal, or everybody does it.


----------



## SusanStorm (Oct 27, 2006)

Wow,that everybody does it?I hope not because it is not ok at all.
Ok,so you can have problems in your relationship and it does happen that you fall in love or even want to have sex with someone else,but I think that it is so much easier to be honest with your partner.
And why can't people just end it rather than jumping into to bed with someone?
When I am in a relationship,no matter how many problems we have and how bad it is,I do not cheat because I respect the person I am with.
I don't know if I could ever forgive someone if they did something like that to me,because it would be in the back of my head and I already have trouble trusting people.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

I think the only ones who say it is ok are the ones doing it but not having it done to them.


----------



## Futures (Aug 27, 2005)

I certainly don't support cheating, but at the same time I don't think we as humans were meant to spend our lives with only one mate.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

Futures said:


> I certainly don't support cheating, but at the same time I don't think we as humans were meant to spend our lives with only one mate.


I've know plenty of people who have lived happily with another person for their whole (adult) life. My grandparents are one example. But I guess it isn't for everyone, and if you can recognize that then you are one step ahead of a lot of people.


----------



## No-Sturm-und-Drang (Jan 21, 2009)

So how do you not live with one mate for the rest of your life? Do you mean like dump them and move on or more than one at once? Just curious.


----------



## Futures (Aug 27, 2005)

Whitney said:


> I've know plenty of people who have lived happily with another person for their whole (adult) life. My grandparents are one example. But I guess it isn't for everyone, and if you can recognize that then you are one step ahead of a lot of people.


Sure, there's tons of married couples that have been together for ages, including my own parents. But every married couple that I look at, it seems as if the romance faded away a long time ago. I'm just acknowledging that I know romance doesn't last forever and for a lot of people, that seems to be a deal breaker. The ones that have a problem with that, they are the ones that shouldn't get married.



No-Sturm-und-Drang said:


> So how do you not live with one mate for the rest of your life? Do you mean like dump them and move on or more than one at once? Just curious.


Yeah, when things are no longer exciting, then move onto someone else.


----------



## General Specific (Mar 4, 2008)

I think cheating is totally wrong as I wouldn't like it to happen to me.


----------



## mooncake (Jan 29, 2008)

I think cheating is deplorable. If you don't respect a person enough to remain faithful to them, you shouldn't be in a monogamous relationship in the first place. Simple. I could never forgive someone for cheating on me as the trust would be absolutely gone forever.

If you want to move onto someone else, fine, but you should at least have the decency to break up with your current partner first.


----------



## ktbare (Sep 13, 2009)

I in no way think cheating is okay at all, but I also think celebrities private lives are noones business. I don't see what Tiger Woods cheating has to do with his sporting career.


----------



## tlgibson97 (Sep 24, 2009)

I'll say that those in open relationships, even if married, isn't cheating in my opinion. The part that really hurts about cheating is not the sex but the damage to trust. The lies are worse than the sex.

So I say cheating is never acceptable and it is one of the worse things you could ever do to your partner.

In the case of tiger woods it was unacceptable for him to cheat. But why is it anyones business but his and the people directly involved. Honestly, I felt the same way about Pres. Clinton when he did it. The only difference between the two of them is Clinton lied about it and Tiger didn't. At least I never heard anything about tiger denying it happening.


----------



## kenny87 (Feb 22, 2009)

when has it ever been ok? really.


----------



## JayDontCareEh (Jul 16, 2007)

ktbare said:


> I in no way think cheating is okay at all, but I also think celebrities private lives are noones business. I don't see what Tiger Woods cheating has to do with his sporting career.


:agree


----------



## SilentLoner (Jan 30, 2006)

Futures said:


> I certainly don't support cheating, but at the same time I don't think we as humans were meant to spend our lives with only one mate.





MichaelWesten said:


> I agree on both parts. Many people get married because they think it's what they're supposed to do.


Human monogamy is not natural, it is an intelligent choice made by a species capable of understanding the consequences of bad choices. I don't see the point in comparing human behavior to that of any species incapable of understanding long term consequences of choices.

Families do better when both parents stick around (that goes for grandparents as well). Lets not forget about STDs. Pretty powerful reason for any human being to choose monogamy. Throughout most of human history STDs have been fatal, and the deaths were not pretty. 

One reason we thrive as a species is because we do not let nature rule us. We find all kinds of clever ways of overcoming "natural" things like baldness, tooth decay, and cancer. I think the naturalness of any behavior is irrelevant at this point in our evolution, what matters are the choices we make. I personally think monogamy is the most reasonable choice.


