Finding a cheater, would you tell or keep secret?

[Bramblethorn]

This is why the rings exist. Wear one and people know you are "open."

Might not go down well with the "I don't care what people do behind closed doors as long as they don't flaunt it in public" crowd.

And as for everyone saying it's "none of your business" - I find that course of logic incredibly flawed. If someone steals from your friend, you're not going to tell them about it? If you witness a serious crime, like someone getting assaulted or raped, you're not going to report it?

Not a great analogy, because in those crimes the "victim" usually knows its happened. If they choose to report, sure, I'd back them in that. But if they don't - and there are very good reasons why that might be the case - then I'd need to consider whether it's right for me to override their wishes. It'd be great to live in a world where reporting always leads to justice but that's not the case.

 

[Devinter]

Not a great analogy, because in those crimes the "victim" usually knows its happened. If they choose to report, sure, I'd back them in that. But if they don't - and there are very good reasons why that might be the case - then I'd need to consider whether it's right for me to override their wishes. It'd be great to live in a world where reporting always leads to justice but that's not the case.

You're right. Let's go with "someone embezzling from the company you work at, and they haven't figured it out yet, but you have knowledge of it" instead then.

 

[HordHolm]

This is entirely true. However, the "don't want to know" is a coping mechanism that can cause serious emotional trauma if left unattended - it falls under the Repression category, and sometimes even Denial comes into play. It can cause serious damage to the psyche that aren't necessarily apparent right away, but that will manifest further down the line.

Agreed, however I was coming at this more from the angle of what a person spilling the beans might expect/experience as a reaction to their information - A might tell B her husband is cheating hoping for some thanks somewhere down the line, or at least that their relationship will be strengthened, only to be surprised when B reacts extremely negatively, refusing to maintain any contact with A and contending that A has ruined her life. I've seen it happen, with A being completely nonplussed by the reaction, with a previously close friendship buried by a 30 minute conversation.

Of course, then there's the flip side when A knows but keeps the truth from B, who then reacts with hurt fury when she finds out, and knows that A kept the truth from her. It's a tough one, and there are a multitude of outcomes that aren't obvious until it's too late...

 

[MediocreAuthor]

I'm not saying I have the right answer, but I do have a personal answer, which is that I would have a strong desire to tell the partner who is being cheated on. I'm sure there are qualifiers, but in general the answer is that I would feel obligated to tell in most cases, as long as I knew for sure.

Thank goodness that has never happened, but to be fair, I have actually told my friends something to the effect of: "If you ever cheat on your spouse, don't tell me... because I will destroy our friendship by telling them."

 

[desecration]

Might not go down well with the "I don't care what people do behind closed doors as long as they don't flaunt it in public" crowd.

Good point. I can't speak to all of that crowd, but as a proud member, I would say that a simple ring is not objectionable. That is not "flaunting it." Nor is having an LGBT neighborhood with all-night sodomy flaunting it. Having a Mustang Ranch, gay pride parade for the whole city, or megachurch might be flaunting it. It's one of those fine lines. If I have to know what it is, to understand it, it's probably not being shoved in my face IMHO.

 

[Voboy]

This is entirely true. However, the "don't want to know" is a coping mechanism that can cause serious emotional trauma if left unattended - it falls under the Repression category, and sometimes even Denial comes into play. It can cause serious damage to the psyche that aren't necessarily apparent right away, but that will manifest further down the line.

This is not your problem, though. You are not their therapist, nor their priest. This is THEIR life, not yours. They are not looking for your validation, nor your judgement, nor your worry.

Just let it go. This thread, sadly, has several people with savior complexes. Stop that. Nobody needs you to be their savior.

And as for everyone saying it's "none of your business" - I find that course of logic incredibly flawed. If someone steals from your friend, you're not going to tell them about it? If you witness a serious crime, like someone getting assaulted or raped, you're not going to report it?

You, and many others here, are twisting the OP's scenario to fit your predilections. I say that because your counterexamples here (and there are others, up-thread, from other posters) are all examples of coercive or nonconsensual acts. The OP's scenario is not.

So sure. I'll report a crime. But "a crime" is not what's being discussed in this thread: cheating is. And cheating is not a crime, regardless of how much you'd like it to be. Cheating is, as far as we know in the initial scenario, consensual by both parties. You should acknowledge the difference between that and being robbed, assaulted, or raped, and if you're being intellectually honest? You would.

 

[desecration]

I would have a strong desire to tell the partner who is being cheated on. I'm sure there are qualifiers...

You also make a good point. Not just qualifiers but, um, feelers. That is, if I see a cheating spouse, and then notice the other spouse is doing the same thing, or obviously not bothered and likely aware, I might take a subtle hint and say nothing. But in most cases that this has happened to me, the partner or spouse has not known and I would have been an accomplice to the cheater had I said nothing. You never want to be accessory to a crime against decency, sanity, honesty, honor, pride, fidelity, the good, the beautiful, and the true, and all that jazz.

