Extramarital Affairs in Women.

[Nightspeed]

My ex and I both cheated on each other, none of those being the reasons we split up. We're actually best friends to this day.

Today, I realize that if I were involved in a romantic, sexual relationship with only one woman or married again I wouldn't be bothered by it anymore. I'd actually like to hear about the affair and their meet ups.

 

[luckyseven]

Cheating is not a great word except in jest. But women get propositioned all the time. Men should expect them to try out new things

I agree; many women get propositioned every day, and this has happened to my wife several times. Exclusivity in a modern relationship is challenging today as either party has many opportunities. I am relaxed when it comes to my wife trying out new things.

I think monogamy is probably more challenging for men than it is for women because female hormones are different; also, women tend to associate emotions such as love with sex, whereas men tend to view it as fulfilling a need. I'm not sure non-monogamy is the solution to fixing a marriage because the only way that's going to work is if both are happy to have a polyamorous marriage - it's a big difference.

Many men are capable of being in monogamous relationships. Monogamy is a personal choice and varies from individual to individual, regardless of gender. It's essential to recognise that various factors, including personal values, cultural background, and relationship dynamics, influence each person's capacity for monogamy or non-monogamy.

The difficulty of monogamy varies from individual to individual rather than specifically between genders. Some people naturally thrive in monogamous relationships, while others might find non-monogamous relationships more suitable.

For many, monogamy remains the preferred form of a romantic relationship, providing stability, security, and intimacy. Finding what works for you is essential, as well as understanding that everyone's relationship needs are unique. Validating only one form of relationship as superior dismisses the breadth of human experience.

 

[LMWM321]

The difficulty of monogamy varies from individual to individual rather than specifically between genders

Great points in your post. ..I hope the OP is reading everyone's post because they are relevant and insightful.

Regarding the above:

It would be interesting to learn just how different men and woman REALLY are if you were able to completely wash away the impact of societal programming. My hunch is they are different, but not by much. As you said, there would be far greater variance b/w individuals than the two genders as a whole.

And even though The Pill and No-Fault Divorce have made it easier for women to be non-monogamous - thus closing the gender gap a bit - it needs to be remembered that women are at far greater risk of violence during both the casual affair and it's discovery. For example: While traveling a man and a woman, both married, meet at a hotel bar and they go back to one of their rooms to fuck. Women are of keenly aware that the chance of being beaten/ raped in that room is FAR greater for them. Likewise if the one-night stand is discovered by their spouses, the chance of being physically beaten/ raped is far greater for women. Knowing this clearly impacts a woman's appetite for sex outside a relationship.

So until this horrific cost imbalance is completely equalized (how, I don't know), along with all the other cost disparities of non-monogamy for women, we may never know just how similar men and women truly are as it pertains to wanting multiple sex partners.

 

[policywank]

Great points in your post. ..I hope the OP is reading everyone's post because they are relevant and insightful.

Regarding the above:

It would be interesting to learn just how different men and woman REALLY are if you were able to completely wash away the impact of societal programming. My hunch is they are different, but not by much. As you said, there would be far greater variance b/w individuals than the two genders as a whole.

And even though The Pill and No-Fault Divorce have made it easier for women to be non-monogamous - thus closing the gender gap a bit - it needs to be remembered that women are at far greater risk of violence during both the casual affair and it's discovery. For example: While traveling a man and a woman, both married, meet at a hotel bar and they go back to one of their rooms to fuck. Women are of keenly aware that the chance of being beaten/ raped in that room is FAR greater for them. Likewise if the one-night stand is discovered by their spouses, the chance of being physically beaten/ raped is far greater for women. Knowing this clearly impacts a woman's appetite for sex outside a relationship.

So until this horrific cost imbalance is completely equalized (how, I don't know), along with all the other cost disparities of non-monogamy for women, we may never know just how similar men and women truly are as it pertains to wanting multiple sex partners.

I tend to think that the truly innate differences between men and women in this regard has historically been misunderstood and overstated. And I think that environment and circumstance are more substantial factors in the observed differences in behaviour than we acknowledge.