----------



## cmr (Apr 8, 2010)

Of course it's not OK. I agree with you though that now a lot of people see it as fine, or try to make you feel bad for the cheater by saying it's a "sex addiction."


----------



## TheDaffodil (Jun 20, 2009)

It happens but it's not something people should accept happening to them. I don't think it's something that people in general absolutely have to do. You don't have to be in a relationship. No one is making you do it. So don't get in a relationship if you know you're a cheater. If you feel like you _have _to cheat on someone and you _cannot _help yourself, something is wrong with you _because _you keep getting in relationships anyway. I can say personally that I am very monogamous when I find someone I'm really into. Other people are in black and white while this one person is in full color so it's easy for me to just not break their heart in that way. But that's me. Human beings...can be some real *******s. I don't care what the reason is for it. It should not be commonly accepted. That, I feel, would distort love. If you can't be monogamous, don't get involved with someone else because doing so is completely and totally inconsiderate. It makes no sense.
Now, cheating to me is not the same as polyamory. That's a totally different. I think people can go there if they want. It certainly would work out better for those who cheat in traditional relationships.


----------



## desolation (May 25, 2010)

Having a partner that cheated on you sounds like such a hurtful feeling its wrong to do that to someone =(


----------



## drealm (Jul 7, 2009)

No-Sturm-und-Drang said:


> Ive noticed a lot of people think its okay to cheat what do you think?


Define cheating.

From my understanding tiger sex addict woods used a combination of prostitutes, strippers and ongoing casual flings.

Each of these relationships has a different context and meaning. Prostitution until recent times was not considered cheating. A man having sex with women besides his wife was only considered a threat or "cheating", when he devoted emotions and inheritance to the cheating woman and away from his wife and children.

I'd say for cheating to occur, there has to be marriage first. Which leads to another question: Define marriage. Marriage as it's defined today by popular vote of lazy people falls short of the definition of traditional marriage in almost every way. Since most marriages today are not traditional marriages, I consider the social contract between the man and wife to be fraudulent. Since most marriage contracts are fraudulent, cheating is meaningless and irrelevant.



No-Sturm-und-Drang said:


> Anyway some of the people have been saying things like it is in men/womens biology to cheat it is only about sex it has nothing to do with if you love your partner.


It's in men's biology to have sex with multiple partners, not to cheat. Cheating involves devoting emotions and inheritance to the woman you're cheating with. The solution for avoiding cheating in times past were prostitutes. Prostitutes enabled men to have sex with women outside of marriage, while still retaining all the benefits for their wife and children. As prostitution has been outlawed and stigmatized, cheating has increased.

I'd argue women do not have the drive to have sex with other men, as men do with women. I'd argue woman have the drive to get infatuated with other men and willing male accomplices simply use that opportunity to extract sex from these bored women.



No-Sturm-und-Drang said:


> Ive also heard, everyone cheats get with the times.
> Is this true?


Most people today do cheat. But who cares when marriage is based on a fraudulent contract to begin with? Getting worried about cheating in today's decadent society is like worrying if a batch of crack cocaine has rat poison in it. Who cares if you're taking drugs in the first place?



SilentLoner said:


> Human monogamy is not natural, it is an intelligent choice made by a species capable of understanding the consequences of bad choices. I don't see the point in comparing human behavior to that of any species incapable of understanding long term consequences of choices.
> 
> Families do better when both parents stick around (that goes for grandparents as well). Lets not forget about STDs. Pretty powerful reason for any human being to choose monogamy. Throughout most of human history STDs have been fatal, and the deaths were not pretty.
> 
> One reason we thrive as a species is because we do not let nature rule us. We find all kinds of clever ways of overcoming "natural" things like baldness, tooth decay, and cancer. I think the naturalness of any behavior is irrelevant at this point in our evolution, what matters are the choices we make. I personally think monogamy is the most reasonable choice.


Excellent post. Marriage is the product of an advanced civilization. Pre-civilization, the mating game consisted of a low quality of life for most women living in harems under singular dominant males. Marriage came into existence through the cooperation of men who decided it was in everyone's best communal interest to each get a mate of their own that they could dedicate resources to and extract sex from. This was much to the chagrin of alpha males, who enjoyed having harems of women that they treated like dirt.



