It's been known to happen. When he decides we should walk or play ball, he'll weasel in under the edge of the desk to whip my hand off the mouse with his head and push me away from the computer.
He's pretty crystal clear as a rule:
Posted on 12/22/2001 5:34:38 PM PST by Bad~Rodeo
If the Internet has brought some people closer, it has unfortunately separated others and in some cases even broken up marriages. Sometimes a bored wife finds an interesting person and decides that her relationship with her husband has gone stale. Through the Internet, she feels she has begun a meaningful and lively relationship. In such cases, the Internet has been the means of destroying relationships.
In the early days of Internet chatting, newspapers reported these break-ups. Now, however, such things have become so common that they hardly provoke any interest at all. They have now become another accepted fact of social life. Perhaps it all began in fun but the end result was anything but — broken marriages and unhappy people.
Recently, a young Pakistani housewife who had been in the Kingdom nine months ago returned to Karachi, leaving her husband behind. When she first arrived, things went very well but then her husband suddenly began coming home later than usual. He was spending extra time on the computer visiting chatrooms. Her protests failed to bring him home on time so she returned to Karachi. Luckily the conflict has not yet reached the stage of divorce and so there is a chance of reconciliation.
Not long ago an Indian couple who were addicted to chatting went from the Kingdom to the United States for a vacation. While there, the wife met one of her male chat friends, an Indian software engineer. The husband never suspected anything though his wife and her chat friend saw each other for almost three weeks. From the US, the couple went to India where the wife remained while the husband returned to the Kingdom. In a few weeks, the man received a letter from his wife; she was in Chicago and she wanted a divorce. She confessed that after the time she had spent with her chat friend, she wanted to marry him.
There have also been cases in which petty interests motivated people to leave their spouses and marry their chat friends. These interests include the lure of a green card for the United States or a UK work permit. The attraction of a Western lifestyle has also been the reason for many women leaving their husbands. A Pakistani accountant who had dreamed for years of migrating to the US found a single American mother on the Internet. Their cyber-relationship lasted for almost a year and the American woman wanted to marry. The accountant who had been married for five years went to the US and married his chat friend. He, however, was honest enough not to divorce his first wife and he admitted to his friends that he was marrying the American woman in order to get a green card.
It is beyond doubt that man by nature is not monogamous. At the same time, indulging in relationships based mainly on deception and dishonesty is no justification for anything. Similarly, when a woman forgets her marriage vows and leaves her husband for someone she knows only from an Internet chatroom, serious doubts are cast on her intelligence and integrity.
Internet chatting was originally to allow people to interact and learn about personal differences and differences in ways of living. The idea was to make the world what has been called a global village. It was not intended to break up marriages and destroy relationships. As we all know, this is what has happened. Is it not a misuse of the Internet and a reflection of the faults of Internet users?
I don't think I agree with this.
You're just making things worse for yourself.:-) Hey -- on top of it all, the more I think about that photo-op, the more I question whether or not that was one of those "celebrity" cut-outs. I'd better take another look...
And BTW -- doesn't your dog just lie there besides you at the PC like all other good dogs?
I probably would because I don't think it is possible. I don't think "cheating" is just lustful thoughts, and all the internet allows is lustful thoughts.
Cheating, at least to me, implies some sort of physical contact -- the physical as opposed to the fantasy.
Now of course a lot of this internet contact is to set up physcial contact. But the cheating, in my definition, doesn't happen until the physical contact occurs.
Of couse I am merely accepting societal norms for this, which are, of course, arbitrary. In Islamic countries, showing a bit of female ankle is "cheating." See their face, Oh my!!!!
Can a western man and woman kiss without it being cheating? Of course, it happens all the time -- there are lots of social kisses that don't have sexual significance, per se.
Clinton, of course, used a very narrow definiton -- way outside the societal norms. But it is certainly imaginable that some society could somewhere adopt that definition. Just as Islamic societies can't stand the sight of female faces in public, just like we can't stand to see a couple of square inches of their flesh about twelve inches lower.
These are obviously both completely arbitrary designations with no other absolute meaning.