Alicia Walker, a sociologist and author has done some recent work on the subject of why men and women cheat. Interestingly, in her sample of men and women who had cheated the motivations cited were almost the opposite of traditional thinking. Obviously there was a range of responses. But high on the list of women's reasons for cheating was simply for the physical sexual experience. And high on the men's list was a lack of intimacy at home. Moreover the women were more likely to be open to embracing an open marriage.

In that case she was dealing with men and women who had cheated so her analysis doesn't speak to the propensity of either gender to cheat. Historically data has suggested that men are more likely to cheat. But more recent data when parsed into older and younger age groups found that for younger generations (I think that the threshold age was 50) women and men are roughly equally likely to cheat. That suggests to me that within a very short time of societal constraints upon women being loosened our behaviour became far less different from male behaviour than it had been.

That is interesting to me because on the one hand, as you have noted, women face a greater risk of harsh consequences for their sexual dalliances. But on the other hand women generally have more opportunity to indulge in a sexual dalliance if they are open to it. Could it be that those things balance out to some degree?

 

[policywank]

Also it seems to me that men are generally more sensitive to the notion of their spouse cheating in the sense that they tend to see it as a more grave transgression than women do. Obviously either gender can see it in a very negative light. But it is difficult to imagine a world in which wives routinely have lovers and men just tacitly accept it the way the opposite was true in much of the last century.

I have often heard men say that this is because it is only they that face the prospect of not having certainty as to the paternity of their children. That is fair enough. I can see that logic.

However, I think that there is also an element of control and competition involved. Men are historically used to having a certain degree of control over women. While that is waning some still have a hard time letting go to the point that they see a loss of control over the women in their life as an affront - they see it in terms of what they have lost without regard to the fact they were never entitled to that control in the first place. And one at least minor factor in that desire for control is men's perceived competitive disadvantage - women generally will find it substantially easier to find desirable partners to cheat with if they are so inclined. That is very unsettling to men's sense of self, so its is sort of natural to either want to reimpose control over everybody (since they can no longer control only women while letting men do as they please) or convince themselves that women fundamentally have different motivations and don't want to "compete" so to speak.

 

[HoldYouDown]

I have often heard men say that this is because it is only they that face the prospect of not having certainty as to the paternity of their children. That is fair enough. I can see that logic.

However, I think that there is also an element of control and competition involved. Men are historically used to having a certain degree of control over women. While that is waning some still have a hard time letting go to the point that they see a loss of control over the women in their life as an affront - they see it in terms of what they have lost without regard to the fact they were never entitled to that control in the first place. And one at least minor factor in that desire for control is men's perceived competitive disadvantage - women generally will find it substantially easier to find desirable partners to cheat with if they are so inclined. That is very unsettling to men's sense of self, so its is sort of natural to either want to reimpose control over everybody (since they can no longer control only women while letting men do as they please) or convince themselves that women fundamentally have different motivations and don't want to "compete" so to speak.

It's mostly the first thing. Your second paragraph is just a potential outgrowth of losing the reproductive game to a rival. These "fears" are hardwired biologically. The testosterone disparity and egg scarcity/sperm abundance dichotomy also makes female cheating generally more deliberate which is another strike against the cuckold. The entire sexual "double standard" originates from these dichotomies, fair or not.

Attempting to control someone is just a reaction to that ego-driven fear. And not a very constructive one. Luckily the "sense of self" can be be trained and improved so that a man doesn't have to be at a competitive disadvantage at all, or even think of it as a competition. Sadly too many men choose to be controlling or worse rather than improve themselves.

 

[policywank]

It's mostly the first thing. Your second paragraph is just a potential outgrowth of losing the reproductive game to a rival. These "fears" are hardwired biologically. The testosterone disparity and egg scarcity/sperm abundance dichotomy also makes female cheating generally more deliberate which is another strike against the cuckold. The entire sexual "double standard" originates from these dichotomies, fair or not.

Attempting to control someone is just a reaction to that ego-driven fear. And not a very constructive one. Luckily the "sense of self" can be be trained and improved so that a man doesn't have to be at a competitive disadvantage at all, or even think of it as a competition. Sadly too many men choose to be controlling or worse rather than improve themselves.

