What is sexual fidelity about anyway?

[SkyRunner]

I've just broken up with my long term GF over the issue of sexual fidelity. I haven't actually done anything rash, but I am unable to grasp the significance of sf and hence have little in the way of principle holding me back.
Essentially, the goal is to get it into my head that infidelity must mean the end of the relationship. At the moment I see it only as morally bad in an indirect sense, i.e. if my GF finds out. Does anyone understand what is so important to (most) relationships about sexual fidelity?

To me it doesn't seem that significant. Logically, all sex necessarily means is that there is a sexual attraction. Isn't the act itself nothing more than the manifestation of the mental attraction in the physical world? So, if my GF is okish with the idea that I have sexual attraction to others, why does the manifestation make all the difference?

I have tried talking to my GF about it to understand her point of view, but with limited success. She's an artist and has a more roundabout way of communicating than I do. That's why I'm here, in the most helpful forum I know, to gain understanding.
This is how far our conversations get before she gets red in the face with anger and frustration:

I ask her why she would put up with all sorts of other things in our relationship, but feels so strongly about fidelity.
She tells me it would be like a betrayal.
I ask her "a betrayal of what?"
"A betrayal of trust because she trusts me not to do that."
[Immediately this seems to me so arbitrary- surely you could trust someone not to do anything- e.g. if she trusted me not to eat her share of the cake and I did, I'm sure she wouldn't break up, yet it would be a betrayal of trust- her reasoning doesn't seem to explain what is so significant about sex.
She then says it would be like making a mockery of all the emotional, spiritual bonds we have built up, by giving it away so easily. But how does it do this? I can see how if I were to have an emotional and spiritual bond just like that, with a stranger, it might reduce the significance of the bonds I have with my GF, but how the hell does sex come into it? It doesn't make sense.

I really want to understand why it causes pain to most people. With understanding can come empathy and with empathy, principles and practical restraint. No one has ever really explained it to me, they just expect me to 'get it'.
Is there anyone who can explain to me in a logical way what my GF means when she says it's a betrayal of trust, and emotional and spiritual bonds? Help me empathize! That's what I ultimately want, understanding is a means to empathy.
Is it a security thing i.e. fear of not having anything over others to keep me from running off?
Is it an evolutionary thing i.e. the need to make sure the mate only has one family to devote time to?
What is the significance of the transition from attraction to acting upon the attraction?

[MidasGirl]

Well, let's get the actual danger out of the way. You could catch disease. But I'm guessing you'd be careful to take care of that part.

I'm guessing what your girlfriend means by betrayal is that infedility involves keeping your actions hidden from your partner. Why would you want to do that? Why not simply be honest and let her know you'd like to have sex with other people......and then let her decide if she's ok being in a relationship with someone that wants to do that.

But yes, insecurity has a lot to do with it as well. Even with people who say they are completely secure, they could be threatened by the idea that someone else could replace them. It doesn't matter if it isn't your intention, remember, fear is irrational and imagined in most cases. So there's your empathy. And btw, are you ok with your girl screwing around too, or is this just what you want for yourself while she sits at home and waits?

[ssandra]

First of all... I don't get sexual fidelity either. I think it would be just as ridiculous to say "I only want you to go to the gym with me" as to say, "I only want you to have sex with me".

However... and this is important... most people when in a relationship feel that sexual fidelity is implied. So breaking that would be a break of trust. Not really because of the sex, but more because of broken promises even if those promises were implied.

If you feel that you don't want to be sexually exclusive that is a good thing to know about yourself, and a good thing to talk about with your partner. For many people that would be considered a deal breaker.

I think the reason why most people seem to think it is important is because there is some sense of possessiveness about it. They have to share their partner on almost all other things, so this they want to have exclusive... just for them.

