So, I figured some of you might still remember me and be interested to know. (Plus "success" stories are always a good thing in this thread.)

 

Simply put, I'm engaged. :grin:

 

awwww

 

Congrats dude! Can we get some pictures of the rings and stuff?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/vicki-larson/why-men-need-to-cheat_b_1170015.html

 

Awesome article telling it like it is :)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/vicki-larson/why-men-need-to-cheat_b_1170015.html

 

Awesome article telling it like it is :)

:roll:

 

 

Congrats FlyingJJ! :mrgreen:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/vicki-larson/why-men-need-to-cheat_b_1170015.html

 

Awesome article telling it like it is :)

:roll:

 

I really wish you would elaborate on your disdain for the article (assuming you read it) with a rational response, rather than simply rolling your eyes and dismissing something because it's challenging your beliefs.

 

How are people supposed to evolve if they dismiss every foreign idea proposed to them?

I can tell you why I didn't like the article. It essentially said, men cheat, so get over it women and you wouldn't feel so bad when it happens.

Tell me, have I ruined my chances with this girl?

 

Was just hanging out with her, her friend had mentioned that she liked me. So we are just sitting, chilling, she says she's cold and I do the gentlemen thing of putting my around her as this is usually what they mean when they say it. She then suggests pretty much straight away that she reckons it would be warmer out of the wind, so we move. I get this means that she wasn't comfortable.

Then at the end when I said goodbye, we hugged. As she is quite a bit shorter than me, I had to bend down. I was going to put my arms under hers, but she looked like she was going to do it the other way because of my height. She then tells me not to "child hug" her because it makes her feel like a child, which I didn't mean to do. I offered that we should do it again but she just said no.

I'm not really happy about this, I feel bad. Is she actually not interested or?

Oi I'll respond to both of your posts after I finish cooking :D brb

Tell me, have I ruined my chances with this girl?

 

Was just hanging out with her, her friend had mentioned that she liked me. So we are just sitting, chilling, she says she's cold and I do the gentlemen thing of putting my around her as this is usually what they mean when they say it. She then suggests pretty much straight away that she reckons it would be warmer out of the wind, so we move. I get this means that she wasn't comfortable.

Then at the end when I said goodbye, we hugged. As she is quite a bit shorter than me, I had to bend down. I was going to put my arms under hers, but she looked like she was going to do it the other way because of my height. She then tells me not to "child hug" her because it makes her feel like a child, which I didn't mean to do. I offered that we should do it again but she just said no.

I'm not really happy about this, I feel bad. Is she actually not interested or?

 

I lol'd a little at the awkwardness of both the context of the post and the fact that you "putting my around her". You can recover from your position, no worries. Just don't child hug her again. Like ever haha.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/vicki-larson/why-men-need-to-cheat_b_1170015.html

 

Awesome article telling it like it is :)

:roll:

 

I really wish you would elaborate on your disdain for the article (assuming you read it) with a rational response, rather than simply rolling your eyes and dismissing something because it's challenging your beliefs.

 

How are people supposed to evolve if they dismiss every foreign idea proposed to them?

My opinion is that that kind of article is an attempt to justify the increasing lack of self-control people today have.

Alright, I need another opinion as to whether I should make a sly move or not. But before we begin, let me clarify that I have never been one whom confuses a girl being flirty with a girl being friendly. Compliments, laughing at bad jokes, smiling while conversing, etc. are all just girls being friendly. Now, there is a girl WAY out of my league that is always friendly and polite, she's one of the nicest people I know. No big deal. I've even ignored her initiating physical contact/ getting me to touch her as her just being social.

'

But Friday, she did something pretty damn friendly. I walk into a class, sit next to her, then for the hell of it take out my chewed gum and say, "do you want this?" Then she takes out hers and replies, "Wanna trade?" So I laugh and tell her of course and then we actually [bleep]ing do it, lol. Surprisingly, it wasn't weird at all. The rest of class I may have noticed some "primping" going on with her. So, anyway, should I try to get something going between us? Again, remember that this girl is always friendly/nice/lovely to everyone, but still....damn.

Tell me, have I ruined my chances with this girl?