I agree mostly. But I do think that control dynamics are more complicated than losing the reproductive game. Even if it is mostly linked to biological realities there is more to it than purely reproductive dynamics. Plus there are factors such religion which do link back to reproductive dynamics but there is more to it. I also think that a lot of what we say about what is hardwired biologically and what is learned behaviour is not really supportable one way or another. Not that it is wrong. But the reality is that we can see the biological difference and we can make some reasonable inferences of what the consequences of those differences might be, but we have no control group against which to test the hypothesis.

In other words, when it comes to scientific study of the behaviour of living sentient beings the only truly unimpeachable way to assess the impact of different outside factors is to be able to remove or add factors and observe behavioural impacts. So, in order to fully support the hypothesis that female behaviour and the double standard is a by-product of biology as opposed to environment you would need a control group of women and men where the environmental factors are removed or altered so that changes in behaviour can be observed. To my knowledge no such control group exists. However, what we have observed is that as societal factors have changed so too has female behaviour which strongly suggests that there is more to it than just biology.

For instance, the premise that the egg scarcity and sperm abundance dichotomy is the driver of behaviour would seem to presuppose that procreation is the driving factor. But one of the most important societal changes we have seen is an overall change in attitudes and the introduction of birth control (arguably also a biological factor) such that sex for pleasure rather than procreation among women is one of the fundamental factors at play. Meanwhile much of the study around this topic is rooted in the premise that women are fundamentally and always driven by the need to procreate and raise their children. That is a false premise.

Even if we try to link everything back to biology, the consequences and implications of our biological reality change as the environment in which we exist changes. We are no longer cave dwellers just trying to survive and progenate.

 

[SlutAddicted]

It's mostly the first thing. Your second paragraph is just a potential outgrowth of losing the reproductive game to a rival. These "fears" are hardwired biologically. The testosterone disparity and egg scarcity/sperm abundance dichotomy also makes female cheating generally more deliberate which is another strike against the cuckold. The entire sexual "double standard" originates from these dichotomies, fair or not.

Attempting to control someone is just a reaction to that ego-driven fear. And not a very constructive one. Luckily the "sense of self" can be be trained and improved so that a man doesn't have to be at a competitive disadvantage at all, or even think of it as a competition. Sadly too many men choose to be controlling or worse rather than improve themselves.

Maybe. I mean that might be where it started. But even when there are no children or prospective children in the picture men are generally more sensitive and defensive about women cheating. Can that all or mostly be traced back to paternity concerns? A lot of it can but I do think there are other things at play.

I think that the premise that the double standard can all be traced back to biological differences is the explanation that men have been trying to sell for generations in order to justify the double standard. I don't disagree with the connection but there is a difference between "reason" and "excuse". The real and perceived biological differences between men and women has long been the premise used to justify the double standard. But the reason it exists (or existed) is because it serves men's selfish preferences and we had control of the means to impose it upon women. We used to biological differences to create the narrative that served our purposes because of our ego-driven fear and desire for control.

People have used real or perceived biological or genetic differences as the premise for all kinds societal constructs (um slavery). That doesn't mean the narrative has efficacy or that the conclusion is justified.

 

[P0peye]

Someone once said that we are three people, The one we see, the one others see, and the secret one. We all have secret lives to some extent. Those of us in committed relationships pledge to love that one person exclusively including sexually, but some of us have a secret agenda. In my case, I'm a Cocksucker and have been all my adult life. I feel no, emotional attraction to any of the men whose cocks I suck, and as such, they pose no threat to my domestic arrangement. The interaction I experience with the men whose cocks I suck is no more significant than with men I may play baseball or play poker.

 

[Purple_Fronds]

Cheating while having kids I'd just as likely to cause a scorched earth approach as not cheating. I may have misrepresented my thoughts in some ways. People can do and should do what they feel they need to. If you've communicated, are weighing the risks and think cheating is the safer, then by all means, who am I to judge. Everyone has their needs and if your spouse is refusing to take care of those needs, then she's pretty much breaking the marriage vows anyway. I just think assuming you won't get caught is almost always dumb. And the law never favors the cheater over dry spouse.

Actually most law in the world is about the jurisdiction, so if you’re in a 50-50 state and if (big if) both parties play it straight. I.e one doesn’t lie by stating the other is a drug addict for example. Then the arguments will be about separation date, assets before etc. it won’t be an exact match but the custody of the kids will most likely end up as 50-50 too if that’s what the parties want.

