Questioning morals if you had sex with engaged/married person.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

Really, Stung? I suppose that thieves and other criminals should be thanked for showing the rest of society how weak and vulnerable we are. I suppose that's true right up until we round them up and ship them all off to Australia (or the moon next, I suppose) for disrupting society to an unacceptable level.

Are you aware of the extrapolation argument for determining whether an act is immoral or not? Basically, it says that if you can extend the behaviour to everyone in society and everyone is happy (noone is hurt) then it can be considered moral. Try it and see where you get with guys (and gals) who prey on committed but vulnerable people for sex.

I wasn't implying that Vincenzo thank this guy, just be thankful that it happened before he got married. I'm not aware of the extrapolation argument, nor do I give a shit about it. That's just another man(or woman's) opinion. I live by my own moral code, which many people see as deviant, warped, or even narcissistic. Fine by me. Can't make everyone happy. As for 'preying' on the vulnerable, they've pursued me in all cases and they've all been 4 or 5 years older than me. It's hilarious that all of a sudden cheaters are the weak, vulnerable prey. Please.

Backup - when you participate in any activity, knowing it could cause emotional pain to another, you are at fault. Period.

Agree to disagree.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

Vincenzo, the guy you dealt with does sound like a real pussy, but I still think the blame is on your girl.

[smackie9]

It all comes down to this....men find it difficult to turn down sex, because it's women who decide who gets sex, when and how much. Boys, guys and men are slaves to their sex drive, so the majority of single guys will take the opportunity when it arises. Yes of course it will depend on her looks, etc (some guy don't even care about that)..... it doesn't take much to say yes. Women on the other hand have time to think about the implications because they have the power to say yes or no to sex. Women don't have to worry about "missed" opportunity like guys do because there will be another guy that will oblige just around the corner.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

I don't think that's what it comes down to at all. Men are definitely less likely to turn down sex, and while I may feel like a slave to my sexuality, I still have a choice. It's still a matter of responsibility and accountability, no matter what biological factors play in. I have a choice and am responsible for my actions. I also don't have to worry about missed opportunities because there are plenty of women who will oblige me, right around the corner. The married chick I slept with most recently, tries to come over to my place every couple weeks, and has for the last 6 months. She's a smokin' hot Brazilian chick, but I turn her down every time, because I have a girlfriend. See everyone, it's not that hard to keep your word.

[smackie9]

I said the majority of SINGLE guys, you didn't read it properly. Try reading over it again.....No where did I post that guys are most likely to cheat or don't make choices.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

I'm in that majority, that finds it difficult. Finding something difficult is not an excuse for anything.

[smackie9]

Human nature, what can we say.....

[BackUpOrGetStng]

That I will definitely agree with. I just think human nature should be applied to both genders.

Where is your sense feminism, Smackie? I'm trying to throw out a double standard lol

[IndiReloaded]

Backup - when you participate in any activity, knowing it could cause emotional pain to another, you are at fault. Period.

Agree to disagree.

Actually, I happen to agree with Stung (sorry Maple). Tho probably for different reasons. Sometimes, causing pain to another is necessary and even kind, in the longterm. I'd probably modify your statement to say "knowing the overall outcome will be to hurt, and not help, another".

As for 'preying' on the vulnerable, they've pursued me in all cases and they've all been 4 or 5 years older than me. It's hilarious that all of a sudden cheaters are the weak, vulnerable prey. Please.

Ha, I wondered how you would respond to that. Well, your moral 'code' seems to be an extreme form of individual responsibility. I happen to agree with you in principle. The problem I think you have is consistency in practice. Is cheating wrong, or not? If you are cheated on by your partner, is it wrong for them to do it?

If not, then I'd say your moral 'code' is consistent (if not one I agree with). Carry on. But if yes, then when you *knowingly* enable someone to cheat you are perpetuating this wrong. You may not be responsible for being a cheater, but you are responsible for making the choice to increase the wrongness of an act when you could have chosen the 'right' one.

I'm reminded of a sad case about a girl who was raped by a group of guys at a party. Several more people watched, but did nothing. While one could say those bystanders didn't do wrong b/c they didn't rape the poor girl, they certainly took part by watching and *choosing* not to help her. Did they do wrong? I think so.

So, IMO, your 'personal responsibility' code is half-assed. Its nothing more than a weak form of selfishness. There's nothing greater in your code than 'I'm gonna get mine' b/c it in no way extends to helping anyone else.