 

:wall:

 

Was just hanging out with her, her friend had mentioned that she liked me. So we are just sitting, chilling, she says she's cold and I do the gentlemen thing of putting my around her as this is usually what they mean when they say it. She then suggests pretty much straight away that she reckons it would be warmer out of the wind, so we move. I get this means that she wasn't comfortable.

Then at the end when I said goodbye, we hugged. As she is quite a bit shorter than me, I had to bend down. I was going to put my arms under hers, but she looked like she was going to do it the other way because of my height. She then tells me not to "child hug" her because it makes her feel like a child, which I didn't mean to do. I offered that we should do it again but she just said no.

I'm not really happy about this, I feel bad. Is she actually not interested or?

 

Ouchy. Your mindset is all wrong when it comes to this shit in general-- it's not the girl that's causing this problem or even how you acted earlier. It's the way you're thinking about it. Even if I gave you the correct "solution" to this particular predicament, it wouldn't really matter because w/o changing your mindset, you're just going to keep getting yourself into these situations in which you care too much about the OUTCOME.

 

Right now you seem fixated on:

-Does this girl like me?

-What happens if this girl doesn't like me?

-How do I keep her liking me, if she does?

-etc, etc.

...it's these exact thoughts that are making you feel bad when things go south.

 

Now, imagine if the thought pattern that I outlined above was replaced with:

-It doesn't really matter to me whether or not this girl likes me because I really like myself. I don't need a girl to validate myself-- but if a girl enters my life, she'll be a happier and better person for doing so because I inspire others to live awesome lives!

-If this girl doesn't like me, that's fine, I was happy before I met her and I can continue to be happy w/o her.

-This girl likes me-- awesome! I'm glad we both mutually benefit from our relationship. This probably won't last forever, so I'll just enjoy it while it does...

 

Do you see the difference?

 

Which thought pattern do you think leads to better success with women? Which thought pattern do you think leads to a happier and better life overall?

 

But to answer your question, who gives a shit whether or not she likes you :P Don't get so caught up in things as trivial as this. Go have fun :)

 

EDIT:

In case I wasn't clear enough, the point I want you to understand is that the external events will usually be beyond your control. In the two examples of thought patterns I listed above, the external circumstances were the same. The only difference was the way you perceived those circumstances-- and that's what really matters.

 

It's all just a matter of how you view the world around you.

I can tell you why I didn't like the article. It essentially said, men cheat, so get over it women and you wouldn't feel so bad when it happens.

 

I guess I'll start by asking-- whether or not you like the article, do you think what the article said is true?

 

My opinion is that that kind of article is an attempt to justify the increasing lack of self-control people today have.

 

Justification aside, is the "lack of self-control" necessarily a bad thing? If so, why?

Alright, I need another opinion as to whether I should make a sly move or not. But before we begin, let me clarify that I have never been one whom confuses a girl being flirty with a girl being friendly. Compliments, laughing at bad jokes, smiling while conversing, etc. are all just girls being friendly. Now, there is a girl WAY out of my league that is always friendly and polite, she's one of the nicest people I know. No big deal. I've even ignored her initiating physical contact/ getting me to touch her as her just being social.

'

But Friday, she did something pretty damn friendly. I walk into a class, sit next to her, then for the hell of it take out my chewed gum and say, "do you want this?" Then she takes out hers and replies, "Wanna trade?" So I laugh and tell her of course and then we actually [bleep]ing do it, lol. Surprisingly, it wasn't weird at all. The rest of class I may have noticed some "primping" going on with her. So, anyway, should I try to get something going between us? Again, remember that this girl is always friendly/nice/lovely to everyone, but still....damn.

 

Go for it. You've already had the thought run in your mind, it's obviously at least worth the shot.

 

http://www.huffingto..._b_1170015.html

 

Awesome article telling it like it is :)

:roll:

 

I really wish you would elaborate on your disdain for the article (assuming you read it) with a rational response, rather than simply rolling your eyes and dismissing something because it's challenging your beliefs.

 

How are people supposed to evolve if they dismiss every foreign idea proposed to them?

My opinion is that that kind of article is an attempt to justify the increasing lack of self-control people today have.