MichaelWesten said:


> You can say what you want, but we are still animals and nature still rules us. Why do you think that certain physical features are found to be more attractive, things such as wider hips? This is a natural preference for seeking out women that are the most fertile.


If nature still ruled us, we'd be living like cave men (excuse my avatar). Living as animals and being ruled by our base nature is not any kind of enlightenment, we've been there before and done that. Justifying such behavior, isn't progress, it's a return to a time before civilization where the laws of the land were very different. If someone wants to live under such natural laws, they need to accept the natural consequences. And the natural consequences were most children went feral and died. Most women were treated like dirt under heavy handed alpha males. And most men murdered each other over women.

Acknowledgment of our origins is one thing, but justifying a return to our roots while living in the present society is having your cake and eating it too. Marriage was an advancement, not a step backwards.



MichaelWesten said:


> The fact of the matter is that monogamy isn't natural. There is a reason that over 50% of all marriages end in divorce. When you say that it's the most reasonable choice, I have to say that you are wrong. People get bored of the same person after so many years and it is natural to seek out those that excite and attract them. Marriage isn't natural and that's why it fails so much of the time.


That's true, monogamy in and of itself isn't natural. However, there are other aspects within monogamy that do carry natural currents, which combat polygamy and encourage monogamy. One such current is children. A wife in and of itself may not be enough to keep a man polygamous, however children have always kept men from wondering away. Children fosters fatherhood, which in turn fosters dedication to one woman.

Marriage is a social contract, which is the building block of civilization. All contracts carry stipulations, regulations and penalties. The opposite of the social contract of marriage, is a brute and grotesque contract where you live and die by the gun. It's a world that follows it's own laws of the land, which most people have agreed is so horrendous that they've avoided it throughout history to the point that marriage is a deeply ingrained universal phenomena.

Divorce rates are a new phenomena that have direct causality with feminism, the sexual revolution and a massive increase in wealth in western society. 50% divorce rates do not exist in most third world countries. In fact it's only wealthy countries that can afford to have such a high divorce rate. Using the current climate of western society as a gauge for measuring norms is tempting but ultimately just a blip on the radar that will soon sew it's own seeds of destruction in a world where marriage has been the norm for some time.

Getting bored of your mate is direct result of buying the illusion that the sexual revolution provides more choice, in fact some would argue, unlimited choice. This seems like a superior option, as why would anyone want to settle for one person, when they can have unlimited partners? But it's in this temptation that lies the fallacy. Because choice is not unlimited, it's finite. Choices have consequences, choosing one item often means the exclusion of another item. Waiting to have kids till your forty, because you love to party mean's your children will probably come out brain dread, or reproductively you won't be able to have children at all. Similarly having children late mean's you won't see grand kids.

But most importantly, moving from one partner to another without any long term investment means you won't cultivate relationships that take on a higher meaning. The idea of being there for someone when they're sick and ill, isn't something you can expect to rely on from mates you pick up from a bar over the weekend. Such selfless dedication is a trait that's built over a life time. So in reality the sexual revolution provides superficial samples of everything, but no complete life-building experiences.


----------



## No-Sturm-und-Drang (Jan 21, 2009)

drealm said:


> It's in men's biology to have sex with multiple partners, not to cheat. Cheating involves devoting emotions and inheritance to the woman you're cheating with. The solution for avoiding cheating in times past were prostitutes. Prostitutes enabled men to have sex with women outside of marriage, while still retaining all the benefits for their wife and children. As prostitution has been outlawed and stigmatized, cheating has increased.
> 
> I'd argue women do not have the drive to have sex with other men, as men do with women. I'd argue woman have the drive to get infatuated with other men and willing male accomplices simply use that opportunity to extract sex from these bored women.
> 
> Most people today do cheat. But who cares when marriage is based on a fraudulent contract to begin with? Getting worried about cheating in today's decadent society is like worrying if a batch of crack cocaine has rat poison in it. Who cares if you're taking drugs in the first place?


 I hope this is not true for most men


----------



## SusanStorm (Oct 27, 2006)

I do not believe in one partner for your whole life either or I think this is a very rare thing to find.On the other hand I do believe that you can find people that you want to be with over a longer period of time.
I don't believe in marriage,love at first sight,soulmates and all these things.