But like I said... I don't get it either

For ex boyfriends I've been faithful because they wanted me to be, and now with my husband, thank god, I can just be myself

[rei]

Originally Posted by SkyRunner

I've just broken up with my long term GF over the issue of sexual fidelity. I haven't actually done anything rash, but I am unable to grasp the significance of sf and hence have little in the way of principle holding me back.
Essentially, the goal is to get it into my head that infidelity must mean the end of the relationship. At the moment I see it only as morally bad in an indirect sense, i.e. if my GF finds out. Does anyone understand what is so important to (most) relationships about sexual fidelity?

First off, must infidelity mean the end of a relationship? Seems to me people respond to it in different ways. To some it's the end, a deal-breaker, others may want to try and rebuild trust.

As Sandra said, in most relationships there is the assumption that it is exclusive. So, you break that by straying outside of it for dating or sex. And often there is deceit involved - it is a different experience if the other person knows you're spending intimate time with others and is okay with that. Infidelity implies there was a promise (spoken or not) to be exclusive and it was broken. Many women find the deceitful aspect the most undesirable, though as MG mentioned disease matters if you don't use protection with all your partners every time.

Also women in relationships often view sex as an expression of love, and if it's set up as an exclusive relationship, then the woman is likely to feel that this is sharing with others what is reserved for the bond. And commitment is valuable to many women, so if you're open to sleeping with others this might seem like you're not really committed to the bond, from her perspective.

Trust is really important and valuable in human relationships, and betrayal interferes with trust. I think people tend to enjoy the idea of having at least one person they can trust, and if you break an agreement whether spoken or not this messes with trust. Of course, it's different if both people have had a discussion and come to agreements that both are comfortable with.

Most girls will, by default, tend to share this girl's perspective, but you could explore polyamory if you wanted a different framework. The key might be to ensure your interest and preference is clear early on.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by ssandra

First of all... I don't get sexual fidelity either.

I know you're in an open relationship, but even then, would it bother you at all if your husband went and had sex with someone else, without your knowledge, and didn't tell you about it, and then you found out, say, couple months later?

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by MidasGirl

I know you're in an open relationship, but even then, would it bother you at all if your husband went and had sex with someone else, without your knowledge, and didn't tell you about it, and then you found out, say, couple months later?

That would bother me. But not the sex part, the secret part is what would bother me.

Because we have the agreement that we will tell each other about these things, either before they happen, or right after. So if he wouldn't do that, that would be breaking my trust and that wouldn't be acceptable for me.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by ssandra

That would bother me. But not the sex part, the secret part is what would bother me.

I think with most people, it IS the secrecy that bothers them most. That is what constitutes the bigger part of the betrayal. Couple that with insecurity and possssiveness (gee maybe he liked the other person more, had more fun, kissed her better than he kisses me, is he going to want to be with her more than me, etc etc) and you have what makes most people go beserk when a partner strays sexually.

[gigij]

Originally Posted by ssandra

That would bother me. But not the sex part, the secret part is what would bother me.

So the sex part with someone else wouldn't bother you - even though you say that you don't get enough sex from your husband?

Even if he doesn't want to have sex with you you'd be OK with him having it with someone else?

[SkyRunner]

Thank you all. All your answers highlight the breach of trust aspect of adultery. I can defintely empathise with the hurt of being lied to but perhaps I wasn't clear- really, what I had difficulty understanding was the significance of 'sex outside a relationship' generally as oppose to being secretive about it. So, I'm not talking about actually doing it, I'm talking about having the inclination to.

I have been honest with my partner- she's not ok with it.
So really, it's the ultimate significance of sexual exclusivity I need explaining to me. I mean I could probably have stolen thousands of pounds from her (if she had it) and spent it all- she would have been obviously very angry but i am sure she would have forgiven me. Sex, somehow is something so sacred. But why?

I am trying to understand what the difference between us is so I can ascertain whether it's something that might change or not.