 

 

I can see where the article is coming from, but it kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. But I guess I'm partially stuck in that chunk of society that associates sex with relationship status to the point enough where cheating isn't acceptable. Though I see the logic of the article, I'm just not convinced I'm ready for such a notion. Even if the FWB attitude is completely up my alley. I can even get behind a notion of dissociating the need of a relationship to have sex; but to cut sex out of a relationship seems sort of backward to me.

My opinion is that that kind of article is an attempt to justify the increasing lack of self-control people today have.

A) That's a big claim for someone who's been alive for this long.

B) Does this lack of self-control stem from the decline of artificial moral codes (especially religious ones, which for some/many were fetters rather than wholeheartedly followed values, à la "death of God"), or are people nowadays less likely to have internal moral principles?

I can see where the article is coming from, but it kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. But I guess I'm partially stuck in that chunk of society that associates sex with relationship status to the point enough where cheating isn't acceptable. Though I see the logic of the article, I'm just not convinced I'm ready for such a notion. Even if the FWB attitude is completely up my alley. I can even get behind a notion of dissociating the need of a relationship to have sex; but to cut sex out of a relationship seems sort of backward to me.

 

Well whether you like it or not, consistent, passionate sex is usually the first thing to go after a few years in a long-term monogamous relationship :P

A) That's a big claim for someone who's been alive for this long.

B) Does this lack of self-control stem from the decline of artificial moral codes (especially religious ones, which for some/many were fetters rather than wholeheartedly followed values), or are people nowadays less likely to have internal moral principles?

 

I think you're confusing morals w/ instincts.

 

Our instincts usually override our morals because our instincts show us how to prosper as individuals, whereas our morals usually force us to make personal sacrifices in order for society to prosper-- with or without us.

 

Biological wiring (instincts) trumps societal programming (morals). Nobody is completely capable of following their morals and logical mind 100% of the time-- we're emotional beings capable of logic, not the other way around.

 

That's why we often sacrifice long-term well-being for short-term gratification. Or, in this case, sacrificing a long-term "healthy" relationship for a one-night-stand.

 

Monogamy/marriage is based around the ideal that we'll follow our morals within the context of a relationship 100% of the time. Sadly, that puts restrictions on urges which are just too powerful for us to resist for that long.

I can see where the article is coming from, but it kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. But I guess I'm partially stuck in that chunk of society that associates sex with relationship status to the point enough where cheating isn't acceptable. Though I see the logic of the article, I'm just not convinced I'm ready for such a notion. Even if the FWB attitude is completely up my alley. I can even get behind a notion of dissociating the need of a relationship to have sex; but to cut sex out of a relationship seems sort of backward to me.

 

Well whether you like it or not, consistent, passionate sex is usually the first thing to go after a few years in a long-term monogamous relationship :P

 

no doubt, I'm not saying I disagree with that, I'm just saying it's an unfortunate flawed view that I share with many other people [in that: once the sex stops being awesome, the relationship stops being awesome]. However, I've never had the displeasure of running into a relationship where the sex ever got boring so...meh

I can tell you why I didn't like the article. It essentially said, men cheat, so get over it women and you wouldn't feel so bad when it happens.

 

I guess I'll start by asking-- whether or not you like the article, do you think what the article said is true?

No, I don't. I think he did a survey study asking men what they thought about cheating -- if they've cheated, why they cheated, etc. and then came up with conclusions based on that information. His conclusions don't follow. He made up explanations for his findings. I think it's bad science. The more I reread it, the more I am convinced that this is bad (and misogynistic) science.

 

I'm okay with someone having an open relationship. But it sure as heck should be a mutual agreement. Don't lie and cheat on someone you want to remain emotionally intimate with. Part of that emotional intimacy is always knowing what's what with your partner.

 

IF (and that sure as heck is a big if) I ever wanted to have sex with someone other than my partner, I would most certainly ask her. If I couldn't convince her, or she was not okay with it, and that was what I was looking for, then she wouldn't be the partner for me.

 

Also, jealousy. It happens, and not because of cultural taboo. Open relationships often end badly because someone ends up jealous.

No, I don't. I think he did a survey study asking men what they thought about cheating -- if they've cheated, why they cheated, etc. and then came up with conclusions based on that information. His conclusions don't follow. He made up explanations for his findings. I think it's bad science. The more I reread it, the more I am convinced that this is bad (and misogynistic) science.