But when you are in a relationship you have commited yourself to this other person and the relationship isn't only based on your own expectations,it is also based on the other persons expectations which can be very different from yours.I think that cheating is a very selfish act where you only think about yourself and your needs,and if you can't be with only one person at a time then why be in a relationship at all?You're not only fooling yourself,but also someone else.
Monogamy might not be natural,but then again aren't we modern human beings with a brain?We are not animals that do what our instinct tells us, we are capable to use our brain to make decisions and assess what is right and wrong.
Using 'monogamy is not natural' or something else as an excuse for making cheating acceptable is just wrong because it's selfish and disrespectful to do something like that.
I don't think it should be a problem for most adults to be able to stick to one person for a longer or shorter period of time.


----------



## MissMay1977 (Oct 25, 2008)

I think it depends on the dynamics of a relationship. Some people's idea of a great relationship is an open relationship. SO if both partners agree to be in an open relationship than it could be ok for them. Not saying I agree with this but there will always be people that differ from the norm. 

There is also emotoinally cheating. I would rather a partner physically cheat than emotional cheat. Sex is just an action but emotions are a lot deeper.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

drealm said:


> Define marriage. Marriage as it's defined today by popular vote of lazy people falls short of the definition of traditional marriage in almost every way.


Can you explain what you mean by this? What is "traditional marriage" and how does today's marriage fall short? And what do you mean by "popular vote of lazy people?"


----------



## drealm (Jul 7, 2009)

Whitney said:


> Can you explain what you mean by this? What is "traditional marriage" and how does today's marriage fall short? And what do you mean by "popular vote of lazy people?"


I'd be glad to.

To start, the requirement that a man still buys an engagement ring to indicate a virgin bride is taken, when most women ruin their virginity by fifteen.

To end, the fact that men no longer have a binding contract of ownership over the product of woman's organs, which are children.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

drealm said:


> I'd be glad to.
> 
> To start, the requirement that a man still buys an engagement ring to indicate a virgin bride is taken, when most women ruin their virginity by fifteen.
> 
> To end, the fact that men no longer have a binding contract of ownership over the product of woman's organs, which are children.


First off, do you have a source that indicates that engagement rings have anything to do with virginity? Because I have never heard that. Through my quick google search (because I am nowhere near an expert on the subject), I found that Pope Nicolas I (in the 9th century) made gold betrothal rings a requirement because they indicated the groom's wealth and ability to care for his wife.

As for the ownership of children, as long as a couple is married there is no question as to who "owns" the children: the husband and the wife. And I thought we were talking marriage here, not divorce or children out of wedlock.

Finally, I don't really understand how you can say that because today's marriage has differed from some ancient idea of marriage that sex outside of the marriage is not cheating.


----------



## bowlingpins (Oct 18, 2008)

No, it is not ok nowadays. I am not even comfortable with the idea of divorce which seems rampant. I doubt though that cheating in relationships is any worse than it has ever been.


----------



## drealm (Jul 7, 2009)

Whitney said:


> *First off, do you have a source that indicates that engagement rings have anything to do with virginity?* Because I have never heard that. Through my quick google search (because I am nowhere near an expert on the subject), I found that Pope Nicolas I (in the 9th century) made gold betrothal rings a requirement because they indicated the groom's wealth and ability to care for his wife.


See:



Wikipedia Engagement Ring said:


> Conventionally, the woman's ring is presented as a *betrothal* gift by a man to his prospective spouse while he proposes marriage or directly after she accepts his marriage proposal. *It represents a formal agreement to future marriage.* - Engagement Ring





Wikipedia Betrothal said:


> a betrothal could be formed by the exchange of vows in the future tense ("I _will_ take you as my wife/husband," instead of "I take you as my wife/husband"), *but sexual intercourse consummated the vows*, making a binding marriage rather than a betrothal - Betrothal





Wikipedia Breach of Promise said:


> Some of the original theory behind this tort was based on the idea * that a woman would be more likely to give up her virginity to a man if she had his promise to marry her*; *if he subsequently refused marriage it was considered that this lack of virginity would make her future search for a suitable mate more difficult or even impossible. *
> 
> However, in the 18th and 19th centuries, the main factors were compensation for the denial of the woman's expectations of becoming "established" in a household (supported by her husband's wealth), and/or possible damage to her reputation - since there were a number of ways that the reputation of a young never-married woman of the "genteel" classes could be damaged by a broken engagement, or an apparent period of intimacy which did not end in a publicly-announced engagement, *even if few people seriously thought that she had lost her virginity. She might be viewed as having broken the code of maidenly modesty of the period by imprudently offering up her affections without having had a firm assurance of future marriage.*
> - Breach Of Promise





Whitney said:


> As for the ownership of children, as long as a couple is married there is no question as to who "owns" the children: the husband and the wife. And I thought we were talking marriage here, not divorce or children out of wedlock.