I can't help but think it's to do with insecurity- the belief that my attention and affection will follow where my sexual attraction leads and if i have sex with others, she has lost something that ensures I will stick around with her rather than anyone else. I can certainly empathise with fear of lonliness.
This would explain why I am not overly perturbed by the idea of her having sex with others as I am very secure she would not leave me.
But every time i put the idea that it's insecurity to her, she said I didn't get it, that it's about giving away intimacy and making our bonds look cheap etc. What? She keeps using these terms that make no sense to me 'give away intimacy'- what does that even mean?
Disease I don't think even enters into the agenda, it's definitely an emotional issue.

MidasGirl, if I wasn't ok with the idea of her having sex with others, I wouldn't need to look very far to empathise.
Rei & ssandra; But there must be something more than the hiding/ lying / broken promises aspect because being truthful about it has been almost as hurtful for her. And there must be a reason it is implied in the first place. Otherwise, it's completely arbitrary, you could replace it with 'shaking hands' or something.

[gigij]

Originally Posted by SkyRunner

I am trying to understand what the difference between us is so I can ascertain whether it's something that might change or not.

I don’t get what you don’t understand.
She obviously values a monogamous bond with her partner and you don’t.
That’s not something that she is likely to change by your rationalizations – it’s a pretty common thing with women.
So find someone who likes to spread it around.

[MidasGirl]

Originally Posted by SkyRunner

I can't help but think it's to do with insecurity- the belief that my attention and affection will follow where my sexual attraction leads and if i have sex with others, she has lost something that ensures I will stick around with her rather than anyone else.

You weren't clear that you meant being truthful from the get go. When you're open about it though, it's not called infidelity now is it? Infidelity is where there is betrayal of trust ie secrecy.

Didn't I say that insecurity and possessiveness is the main issue? It does not matter how people try to sugarcoat it -- giving away intimacy what not-- what you described is the main issue. If you can't empathize with that, then it just means you two aren't on the same page when it comes to relationship dynamics.

[rei]

Originally Posted by SkyRunner

Rei & ssandra; But there must be something more than the hiding/ lying / broken promises aspect because being truthful about it has been almost as hurtful for her. And there must be a reason it is implied in the first place. Otherwise, it's completely arbitrary, you could replace it with 'shaking hands' or something.

Like I said, women tend to see sex as an expression of love. So it might seem like you are less loving toward someone if you're willing to use this means of expressing love with someone else.

Guys, on average, find it easier to view sex as a purely physical thing. There are women who can do this too, and they do, but women also generally tend to see it as a way to express your love - especially if there is a commitment involved.

Sounds to me like she prefers monogamy, like many people, and you like the idea of polyamory. Nothing wrong with that but it's not very compatible either. To someone who prefers monogamy, sex outside the main bond can feel like you must not be satisfied with loving that one person or you would be keen to let that be your source of sexual gratification.

Some people think there is enough love in the world to connect with more than one person sexually. Others do not feel that way.

[Liz Caitlin]

Question: would you honestly not have minded at all if she had "cheated" on you?

I ask only because quite a lot of people who claim they want open relationships would be horrified if their SO actually slept with someone else. So that's the first thing you should consider, imo. Other than that, I agree that you can't change a person's views on monogamy vs. an open relationship. They might change their minds on their own, but no amount of rationalization is going to work in most cases.

[SkyRunner]

Oh, I don't want to change her mind. I would like to understand it so that I can more easily empathise with it. Just accepting that she wants a monogamous relationship doesn't really do this for me.

Rei, it probably has got something to do with the perception of what sex is. But then she would be committing the error of foisting her perception on to me, that is, believing it is always an intimate expression of love for me, simply because it is for her.

Liz, I guess you're right. I wouldn't really know until it happened- it's so unimaginable that it doesn't elicit any feeling.

Sex attaches you to people, chemically. So I suppose if you are insecure that there is not enough about yourself to ensure your partner favours you over others, the sexual bond is all that you can rely upon. Sexual exclusivity is the first barrier to keeping your partner from going off with someone else.
It's akin to two friends who don't talk to anyone else. They each fear someone more interesting may come along and attract their sole friend away, so they make a pact to not talk to anyone else, removing this threat.
That seems wrong to me- two people stifling each other out of fear.

