Have you cheated?

Dabamf_sl said:

Stuff....

Click to expand...

Now while I don't study it like you apparently do and I don't typically consider wikipedia a valid source, I find it hard to believe that we were meant to be monogamous when no one/few people in human history were until 20,000 years ago when agriculture was invented, and most societies aren't monogamous.

Although, scientists discuss the evolution of monogamy in humans as if it is the prevailing mating strategy among Homo sapiens, only approximately 17.8% (100) of 563 societies sampled in Murdock's Atlas of World Cultures has any form of monogamy (although these account for much larger than 17.8% of the World population). Therefore, "genetic monogamy appears to be extremely rare in humans," and "social monogamy is not common, . often reduc[ing] to serial polygyny in a biological sense". This means that monogamy is not now and probably never was the predominant mating system among the hominid lineage.

Click to expand...

At any rate I thought that this was an interesting set of articles.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...y-polygamous-0
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...gamy-is-normal
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...enefit-women-0

It also points out that from an evolutionary perspective that polygyny is a superior option for women as they gain access to better genetics that way which is something that I had never considered prior to reading that article.

Archangel_sl said:

My first finacee left me for my best friend on the morning of what was supposed to be our wedding, and later when I *was* married, after 7 years of marriage, my now-ex-husband fooled around with a 20 year old. I know how bad cheating hurts, and I have never done it, nor will I *ever* do it!

Click to expand...

You are either cursed or lying.

And fat.

The one and only time I've ever "cheated" was when I was with a rebound girl who I honestly only hung around with for company following a break up. Despite having little to no feelings about the girl I was with I broke up with her the next day because I didn't want to lead her on. I've been cheated on in the past by a girl who I truly thought I was in love with and it hurts like fuck.

Dabamf_sl said:

That's not true.

Humans are capable of both monogamy and having many sexual partners. There are massive individual differences in sexual behaviors. We are influenced hugely by our early childhood years (0-5) on which type of sexual "strategy" we adopt. There is a relatively new theory backed by considerable evidence that many of our behaviors (sexual, stress response) are formed in the early years based on cues from our environment that have historically been predictors of our likely environment as adults. An unstable or dangerous environment would favor quick reproduction, whereas stable and safe environments would favor those who invested in the future. A closely related concept isLife History Theorythat explains how organisms have adapted various reproductive strategies.

Interesting fact - girls whose fathers are not present up until age 5 not only have sex earlier in life, but they actually hit puberty earlier as well.

Unsolicited but evo psych is one of the most interesting fields to me. If you are curious and have access to a uni's library system, look for these:
Boyce & Ellis (2005) "Biological Sensitivity to Context" - One of the most fascinating journal articles I've ever read.
Guidice, Ellis, Shirtcliff (2011) "Adaptive Calibration Model" - THE most fascinating article I've ever read.

Click to expand...

So basically, hoes with daddy issues put out easy? Did we really need a study to confirm that?

prescient63_sl said:

Now while I don't study it like you apparently do and I don't typically consider wikipedia a valid source, I find it hard to believe that we were meant to be monogamous when no one/few people in human history were until 20,000 years ago when agriculture was invented, and most societies aren't monogamous.



At any rate I thought that this was an interesting set of articles.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...y-polygamous-0
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...gamy-is-normal
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...enefit-women-0

It also points out that from an evolutionary perspective that polygyny is a superior option for women as they gain access to better genetics that way which is something that I had never considered prior to reading that article.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the links. I'll try to read em soon. Keep in mind I don't think we were "meant to" be monogamous. I'm saying we aren't necessarily "meant to" be polygamous. We adapt according to environmental cues (individual differences exist, as always). There is rapidly growing evidence recently that we are incredibly adaptive to various environments, yet our early childhood experiences (0-5) essentially set the route that we will take (e.g. hypervigilent vs laid back, early & multiple sexual activity vs monogamy - there are more but those are all I've read about thus far).

We have seemingly well-adjusted people even here who have only had 1 partner (Tuco, Sutekh) and seem content with it. I had a good friend who only had 1 partner and never really cared about other options. On the other hand, I broke up with a perfect girl in college 100% because I needed other experiences. But it works for some people. By the way that wiki quote is a bit misleading. Only 17.8% of *societies* are monogamous, but it says the actual population % is much much higher. Higher risk environments (which would be present in more primitive--and numerous--societies) would favor multiple partner reproduction strategies. Nomad societies would likewise favor multiple partners. Stable environments like farming communities, or present-day middle-upper class 1st/2nd world would generally favor monogamy.

(I don't know a ton about evo psych. I read those articles on my own time). If you're interested in the evidence and reasoning behind what I'm saying, or just interested in evo psych at all, I REALLY highly recommend the 2nd article I linked. It summarizes and builds off the first. It's less stale than most journal articles as well.