I lied to him. I helped you screw over his best friend. I helped cause his best friend to assault him. Do you really think that he's going believe a single word out that I tell him?

From an insightful story. Some of these capture tragedy (solipsism versus reality, a type of morose comedy) better than others.

 

[desecration]

This is THEIR life, not yours.

I do not believe in this division. We share a world. Lies spread like cancers and AIDS. Also, their partner has a life and if that is being violated, the violator needs to be exposed.

Again, I think we should just make our sexual histories public and then hang anyone who lies.

 

[desecration]

Of course, then there's the flip side when A knows but keeps the truth from B, who then reacts with hurt fury when she finds out, and knows that A kept the truth from her. It's a tough one, and there are a multitude of outcomes that aren't obvious until it's too late...

At the end of the day, it's like someone else's example of embezzling or bullying in the workplace. You either speak up and be a hero or become an accessory. If you are an accessory, do not be surprised if you lose friends! There can be other consequences as well since allowing a fraud is endorsing the fraud.

 

[Voboy]

Also, their partner has a life and if that is being violated, the violator needs to be exposed.

Why is that your job?

What makes you that kind of superhero?

 

[Devinter]

This is not your problem, though. You are not their therapist, nor their priest. This is THEIR life, not yours. They are not looking for your validation, nor your judgement, nor your worry.

Yes and no. If you were in my line of work, you'd understand. I may not be their therapist, but I am a psychologist, and I deal with these sort of matters all the time.

Look at it this way; Imagine you were a doctor, and you were specialized in treating lungs and the respiratory system. You'd likely have a stronger than average reaction to people smoking in that case, since you're watching the damage it deals up close on a regular basis. It's still not the doctors place - nor mine - to tell others how to live their life, but I am certainly allowed to have an opinion about it. A strong one at that. This is a public forum and I'm allowed to voice what I believe in the same as everyone else.

Furthermore, you write "Cheating is, as far as we know in the initial scenario, consensual by both parties" - but that goes against the very definition of cheating as if it's consensual then it's no longer cheating, so I believe you're the one being intellectually dishonest. Maybe you're just lashing out because I am calling out negative behaviour that damages other human beings and you can't deal with that?

 

[Voboy]

Yes and no. If you were in my line of work, you'd understand. I may not be their therapist, but I am a psychologist, and I deal with these sort of matters all the time.

Then you know (or should) that there is a difference between a person who seeks you out, voluntarily asking for your help, and a person who does not. You have NO responsibility to that second person. They are not your problem. So you should butt out of their lives.

Look at it this way; Imagine you were a doctor, and you were specialized in treating lungs and the respiratory system. You'd likely have a stronger than average reaction to people smoking in that case, since you're watching the damage it deals up close on a regular basis. It's still not the doctors place - nor mine - to tell others how to live their life, but I am certainly allowed to have an opinion about it. A strong one at that. This is a public forum and I'm allowed to voice what I believe in the same as everyone else.

Undoubtedly.

Furthermore, you write "Cheating is, as far as we know in the initial scenario, consensual by both parties" - but that goes against the very definition of cheating as if it's consensual then it's no longer cheating, so I believe you're the one being intellectually dishonest.

I was talking about the two people fucking, as I suspect you know quite well, and in doing so I was making a distinction between unlawful and merely unsavory behavior. I suspect you know that quite well, too.

Maybe you're just lashing out because I am calling out negative behaviour that damages other human beings and you can't deal with that?

Not at all. Call it out all you wish; it is definitely negative behavior.

But it's not your problem. It's not for you to "help," unless someone asks for your help.

 

[Devinter]

Then you know (or should) that there is a difference between a person who seeks you out, voluntarily asking for your help, and a person who does not. You have NO responsibility to that second person. They are not your problem. So you should butt out of their lives.

Do you not understand the irony of this statement? You're saying "I should butt out of their lives", essentially butting into my life.

If any of my friends or acquaintances cheat, and I found out about it, I'm telling their partner and there's nothing you can do about it. You cannot tell me how to live my life. I will live with the consequences of my actions - gladly - because I know about the the damage this sort of behaviour can cause to someone. It is taken far too lightly, in my opinion. Many people trust their partner more than any other person in their entire lives. Being betrayed by that person can have extreme consequences, making a person have a difficult time trusting anyone ever again afterwards.

Furthermore, I do help people that do not ask for help all the time. Many find it difficult to ask for help, in fact. Oftentimes, you can tell if a person isn't feeling well, and obviously you must approach the topic with some tact.

 

[desecration]

And cheating is not a crime, regardless of how much you'd like it to be.

I disagree, it's fraud.

 

[desecration]

You have NO responsibility to that second person.