That would be my understanding of sexual exclusivity being an insecurity issue. I can't help but think there's more to it than that though, particularly because of the way my GF denies it's primarily about insecurity and talks more about de-valuing our relationship, intimacy and bonds.
Oh, I'll get it one day.

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by ssandra

First of all... I don't get sexual fidelity either. I think it would be just as ridiculous to say "I only want you to go to the gym with me" as to say, "I only want you to have sex with me".

However... and this is important... most people when in a relationship feel that sexual fidelity is implied. So breaking that would be a break of trust. Not really because of the sex, but more because of broken promises even if those promises were implied.

If you feel that you don't want to be sexually exclusive that is a good thing to know about yourself, and a good thing to talk about with your partner. For many people that would be considered a deal breaker.

I think the reason why most people seem to think it is important is because there is some sense of possessiveness about it. They have to share their partner on almost all other things, so this they want to have exclusive... just for them.

But like I said... I don't get it either

For ex boyfriends I've been faithful because they wanted me to be, and now with my husband, thank god, I can just be myself

So you're saying your husband lets you sleep with other people?

[dulaney0330]

[QUOTE=SkyRunner;636691That would be my understanding of sexual exclusivity being an insecurity issue. I can't help but think there's more to it than that though, particularly because of the way my GF denies it's primarily about insecurity and talks more about de-valuing our relationship, intimacy and bonds.
Oh, I'll get it one day.[/QUOTE]

Do you see it as de-valuing your relationship and intimacy?

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

So your saying your husband lets you sleep with other people?

Yes.

[Lucidism]

A friend once asked me, "Hey man, why don't you let me borrow your girlfriend for a night?"

I replied, "For the same reason I won't let you borrow my car."

He asked, "What is your reason?"

I said, "Knowing you, you will spill something and ruin the interior."

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Yes.

Confident guy. I guess it's better than divorce. Almost the same thing really.

[st33med]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

Confident guy. I guess it's better than divorce. Almost the same thing really.

You don't understand the concept of polyamory or open relationships, do you?

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

Confident guy. I guess it's better than divorce. Almost the same thing really.

How is it almost the same thing?

Edit: and I didn't give him the choice between divorce and open relationship. I offered open relationship as an added benefit in our relationship, and he agreed with me. If he wouldn't have, I still wouldn't have left him. Love (at least ours) is much more then sex.

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by st33med

You don't understand the concept of polyamory or open relationships, do you?

Sure I understand it. I remember I was watching this documentary about this tribe where the woman was literally having sex with hundreds of men and they were lining up. The husband who was sitting at home was sort of upset by that.

Unless you are a top tier dude a relationship like that is weighed heavily in the females favor.

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by SkyRunner

That would be my understanding of sexual exclusivity being an insecurity issue. I can't help but think there's more to it than that though, particularly because of the way my GF denies it's primarily about insecurity and talks more about de-valuing our relationship, intimacy and bonds.
Oh, I'll get it one day.

Are all monogamous relationships motivated by insecurity and fear? Most? If one is, what is the solution?

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by ssandra

How is it almost the same thing?

Edit: and I didn't give him the choice between divorce and open relationship. I offered open relationship as an added benefit in our relationship, and he agreed with me. If he wouldn't have, I still wouldn't have left him. Love (at least ours) is much more then sex.

Yeah he was such a nice guy for giving you that benefit and you are really admirable for being willing to stay with him even if he didn't. If I were the guy I could care less about you wanting that or not wanting that as long as you told me that you did so I could move on. The guy is acting like he has no choices or something. It's pretty lame.

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

Are all monogamous relationships motivated by insecurity and fear? Most? If one is, what is the solution?