Dabamf_sl said:

Stuff...

Click to expand...

I'm skimming through that second paper so maybe I'm cherry picking here, but it seems to agree with me that in this day and age the predominant reproductive strategy for males shouldn't by monogamy from a bioenergetic standpoint. In an environment where parental involvement has little to do with morbidity/mortality rates the preferred mating strategy for males should be to impregnate as many women as possible (pg 6).

Moreover it points out that monogamy is a rare thing. My point isn't that I'm not a fan of serial monogamy. I actually am, but lifelong monogamy seems an unrealistic goal for males hardwired to reproduce.

My father was the biggest douchebag cheater of all times, lived with another woman and had a kid while still being married to my mom. Call it daddy issues or whatever, but seeing how devastated my mom was during this shit i vowed never to be like him. I'd be lying if i say i'v never had the urges, but my partner and my daughter have kept me in check. Like someone said earlier, if you are unhappy in the relationship be fair and end it.

prescient63_sl said:

I'm skimming through that second paper so maybe I'm cherry picking here, but it seems to agree with me that in this day and age the predominant reproductive strategy for males shouldn't by monogamy from a bioenergetic standpoint. In an environment where parental involvement has little to do with morbidity/mortality rates the preferred mating strategy for males should be to impregnate as many women as possible (pg 6).

Moreover it points out that monogamy is a rare thing. My point isn't that I'm not a fan of serial monogamy. I actually am, but lifelong monogamy seems an unrealistic goal for males hardwired to reproduce.

Click to expand...

Well the ideal strategy now is irrelevant because we didn't evolve in modern conditions. What matters is the strategies that would have worked best when survival was difficult. In unstable or dangerous environments, it would make sense to try to get as many offspring as possible because you could die before reproducing and your offspring could die regardless of the quality of your care. In predictable and safer (but where survival is still a challenge) environments, building up skills, resources, and status to get a better mate, who would then produce better children could be more ideal. Caring for your children and protecting them would ensure the best offspring with skills, resources, and status all gotten from you, who would then go on to find a high quality mate of his/her own. In some cases that might be more ideal than fathering a bunch of low quality / low status offspring.

Sure now, the best way to spread your genes is have as many partners as possible as a man. But we aren't wired for today's world. So when we're young (0-5) and see signals of a stable, safe environment, our monogamy genes are activated. If we see an unstable home, say with no father and a constantly stressed mother, our "this environment is unstable, reproduce asap" genes get turned on.

Kirun_sl said:

I have a really hard time believing that a species who was almost completely polygamous until fairly recently, was able to evolve monogamous triggers that quickly. And then be able to switch them on and off based on your environment for 5 years.

Click to expand...

I don't really understand the first part because you're exceptionally vague, but in response to the second:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

I don't know if I'm a freak, or what. I've never cheated, nor have I had the urge to do so. I'm very content in my marriage. Have always been. And when I was dating, I just didn't have the urge to step out.

Who knows why. It probably proves I'm a lower level human, or some such shit.

Is hardcore flirting online a form of cheating? I've never felt the desire to cheat, pretty much don't even register other women have a vagina in a relationship as I'm happy with my partner. One night went downstairs for a midnight snack, saw a blinking message and curiously looked (felt guilty doing it but eh, curiosity). "I wish you were my homework so I could do you instead" to her best friend and some replies. Confronted her and to my point of view that's cheating, to her it was just how she communicated with her best friend.

I like the analogy of "You can get your appetite anywhere as long as you eat at home", at least in regards to things like porn, but when it's your best friend that you see randomly at any time? Fuck that noise.

Has anyone who has cheated used Ashley Madison?

If you finish before the girl it's not actually considered cheating

k^M_sl said:

Is hardcore flirting online a form of cheating? I've never felt the desire to cheat, pretty much don't even register other women have a vagina in a relationship as I'm happy with my partner. One night went downstairs for a midnight snack, saw a blinking message and curiously looked (felt guilty doing it but eh, curiosity). "I wish you were my homework so I could do you instead" to her best friend and some replies. Confronted her and to my point of view that's cheating, to her it was just how she communicated with her best friend.

I like the analogy of "You can get your appetite anywhere as long as you eat at home", at least in regards to things like porn, but when it's your best friend that you see randomly at any time? Fuck that noise.

Click to expand...

Her best friend is a dude? If the message was phrased in that way, that's not cool. Perhaps it's just innocent flirting, but to me that's a half step away from his cock in her mouth.

Eomer_sl said:

Her best friend is a dude? If the message was phrased in that way, that's not cool. Perhaps it's just innocent flirting, but to me that's a half step away from his cock in her mouth.

Click to expand...

Innocent flirting is "Wow don't you look handsome in that", or "Looking cute", not naked pictures and shit.