It’s safe to say that getting divorced in somewhere like Pakistan is going to be a very different than getting divorced in California, and in the US it is still different state by state.

This is just the law part, mixing in emotions, friend groups, money, manipulation of children it is never black and white.

Like a few people have already commented I don’t think one gender over the other has the monopoly on being arse holes or for that matter being cruel.

As far as presuming you’re not going to be caught is nearly always dumb, is possibly true but as I’ve stated above being denounced as the cheater isn’t the death blow in a divorce that you might imagine it to be.

In some situations it is really the time honored practice of kicking the can down the road and if at some point it comes to an end then so be it.

Additionally sentiment and what is accepted culturally is changing all time. In California and other similar states men routinely seek alimony and child support from their much higher compensated spouse, as they should.

This would have been tough both legally and culturally even 20 years ago and now it’s becoming common.

 

[Purple_Fronds]

The other thing that I think is interesting about the historical perspective is that when it was more male dominated there seemed to be a realistic understanding of why a man might be tempted. The idea that if a man was satisfied at home his eye would never wander didn't seem to be prevalent. Quite the opposite it was assumed to be in his nature. People weren't scratching their heads as to why JFK fucked Marilyn Monroe. They didn't need to attribute it to the notion that Jackie wasn't satisfying him at home. Even if she was a sexual dynamo it was only natural that he would want Marilyn too.

But a fallacy has developed that somehow women are different and that we are so driven by uniquely female motivation that if we are loved and sexually satisfied at home we will never even think of another man. I don't know of any basis for that other than what men wanted to believe. They wanted to believe that we couldn't or generally didn't have the same natural sexual desire for other men as men do for other women. Therefore if we do wander it must be because our husband is inadequate in some way. I think that is just made up nonsense used to justify the double standard or cope with its waning influence.

Sometimes we overcomplicate these things. Consider the JFK and Marilyn Monroe example. There is no real mystery as to why he cheated with her is there? I mean look at her. Who wouldn't want to fuck her? Asking why he would want to fuck her is like asking why I like prime rib - because it is awesome. Why did he cheat in order to fuck her is only a little less complicated - the perceived enjoyment of the indulgence outweighed the consequences. We can all argue that the consequences are never worth it, but people balance those dynamics all the time and frequently give in to temptation for seemingly irrational reasons.

It isn't a big mystery why JFK fucked Marilyn Monroe. He did it because she was highly desirable and he prioritized his own sexual urges. Jackie, his marriage and his life didn't need to come up short in any way for those natural urges to exist. And it isn't different for women who cheat. Or at least it need not be. There may be some deep underlying dynamics. Or it could be like it was with me. I just wanted to fuck some dude because I found him attractive, the urge is natural and I was careless (albeit momentarily) with my marital commitment.

I agree with this but add that it worked the other way too, he’s JFK do I think he had any real issues getting any pussy he wanted, hell no. I think him fucking Marilyn as gorgeous as she was, was just as much about the ego of her being one of the most desirable women in the world as anything else, she might not even been that good in bed .

The same applies to Marilyn who as a living breathing fully dimensional person was probably hell yeh I’m going to fuck the most powerful man in the world and for bonus points I get to cuckold that prissy bitch Caroline.

Of course now I’m headed over to the celebrity stories thinking somebody must have wrote this already.

 

[LMWM321]

Reading through the above posts reinforces what I've believed for quite some time. For marriage to survive as an institution, it needs to evolve. Currently, half of marriages end in divorce, and we all know the half that don't aren't all happy or healthy. Here's just a few of my thoughts on what a more enlightened version of Marriage might address.