I disagree here too. We are our brother's keepers... both keeping them from harm, and keeping them from harming others.

 

[desecration]

Funny how this gets addressed in some of the stories on the topic:

She not only lied to me repeatedly about her actions and your slut but she used our friendship to hide it in an evil way and make me an active participant in the deceiving you.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Again, I think we should just make our sexual histories public

Talk to any of your queer friends about why this is a bad idea.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Furthermore, you write "Cheating is, as far as we know in the initial scenario, consensual by both parties" - but that goes against the very definition of cheating as if it's consensual then it's no longer cheating, so I believe you're the one being intellectually dishonest.

There is no one "the very definition of cheating". Some people (including me) prefer to use it the same way you're using it, to mean violating what that specific couple had agreed on. But there are plenty of others who use "cheating" to mean any form of adultery (or equivalent in de-facto relationship), regardless of mutual consent.

For instance, the American Psychological Association's definition of "cheating" points to "infidelity" (after some other meanings not relevant here) which is defined as:

the situation in which one partner in a marriage or intimate relationship becomes sexually or emotionally involved with a person other than the partner’s spouse or girlfriend or boyfriend. The infidelity, also called cheating, usually transpires in secrecy between those in the extradyadic relationship; however, online infidelity, in which the extradyadic intimacy occurs on social networks and other Internet-based sites that may be only marginally private, is becoming widespread. Regardless of its method of pursuit, its effects can be harmful: Infidelity has been linked to significant adverse emotional and behavioral consequences, especially for the individual who is cheated on, including decreased self-esteem and increased risk of depression and suicide. Additionally, it is cited as a common cause of divorce or relationship dissolution.

There's no exception there for consensual arrangements; by APA's definition, any kind of nonmonogamy is "cheating" even when nobody in the picture feels they've been cheated.

While my preference is to use "cheating" the same way you're using it, contra that APA-style interpretation, I don't think it's fair to accuse somebody of being "intellectually dishonest" for the other usage. One of those situations where it's better just to clarify meanings within the discussion rather than presuming a universally agreed meaning that doesn't exist.

 

[SimonDoom]

Do you not understand the irony of this statement? You're saying "I should butt out of their lives", essentially butting into my life.

If any of my friends or acquaintances cheat, and I found out about it, I'm telling their partner and there's nothing you can do about it. You cannot tell me how to live my life.

Nobody can force you what to do, but one can tell you that you are being foolish if you think this is always the right thing to do.

Suppose you know of a man who is cheating, and the wife doesn't know, and you tell the wife, and you make her miserable, where she wasn't miserable before, and you cause the break up of the marriage? Can you be certain you have done the right thing? Of course you cannot. It's possible that by doing so you have caused enormous destruction that would not otherwise have existed. It's possible that the wife would have been better off not knowing of her husband's infidelity. The point is that you cannot be certain in all cases that telling the wife is the good or right thing to do, and if you insist otherwise then you are elevating your own personal biases over the welfare of others, to their possible detriment.

You can tell yourself "The wife has the right to know." That's not necessarily your call to make when you are dealing with different people with different perspectives. It's entirely possible that you could destroy people's lives by taking this attitude in an inflexible way.

 

[Bramblethorn]

This is all coming from someone who has never been cheated on, but whom deals with patients that have undergone trauma every single week. Most of the time, the cheating is discovered eventually - and when that occurs, people suffer. Significantly more so if it has been going on for a long time.

You're a psychologist, working as a therapist, yes?

That's an honourable occupation, and no doubt one that shows you a lot of the worst of how these things can turn out. But it may be worth keeping in mind that it doesn't show you a representative picture of how these things can turn out. Your occupation filters your observations towards the bad end of things.

I've been cheated on (by my definitions) twice, that I know about, by two different people. One of those times was extremely distressing, and I talked to my psych about it, because talking about extremely distressing things is what she's there for.

The other time, circumstances were different and my reaction was just "oh okay, I appreciate you telling me, I can understand how that could have happened". I wasn't distressed by it, and I've never mentioned it to my psych because it's never been something I needed help with. So she only hears about the time that caused suffering, not the time that didn't.

I don't mean to minimise cheating. The distressing 50% was extremely unpleasant and took us a lot of work to get past. But it's not the whole of the picture, and psychologists are not immune to the cognitive biases that arise from being exposed to a large but non-representative sample.

 

[Cagivagurl]

I disagree here too. We are our brother's keepers... both keeping them from harm, and keeping them from harming others.

Good grief...
I suppose you want to stone the cheaters to death as well???

 

[Mike130]

I try not to meddle in other people’s affairs. People have their own set of morals, they don’t need me imposing mine.

 

[Devinter]

You're a psychologist, working as a therapist, yes?