It's not insecure at all to not want your partner sleeping with other people. A good relationship should be possessive. That's the point of it. That's MY girl or wife. If she's out banging five dudes a night she might as well get paid for it. What's the freaking point of being with someone. So you can kiss them and wonder whose penis was in her mouth an hour ago? I want a wife not a whore.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

Yeah he was such a nice guy for giving you that benefit and you are really admirable for being willing to stay with him even if he didn't.

Not really. We were talking (way in the beginning of our relationship, not already after we were married) about how we see relationships. And for both of us, being sexually exclusive doesn't make any sense.

If it would have been important to him to remain sexually exclusive I would have weight my options. Leaving him for someone who is more compatible with my idea on the ideal relationship, or staying with him and giving up that part of the ideal relationship.

Right now, I can say that even if he would change his mind now (which he and I are both entitled to of course) I would still be with him. Because of love. Not because I'm such a good person or something like that.

If I were the guy I could care less about you wanting that or not wanting that as long as you told me that you did so I could move on. The guy is acting like he has no choices or something. It's pretty lame.

How is he acting like he has no choices? Of course he has a choice. He actually has a zillion choices Just like I do.

If he wouldn't be ok with it, he could choose to either stop the relationship and move on, or communicate with me to negotiate a different type of relationship, or suck it up and go along with it anyway... .etc. etc. etc.

He just choose the thing that is best for him. Which is also in agreement with how he sees relationships. Which is not being sexually exclusive.


Where did you get the idea that he is acting as if he has no choice? Just because he didn't make the same choice as you would have made?

[zenrealized]

Originally Posted by ssandra

Not really. We were talking (way in the beginning of our relationship, not already after we were married) about how we see relationships. And for both of us, being sexually exclusive doesn't make any sense.

If it would have been important to him to remain sexually exclusive I would have weight my options. Leaving him for someone who is more compatible with my idea on the ideal relationship, or staying with him and giving up that part of the ideal relationship.

Right now, I can say that even if he would change his mind now (which he and I are both entitled to of course) I would still be with him. Because of love. Not because I'm such a good person or something like that.



How is he acting like he has no choices? Of course he has a choice. He actually has a zillion choices Just like I do.

If he wouldn't be ok with it, he could choose to either stop the relationship and move on, or communicate with me to negotiate a different type of relationship, or suck it up and go along with it anyway... .etc. etc. etc.

He just choose the thing that is best for him. Which is also in agreement with how he sees relationships. Which is not being sexually exclusive.


Where did you get the idea that he is acting as if he has no choice? Just because he didn't make the same choice as you would have made?

Yeah the real question is why doesn't it make any sense?

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

Yeah the real question is why doesn't it make any sense?

I don't understand you. Can you elaborate?

[dulaney0330]

Originally Posted by zenrealized

It's not insecure at all to not want your partner sleeping with other people. A good relationship should be possessive. That's the point of it. That's MY girl or wife. If she's out banging five dudes a night she might as well get paid for it. What's the freaking point of being with someone. So you can kiss them and wonder whose penis was in her mouth an hour ago? I want a wife not a whore.

It sounds like this subject inspires you to be passionate and outspoken

While we may word things differently, I agree with you. I believe that multiple partners can only take away the intimacy and satisfaction of a husband or wife. If two are united, there is much strength and such is needed in this lifetime full of stresses, pains, responsibilities, fears, etc.

I asked an open ended question, not in agreement/disagreement, but to invoke conversation.

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by dulaney0330

While we may word things differently, I agree with you. I believe that multiple partners can only take away the intimacy and satisfaction of a husband or wife. If two are united, there is much strength and such is needed in this lifetime full of stresses, pains, responsibilities, fears, etc.

I get that

However, I personally (not meaning that you are wrong, and I am right, we are just different) do not see a correlation between intimacy and satisfaction and having multiple partners.

I am here for my husband, he is my priority. I share my life, my heart, my soul with him. And he with me.

That doesn't lessen (for us) just because we choose to share our bodies with other people.