Take that and smoke it, Stung.

[smackie9]

Hey I never agreed to (said female) cheater was taken advantage of because they were "vulnerable"....that's a load of crap too. What female brain came up with that? Oh right this guy's GF....maybe better off to date someone else...who knows what other cockamamie crap theories she will come up with down the road.

[BackUpOrGetStng]

My moral code is an extreme form of individual responsibility. I'm responsible for myself and everything I do, so I think everyone else should be able to handle it too. I'll also give you selfish. No I don't think cheating is right, or I'd still be banging other girls. I never enabling someone to cheat was the 'right' thing to do. Right and wrong, to me, don't exist independent of ones experience, but that's a completely different discussion. Now, I don't think that it is 'right' to enable someone, but I don't think it's morally reprehensible either. Cheating on someone, morally reprehensible. Enabling someone to cheat, taking advantage of an opportunity. There's also the possibility that the enabler actually has feelings for the cheater. Whatever happened to all being fair in love and war?

Now, can you please explain how cheaters are the vulnerable ones?

[IndiReloaded]

It depends whether they (the cheater) thinks what they are doing is wrong. When people do something they think is wrong, then they are indeed vulnerable or conflicted in some way.

Take Stungs hot Brazilian. If she thinks cheating is wrong (maybe her husband cheats too and it upsets her), then she is conflicted about the issue. But her best solution isn't to cheat in return but to deal with the real issue, which is her philandering husband. Again, this is only if she thinks its wrong--if they've agreed to an open relationship, then all is well in her universe.

Stung is enabling her to stay in this situation. Sure, he could argue that 'if not me then someone else', but that's like a thief saying 'if I didn't steal it, someone else would have'.

Decide on your moral code, then live it with consistency. Simple in theory, hard in practice. Stung is weak in this regard, probably b/c he is young. As he gets older, he'll (hopefully) realize that its not all about him and we really are interconnected. Tragedy of the Commons.

[IndiReloaded]

My moral code is an extreme form of individual responsibility. I'm responsible for myself and everything I do, so I think everyone else should be able to handle it too. I'll also give you selfish. No I don't think cheating is right, or I'd still be banging other girls. I never enabling someone to cheat was the 'right' thing to do. Right and wrong, to me, don't exist independent of ones experience, but that's a completely different discussion. Now, I don't think that it is 'right' to enable someone, but I don't think it's morally reprehensible either. Cheating on someone, morally reprehensible. Enabling someone to cheat, taking advantage of an opportunity. There's also the possibility that the enabler actually has feelings for the cheater. Whatever happened to all being fair in love and war?

Inconsistent = selfish. Not a true moral code. Sorry.

[smackie9]

That I will definitely agree with. I just think human nature should be applied to both genders.

Where is your sense feminism, Smackie? I'm trying to throw out a double standard lol

I agree women who choose to date married men are no better, but in certain societies being someone's mistress is acceptable. More like a full time prostitute, with the paid apartment, clothes and spending money....what men will do for some pussy.

[Wakeup]

I don't think that's what it comes down to at all. Men are definitely less likely to turn down sex, and while I may feel like a slave to my sexuality, I still have a choice. It's still a matter of responsibility and accountability, no matter what biological factors play in. I have a choice and am responsible for my actions. I also don't have to worry about missed opportunities because there are plenty of women who will oblige me, right around the corner. The married chick I slept with most recently, tries to come over to my place every couple weeks, and has for the last 6 months. She's a smokin' hot Brazilian chick, but I turn her down every time, because I have a girlfriend. See everyone, it's not that hard to keep your word.

There are always people who have had piss poor childhoods and abuses that lead them to believe that they are worth something if they are having sex with someone. They cheat on their spouse/SO when the spouse/SO doesn't provide the accolades as they once did during the honeymoon period.
Most people, if left to continue on having honeymoon type sex without commitment will, indeed cheat some day because they are addicted to the chemical rush gleaned from sexual unions without the responsibilities of commitment and life-partnership.

If one has no personal boundaries, then they are the most vulnerable to the normal temptations we all encounter and they are more likely then those that do have personal boundaries to stray. It's a fact.

I also don't have to worry about missed opportunities because there are plenty of women who will oblige me,

Sadly you are correct.. which goes back to self-respect and those who obviously lack it.