• Your sexuality changes with time. You may have entered into a marriage believing you know what your sexual needs are but that can change in quite unexpected ways with the passing decades. Each needs to know this about their partner, accept it and find ways to accommodate it.
• Women can be just as desirous of multiple sex partners as some men, and that desire can be just as immutable.
• For some, non-monogamy is essential to who they are - rather than a weakness or a failing. Telling that person to NOT satisfy that desire for other partners may be as hopeless and perhaps cruel as telling a gay woman or man, "sorry, but if you can't love someone of the opposite sex, then just content yourself with being alone."
• People need to give up on the silly notion that "if you really love me, you'll want to fuck ONLY me." This also applies to those who think the viewing of porn constitutes being unfaithful. Thankfully, this notion seems to be on the wane, but still merits inclusion in my list.
• Marriage is a shared commitment to make the other person the most important person in your life. But it is not a certificate of ownership.
• Once one person in the marriage has made the decision to entirely forgo sexual intimacy he/she must allow the other to pursue it elsewhere.

added edit:
As a relevant aside, I've been happily married to the same lovely woman for >30 years. So I strongly believe in the institution generally speaking, but the survival rates for marriages is quite sobering.

 

[Britva415]

women generally have more opportunity to indulge in a sexual dalliance if they are open to it

I'm not totally sure how true this is. I get why you'd say this but every dalliance involves another person - does that other person not have the opportunity?

 

[policywank]

I agree with this but add that it worked the other way too, he’s JFK do I think he had any real issues getting any pussy he wanted, hell no. I think him fucking Marilyn as gorgeous as she was, was just as much about the ego of her being one of the most desirable women in the world as anything else, she might not even been that good in bed .

The same applies to Marilyn who as a living breathing fully dimensional person was probably hell yeh I’m going to fuck the most powerful man in the world and for bonus points I get to cuckold that prissy bitch Caroline.

Of course now I’m headed over to the celebrity stories thinking somebody must have wrote this already.

Agreed. They both potentially had a natural desire to want each other sexually. If that desire is strong enough it will outweigh the reasons not to do it.

I was going to say they both had their reasons, but I think that desire is a bit different than a reason. Sort of like asking someone why do you like chocolate? Is saying you like the taste really a reason. I guess so but it seems almost more obvious than that. Semantics I suppose. It is just that when we talk about things that people consider to be a natural desire we tend to just accept it at face value. We only seek "reasons" for the things we think of as outside the realm of acceptable.

 

[policywank]

I'm not totally sure how true this is. I get why you'd say this but every dalliance involves another person - does that other person not have the opportunity?

Just because the other person was the one chosen doesn't mean they had as much opportunity. In economic parlance supply and demand is different than number of transactions.

Suppose that for every woman seeking an extra marital affair there are 10 men willing to have one with her. But each woman only has one affair. In that simplified version 100% of women seeking an affair find one and 10% of men find one.

Put another way, look at the man and woman who had the affair. She had 10 guys to choose from. He had to compete with 9 other guys for one opportunity. The fact that he won out doesn't change the fact that she had more opportunity. And the statistics are such that if both continue to pursue incremental affairs she will have a higher success rate.

 

[policywank]

Reading through the above posts reinforces what I've believed for quite some time. For marriage to survive as an institution, it needs to evolve. Currently, half of marriages end in divorce, and we all know the half that don't aren't all happy or healthy. Here's just a few of my thoughts on what a more enlightened version of Marriage might address.

• Your sexuality changes with time. You may have entered into a marriage believing you know what your sexual needs are but that can change in quite unexpected ways with the passing decades. Each needs to know this about their partner, accept it and find ways to accommodate it.
• Some women may be just as desirous of multiple sex partners as men, and their ability to suppress that desire might be just as immuteable.
• For some, non-monogamy is essential to who they are - rather than a weakness or a failing. Telling that person to NOT satisfy that desire for other partners may be as hopeless and perhaps cruel as telling a gay woman or man, "sorry, but if you can't love someone of the opposite sex, then just content yourself with being alone."
• People need to give up on the silly notion that "if you really love me, you'll want ONLY me." This applies to those who think the viewing of porn constitutes being unfaithful. Thankfully, this notion seems to be on the wane, but still merits inclusion in my list.
• Marriage is a shared commitment to make the other person the most important person in your life. But it is not a certificate of ownership.
• Once one person in the marriage has made the decision to entirely forgo sexual intimacy he/she must allow the other to pursue it elsewhere.

added edit:
As a relevant aside, I've been happily married to the same lovely woman for 30 years. So I very believe in the institution generally speaking, but the survival rates for marriages is quite sobering.