That's an honourable occupation, and no doubt one that shows you a lot of the worst of how these things can turn out. But it may be worth keeping in mind that it doesn't show you a representative picture of how these things can turn out. Your occupation filters your observations towards the bad end of things.

You are 100% correct. Definitely worth taking into account. It's genuinely difficult for me to picture the scenario in my mind without it being heavily skewed towards the "my life is completely ruined" side of the spectrum. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

Regarding your other post; I only called him intellectually dishonest because he did it to me first, which in hindsight is rather childish. And I have no issue whatsoever with consensual non-monogamy. THAT is none of my business. If it's not hurting anyone, there is no victim.

It's possible that by doing so you have caused enormous destruction that would not otherwise have existed. It's possible that the wife would have been better off not knowing of her husband's infidelity.

This is partly true, and I actually brought it up in a previous post of mine to some extent, but I hope you understand that cheating is discovered far more often than the other way around according to all gathered statistics - and the longer it has been going on, the more betrayed a person generally feels. Knowing they were around someone that lied and manipulated them for potentially several years can, as mentioned, be incredibly damaging. Anyone cheating on their spouse should keep that in mind before they proceed with the act. One of the most common cases among those that seek professional help for the matter is that they have suicidal thoughts.

Now, I'll admit even those numbers stated above are likely incorrect because people aren't necessarily truthful in a survey, and of course the world isn't totally black or white. There may be fringe cases just like the one you mention, but I look at it mathematically; If one in ten would have rather not have known, but the other nine can improve their lives, I still think that is a net positive overall.

Furthermore, I am strong enough to be able to deal with the consequences in case things would go poorly, and should that one-in-ten situation spring to life, it would weigh significantly less heavily on my conscience than seeing a friend whose partner is betraying them - look them in the eye - and say nothing. That, I cannot do. That is not what a friend does, in my opinion - and thankfully, the company I keep would agree with me, so that makes it less likely of things going wrong as well. Your mileage may wary.

 

[lustychimera]

There is no one "the very definition of cheating". Some people (including me) prefer to use it the same way you're using it, to mean violating what that specific couple had agreed on. But there are plenty of others who use "cheating" to mean any form of adultery (or equivalent in de-facto relationship), regardless of mutual consent.

For instance, the American Psychological Association's definition of "cheating" points to "infidelity" (after some other meanings not relevant here) which is defined as:



There's no exception there for consensual arrangements; by APA's definition, any kind of nonmonogamy is "cheating" even when nobody in the picture feels they've been cheated.

While my preference is to use "cheating" the same way you're using it, contra that APA-style interpretation, I don't think it's fair to accuse somebody of being "intellectually dishonest" for the other usage. One of those situations where it's better just to clarify meanings within the discussion rather than presuming a universally agreed meaning that doesn't exist.

I've always defined cheating as being more about breaking a commitment rather than the act of being with someone else. That APA definition is quite out of touch.

I see as more of a term for someone who broke a specific intimate clause in the contract of their relationship regarding relations with other people. Cheater's break an intimate trust, which the root of the pain--I believe--and the act that broke that trust is secondary to defining a cheater.

Talk to any of your queer friends about why this is a bad idea.

Exactly. Which is also why if I don't know the couple very well, I stay the fuck out of it. Getting involved when I don't understand the circumstances, even to "drop a harmless hint" as people are saying, is the equivalent to outing their lifestyle, especially vile if I gossip about it to others.

If they are swingers, "harmlessly" telling their partner will pressure them to explain intimate details of their life to me if they want to quell any judgements, and they might not be comfortable with that.

 

[lustychimera]

Nobody can force you what to do, but one can tell you that you are being foolish if you think this is always the right thing to do.

Suppose you know of a man who is cheating, and the wife doesn't know, and you tell the wife, and you make her miserable, where she wasn't miserable before, and you cause the break up of the marriage? Can you be certain you have done the right thing? Of course you cannot. It's possible that by doing so you have caused enormous destruction that would not otherwise have existed. It's possible that the wife would have been better off not knowing of her husband's infidelity. The point is that you cannot be certain in all cases that telling the wife is the good or right thing to do, and if you insist otherwise then you are elevating your own personal biases over the welfare of others, to their possible detriment.

You can tell yourself "The wife has the right to know." That's not necessarily your call to make when you are dealing with different people with different perspectives. It's entirely possible that you could destroy people's lives by taking this attitude in an inflexible way.

I don't see it as me breaking up their marriage. Her husband broke their marriage. All I did was give her the information to do with as she sees fit.

Her husband was the one who made her miserable.

If know for a fact that he's cheating, and I'm friends with the woman, I'm going to let her know or else, I feel, I can't call her a friend. I'm lying to her just the same as her husband is. When she finds out, and especially if she finds out that others who she knew and trusted had lied to her and covered for him, she'll be destroyed far worse than if he was the only liar.