 

I'm okay with someone having an open relationship. But it sure as heck should be a mutual agreement. Don't lie and cheat on someone you want to remain emotionally intimate with. Part of that emotional intimacy is always knowing what's what with your partner.

 

I agree that cheating is bad. But like he said in the article, men usually cheat because the alternative would be to ask permission from their partner and/or propose an open relationship--after which, they are denied, considered less trustworthy, and stigmatized for their needs/desires. Or even if he's granted permission, he'll regret asking as soon as he sees his partner going on dates. Men are less open-minded when it comes to open relationships than women are.

 

As far as being misogynistic goes, he mentioned women also cheat, lie about it, and want to cheat w/o their partners doing the same. It's not just men.

 

Also, the emotional intimacy has nothing to do with the cheating. The cheating is about sex. Emotional intimacy and sex are NOT the same thing.

 

Finally, you said you're okay with someone having an open relationship. What about you, personally? Are YOU okay with having an open relationship? Why or why not?

 

IF (and that sure as heck is a big if) I ever wanted to have sex with someone other than my partner, I would most certainly ask her. If I couldn't convince her, or she was not okay with it, and that was what I was looking for, then she wouldn't be the partner for me.

 

That's a good way of looking at it if you're dating someone. But if you're married, you're screwed either way.

 

Also, jealousy. It happens, and not because of cultural taboo. Open relationships often end badly because someone ends up jealous.

 

I agree, however that's not a fault of an open relationship. That's a fault of a person who doesn't know how to properly manage an open relationship (usually the man's fault).

 

----

 

I don't think it's the cheating that makes people who read that article uncomfortable. It's the thought of an open relationship. The thought that the Disney fairy tale of living happily ever after with just one person for the rest of your life might not be true. The thought that it might be impossible for your loved ones to resist their biological urges just to keep up appearances for the rest of society. The thought that your partner could be having sex with strangers and still love you.

 

RPG did a good job of summarizing the cognitive dissonance that many people who read the article seem to experience. The article makes a lot of sense, but it's threatening everything people have been taught by society up to this point, and they're afraid to think of what might happen if what the majority of society believes and teaches could actually be WRONG

 

Additional reading: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/why-we-think-monogamy-is-normal

Wow, a bit obsessive in trying to prove "what they taught you is ALL WRONG!" eh? Well, your morals vs. instinct is the typical biological argument, then you suggest to reject the moral/social norm to better promote ourselves - however, we didn't come to this point of humanity by following our own instincts. There was a society we built and rules we should damn well follow if we wish to remain part of the society - unless your goal IS to live like a caveman?

 

Trying to justify any sort of relationship biologically works at times, since who can argue about the logic of nature, but post-sex relationships aren't natural they are man made. Trying to fit natural biology into it just doesn't work, because it is man-made.

 

So yes, I hate the article for trying to justify cheating when these men clearly know the norms of society. Perhaps though, I should feel pity for these fools who think can change the system? No, I'll rather hate, for what damage they cause to their partner.

Wow, a bit obsessive in trying to prove "what they taught you is ALL WRONG!" eh?

 

I sense strong negative emotions in this one. Hopefully this isn't an emotionally-driven argument I'm about to read :P

 

Well, your morals vs. instinct is the typical biological argument, then you suggest to reject the moral/social norm to better promote ourselves - however, we didn't come to this point of humanity by following our own instincts. There was a society we built and rules we should damn well follow if we wish to remain part of the society - unless your goal IS to live like a caveman?

 

Like I said above-- there's a difference between morals and instincts. Morals generally benefit society, sometimes at your expense. Instincts generally benefit you, sometimes at society's expense.

 

Yes, living PURELY on instincts would mean living like a caveman, but that's not what I am advocating. There's a fine balance between your biological wiring and societal programming. When it comes to relationships, you're probably going to end up happier by following your biology instead of societal programming.

 

Trying to justify any sort of relationship biologically works at times, since who can argue about the logic of nature, but post-sex relationships aren't natural they are man made. Trying to fit natural biology into it just doesn't work, because it is man-made.