That is a good summary. It is interesting that you use the word institution. It is standard vernacular of course. But I think it also speaks to the degree to which people sometimes defer or subscribe to a consensus view of what marriage is supposed to be in a way that is not helpful. If enough people agree that sexual activity wanes after a certain point that is seen as justification for an unwillingness to engage. If one partner is interested in something unconventional of which others might disapprove that is justification to not give it fair consideration. If our group of friends agree with you as to the way things are "supposed" to work that is reason to believe we are right and our spouse is wrong on a point of disagreement.

I take the view that a change for the better would be to be more explicit that the terms of reference are only that which is agreed among the two partners. Your Mom, your friends and the Pope don't get a say at all. Everything is up for discussion and nothing can be assumed. You don't have to agree but you never get to dismiss the other's point of view based upon a generalized notion of the way things are "supposed" to be.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

Just because the other person was the one chosen doesn't mean they had as much opportunity. In economic parlance supply and demand is different than number of transactions.

Suppose that for every woman seeking an extra marital affair there are 10 men willing to have one with her. But each woman only has one affair. In that simplified version 100% of women seeking an affair find one and 10% of men find one.

Put another way, look at the man and woman who had the affair. She had 10 guys to choose from. He had to compete with 9 other guys for one opportunity. The fact that he won out doesn't change the fact that she had more opportunity. And the statistics are such that if both continue to pursue incremental affairs she will have a higher success rate.

I think the commonly tossed around numbers are 70% of married men have cheated, and 30% of women. No one knows with certainty. But the point is, your example is reality based.

 

[LMWM321]

But I think it also speaks to the degree to which people sometimes defer or subscribe to a consensus view of what marriage is supposed to be in a way that is not helpful.

I think that's a good point. All that matters is what's agreed upon b/w the couple.

I know I personally would not engage in a marriage nowadays unless my partner was in full agreement w/ the list. Of course, I would already know she is - otherwise, the subject of marriage wouldn't even be broached.

 

[Cobra6813]

My story - been married a long time. my wife is the one who cheated on me. The story:

We started swinging about 15 yrs ago. My wife is a true 9+ and gets a ton of attention. Swinging became a integral part of our lives for quite a time. I had some fantastic encounters with women that I thought were well above my looks. All in all we had a blast and became good friends with few fun couples which we have kept in contact with. after being in the lifestyle for a few years My wife started getting jealous of a few of the women I had warmed up to so we stopped cold which was difficult. She accused me of cheating with one of the wives. Although I wanted to I didn’t. She didn’t believe me and ended up putting a bit of an emotional wall up. We remained married cause we had kids but the closeness of lifestyle fun was gone. I couldn’t get her to realize it was in her head but that is a consequence of swinging

Anyway, overtime she still thinks I am screwing around without basis and decides to get a boyfriend. she hooks up with one of the husbands we played with and develops a relationship. due to her job and required travel I didn't suspect a thing - it goes on for years. Then in 2019 she drops a bomb that she wants to have an open relationship - never mentions this guy but i believe she figures this is a way she can now cheat in the open. I had no idea she was cheating but i was suspicious. After about 8 months in this “open relationship” we’re both going out on dates and then she decides we should stop. Anyway, 3 months after that I got into her phone and figured out she had been cheating. Confronted her and the truth came out. I was blown away. Its been 4 years of rebuilding trust and had several heart to heart converstions. Now she realizes I never cheated on her.

Essentially, she thought I was cheating and felt neglected. Decided to cheat

 

[jehoram]

"Cheating" and "extramarital affairs" aren't synonymous. It's about consent and permission. That said, I think that women have an easier time initiating an affair if they choose to do so, since they know that men are easy to seduce. On the other hand, society makes it harder for a women to stray than a man, because men are often given a pass... you know, "sowing wild oats" or "boys will be boys" and so on. It's far more common for men to have mistresses, but marital fidelity in women was demanded, largely so that male lines of property and inheritance could be guaranteed. A guy is assured that the kid is his and not somebody else's.

 

[Islander55]

exactly. By the time we were married 25 years we had had sex over 3000 times (basically 2.5x/wk), and that doesn't include the 5 years of monogamy while we were dating. It's utterly understandable that at that point each of us would want to occasionally be w/ someone different - especially once we reach a point in our relationship when neither of us has a single insecurity about the permanence of our marriage.