Wrong. See.



Whitney said:


> Finally, I don't really understand how you can say that because *today's marriage has* *differed* from some ancient idea of marriage that sex outside of the marriage is not cheating.


There's no such thing as "differed". There's marriage and not marriage. What we have today is not marriage, it's a new arrangement altogether that's loosely based on marriage, minus all the commitments, restraints and investments.

It's not cheating if there's no contractual agreement to begin with. And it's especially not cheating if the contractual agreement is based on lies. Any marriage today, minus a handful of orthodox jews and other dying breeds is a false contract. You cannot enforce a contract that's false to begin with.

I don't doubt that having sex with others besides your partner violates an unspoken agreement, but it's precisely because marriage has been relegated to an unspoken agreement that no party is at fault when the terms are so unclear to begin with.


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

drealm said:


> See:
> 
> Wrong. See.
> 
> ...


Wow, um, I could type up a response to that but it is just not worth my time. You are wrong on so many levels.

Question for everyone else: does _anyone_ else agree with drealm on _any_ of the points he made?


----------



## Whitney (Oct 2, 2008)

MichaelWesten said:


> I stopped reading his posts because he feels it's necessary to type out a book for each response he makes.


Yeah I'm pretty sure that is why no one else has commented on the absurdity of his claims.


----------



## millenniumman75 (Feb 4, 2005)

SilentLoner said:


> Its been happening througout history, it just seems more common nowadays due to media and people openly discussing the subject. For example, JFK got way more women than Clinton but the only difference was media attention.
> I believe very little really changes in society, the only thing different is the context of how it happens.
> And its not accpetable, back then or now.





Whitney said:


> I wonder if it is really more common now, or if it is just more public.


It doesn't matter - cheating is cheating.


----------



## SusanStorm (Oct 27, 2006)

Whitney said:


> Wow, um, I could type up a response to that but it is just not worth my time. You are wrong on so many levels.
> 
> Question for everyone else: does _anyone_ else agree with drealm on _any_ of the points he made?


No,and I don't care if there's a contractual agreement or not.When you are with someone you are committed to that person no matter if you are married or not.
Each and every couple make up their own 'rules' for how they want their relationship to be.If they want a open relationship,fine,as long as both agree on it.
Marriage in its original sense is pretty old fashioned and applying that to modern society isn't possible anymore since men do not decide for or 'own' women anymore.Most people that get married today does it as a symbol for their love and being committed to each other(which I think you can do just as easily without getting married).So saying that cheating is ok because marriage doesn't mean the same today as it did for a 100 years a go is just bull****.
Relationships today are based on a mutual understanding between the two people in it,so cheating is breaking that mutual understanding.


----------



## izzy (Dec 18, 2009)

No. Cheating is not acceptable.



SilentLoner said:


> Its been happening througout history, it just seems more common nowadays due to media and people openly discussing the subject. For example, JFK got way more women than Clinton but the only difference was media attention.
> I believe very little really changes in society, the only thing different is the context of how it happens.
> And its not accpetable, back then or now.


Yes, I completely agree! People will often say things were so much better in the past... but if they stop to think about it, they'll see it really isn't that different. It's also insulting to current generations.


----------



## SOME (Jul 13, 2009)

opcorn 

lol you people crack me up. :lol


----------



## rdrr (Dec 31, 2008)

Cheating is something you shouldn't do about someone you care about. If you are so determined to cheat, you should break off the relationship first. Remember you're basically telling that other person, 'yeah, I physically rather have this person instead of you, and you're not cutting it in that dept. completely, but, I still want to be with you. I don't know if anyone has been cheated on reading this thread, but to have your trust betrayed by someone you gave your heart to is a very cruel thing to do. 

In celebrity marriages like Tiger Woods these people are so out of their mind from fame that they don't care about the consequences of anything, and are being shielded and protected, and even lauded for their mistakes and crimes. See Mel Gibson. If someone is willing to cheat, they can have the pleasure of feeling that guilt that you made another person extremely unhappy. Let them keep doing that and we'll see how happy they are down the road.


----------



## accepting myself (Jun 27, 2010)

No, no and NO it is not ok, it never has been nor will it ever be ok.

at least in my book


----------