 

Not sure what you mean by post-sex relationships. Could you please be more specific? I'm talking about long-term monogamous relationships-- meaning a relationship between a man and a woman for 3+ years in which the man and woman both agree to have sex with only each other. If either of them violates that agreement-- with or without their partner's consent or knowledge-- then it is no longer a monogamous relationship, even if they choose to keep calling it that.

 

So yes, I hate the article for trying to justify cheating when these men clearly know the norms of society. Perhaps though, I should feel pity for these fools who think can change the system?

 

I can't fight society and its system of monogamy-- and that's not what I'm trying to do. However, I understand the system and its rules and limitations, and bend those rules to my personal advantage to make me happier than the average person who blindly abides by the rules without considering alternatives and thinking for himself.

 

No, I'll rather hate, for what damage they cause to their partner.

 

Hate? Really? That's a strong word... you seem really angry, and it's really hard for me to want to be part of the system if that's what people in it are like >_>

 

So you've clearly established that you don't like cheating. That's okay. I don't either-- cheating is lying, and lying is bad. But just for fun, let's "pretend" that cheating is inevitable for everybody-- some people cheat immediately upon entering a relationship, some don't cheat for years into a committed relationship, some don't cheat for decades into a committed relationship. Either way, everybody (hypothetically) eventually cheats. It's inevitable. Faced with this (again, hypothetical :P) realization, how do you react? Well one option is to become bitter about it and hate the opposite sex/the system. The other option is to reconsider how you perceive the opposite sex/the system-- sex is now much more fun and free w/o any stigmatization, judgment, or major repercussions! Like I told Ouchy earlier-- the situation hasn't changed. The only thing that's changed is how you perceive the situation. The choice is yours-- do you want to be happy with "reality" or bitter?

 

And btw-- it's AWESOME being a "fool" who strays from the system! I have so much freedom! I can do whatever I want, when I want, without having to consult anyone for their permission before doing so! I can hook up with anyone without any strings attached and it's great! Whenever I come home it's so peaceful and quiet! I can relax all night long without a single care in the world :D My life is AWESOME!!! :thumbsup:

A) That's a big claim for someone who's been alive for this long.

B) Does this lack of self-control stem from the decline of artificial moral codes (especially religious ones, which for some/many were fetters rather than wholeheartedly followed values), or are people nowadays less likely to have internal moral principles?

 

I think you're confusing morals w/ instincts.

 

Our instincts usually override our morals because our instincts show us how to prosper as individuals, whereas our morals usually force us to make personal sacrifices in order for society to prosper-- with or without us.

 

Biological wiring (instincts) trumps societal programming (morals). Nobody is completely capable of following their morals and logical mind 100% of the time-- we're emotional beings capable of logic, not the other way around.

 

That's why we often sacrifice long-term well-being for short-term gratification. Or, in this case, sacrificing a long-term "healthy" relationship for a one-night-stand.

 

Monogamy/marriage is based around the ideal that we'll follow our morals within the context of a relationship 100% of the time. Sadly, that puts restrictions on urges which are just too powerful for us to resist for that long.

I'm only really addressing the idea that self-control is (becoming) a lost art. I think there was never much self-control to begin with, only control by the other through principles which don't make sense to everyone anymore or never really did. In this case, the article shows a case where morals don't lead to self-sacrifice for the well-being of society, which is why they're all the harder to follow.

In case I wasn't clear enough, the point I want you to understand is that the external events will usually be beyond your control. In the two examples of thought patterns I listed above, the external circumstances were the same. The only difference was the way you perceived those circumstances-- and that's what really matters.

 

It's all just a matter of how you view the world around you.

Spoken like a Stoic. :P

 

As far as being misogynistic goes, he mentioned women also cheat, lie about it, and want to cheat w/o their partners doing the same. It's not just men.

I'd be interested in seeing a similar survey. For some reason, I don't think the results would be too pretty. :\

So there's only two opitions? Hate men/women or enjoy cheating?

 

Couldn't there be 'hate cheaters'? Because you're not making sense at all - you say you don't like cheating then praise it into bringing the world eternal happiness? Oh and of course, everybody is "following the rules like a drone" and you're the only enlightened thinker here. :roll:

He's saying lying is bad, and if we could have alternative relationships in an honest way, then we would be happier.