And this is relevant to the OP's question about why people cheat. Perhaps the OP should more clearly explain what sort of cheating. Is it a wife who over a 30 year career of hectic business travel spent a single night with three different guys - guys she has not communicated with since? Or are you talking about a wife who's been having sex with someone else every week for many months. The two are very different, have different reasons and reflect differently on the health of the marriage. And of course these same questions apply to a cheating husband.

If couples can understand this and work it into their marriage, I think it can spice up the marriage on several levels.

 

[Islander55]

I encourage my wife to have fun, were older now and she rarely does now.

Our bills are paid and our kids reared, so why not both have a little fun.

Unfortunately age sometimes dampens the libido and some people simply do not want to exert the necessary energy and would rather pursue other activities.

 

[LMWM321]

Anyway, 3 months after that I got into her phone and figured out she had been cheating. Confronted her and the truth came out. I was blown away. Its been 4 years of rebuilding trust and had several heart to heart converstions. Now she realizes I never cheated on her.

Essentially, she thought I was cheating and felt neglected. Decided to cheat

Sorry to hear Cobra. Hopefully the damage can be repaired.

 

[LexiSmiles92]

My story - been married a long time. my wife is the one who cheated on me. The story:

We started swinging about 15 yrs ago. My wife is a true 9+ and gets a ton of attention. Swinging became a integral part of our lives for quite a time. I had some fantastic encounters with women that I thought were well above my looks. All in all we had a blast and became good friends with few fun couples which we have kept in contact with. after being in the lifestyle for a few years My wife started getting jealous of a few of the women I had warmed up to so we stopped cold which was difficult. She accused me of cheating with one of the wives. Although I wanted to I didn’t. She didn’t believe me and ended up putting a bit of an emotional wall up. We remained married cause we had kids but the closeness of lifestyle fun was gone. I couldn’t get her to realize it was in her head but that is a consequence of swinging

Anyway, overtime she still thinks I am screwing around without basis and decides to get a boyfriend. she hooks up with one of the husbands we played with and develops a relationship. due to her job and required travel I didn't suspect a thing - it goes on for years. Then in 2019 she drops a bomb that she wants to have an open relationship - never mentions this guy but i believe she figures this is a way she can now cheat in the open. I had no idea she was cheating but i was suspicious. After about 8 months in this “open relationship” we’re both going out on dates and then she decides we should stop. Anyway, 3 months after that I got into her phone and figured out she had been cheating. Confronted her and the truth came out. I was blown away. Its been 4 years of rebuilding trust and had several heart to heart converstions. Now she realizes I never cheated on her.

Essentially, she thought I was cheating and felt neglected. Decided to cheat

That broke my heart. I’m sorry you endured that

 

[JR284]

It's so interesting to read different perspectives on this topic. I used to think that infidelity was primarily something that men did. Over the years though, I've come to realize that although probably not as prevalent, women certainly do their fair share of cheating. Personally, I do see a difference between emotional cheating, and just pure carnal desire. Of course, I'm a bit biased on the topic because I find infidelity driven by raw desire to be exciting. And, I've experienced it as the partner to a cheating girlfriend/wife.

I discovered that my wife, girlfriend at the time, had been cheating on me a couple of years into our relationship. I did find it incredibly arousing; however, a big reason why I found it arousing and not hurtful was because it was just hookups and it was three different guys. It wasn't a long-standing affair that she had nor did she have any kind of exchange that indicated and emotional connection with any of them. Strangely, the fact that she cheated on me with multiple men is what made it palatable to me. Had she been cheating with just one guy, and carrying on a deep meaningful relationship, I certainly would have ended things at the time. In the case of my wife, she's always had an extremely strong sex drive. She's someone who likes to live in the moment and simply gives into desire.

Someone mentioned, that if you have that type of personality, then you shouldn't enter a monogamous relationship to begin with. While I can certainly understand the logic behind that statement, I also understand that someone like my wife genuinely enjoys being in a relationship, and has always loved me deeply. To someone like her, sex and love are genuinely to very independent components. She didn't get into a relationship with me with the intention of not being faithful. She simply just gave into her desires.