So these concepts, such as "cheating" can mean almost anything to anyone -- I'll keep it at sexual physical contact -- not at mere fantasy, no matter if alone or in conjuction with another communicating human.
The same thing has happened here in the US. What would you think about our society? I know of a case from a christian website, where a woman got involved with a man, an Arab or something like that, and had a long term affair with the dude. The last that I heard, she was still wondering if she should tell her husband. Sick.
It forces communication, intimate, meaningful communication that is normally derailed by the temptation of physical intimacy in real life. When you consider how a net relationship can last years, something must be given its due.
It teaches the lost art of human intrigue and mystery, seduction and temptation as a constant, rather than a means. True, only your minds touch, but an incredible journey lies there.
Is it cheating? It is the DEFINITION of cheating -- telling more truth, sharing more of yourself, to and with someone you shouldnt be.
The Arab News makes the examples they entailed sound like an epidemic. Thus my statement that it is a sick society. But then the individuals in the story you detailed are also demented.
Especially the woman. If I were related to her Id have her committed. After all, who in their right mind would want to get involved with a Arab man when women are so poorly treated over there?
At the risk of sounding prude and pessimistic. I agree with you totally.
I'm specifically talking about married people meeting people of the opposite sex on-line, and that it's bad and wrong.
I think it means they didn't marry well. That happens, a lot.
I don't agree their hearts were necessarily gone before they turned on the computer. The computer could have been a legitimate tool for some legitimate purpose. However, without recognizing the temptation it can present, things can quickly become confusing.
It is the same with anything to which one chooses to give their time, but I think the internet holds an unrealized dimensional quality. And if there is already the suspicion felt(even, perhaps, not consciously recognized) that there is a lack in their relationship, the reality of what is truly pulling them to these outside interests could be honestly lost on them.
As for whether it proves they married well, isn't it true that even "good marriages" have ups and downs, conflictual periods that, if handled wrong can make it "appear" to have been a "poor marriage" from the start?
There seems to be another point of view offered here by some that to even "look" is bad. Now I can agree that finding that there appears to be something better out there can often be counter-productive to happiness -- for all the reasons we are aware of.
But I just can't pronounce that bad or evil per se. Everyone has to make that call for themselves.
You last me on that last "shouldn't." Why shouldn't??
Better than what? What the relationship may be going through (and probably in need of being worked through) at the moment?
I think, in society today, there are just way too many pulls that can be inadvertantly stumbled into, which are allowed to take the place of the more difficult commitment involved in struggling through the conflicts that are a natural part of the ebb and flow of a human relationship. In this instance, then I would have to say, "Yes, even to look is bad". Bad for the happiness of those involved (aside from any moral rules you or I may think apply), if for no other reason that it is bad for the skills that we need to acquire, eventually, if we are ever to have a relationship that will last.
There has to be some level of commitment. Even if, after all is said and done, the marriage ends as a result, to face up to what is really going on, rather than reaching for yet another perception of a "good relationship" will be better for all the individuals involved, in the long run.
That can keep a relatively happy marriage happy, but it can also keep a battered spouse from seeking an exit.
I'm not disagreeing that this is true, as well. I just think that too many use this kind of reasoning to give their own laziness a pass. And I don't think, in the sum of things, this mindset is only harmful to the individuals, look at what it has done to society's idea of the family today.
Everyone has to make that call for themselves.
Of course they do. But that doesn't deny that there IS a right and a wrong, or a good and an evil choice.
At what point does it become "cheating"?
To the individual, themselves? Or to the spouse? That is what I would have to ask
It's been known to happen. When he decides we should walk or play ball, he'll weasel in under the edge of the desk to whip my hand off the mouse with his head and push me away from the computer.
He's pretty crystal clear as a rule:
That's very logical. No one thinks like that though. People get married out of love, but also people get married out of societal pressure. They are in the relationship for a bad reason, and good reasoning isn't their strong suit. All they have are vague feelings of unhappiness or emptyness. They are unfulfilled. They might conciously resist admitting what their impulses are telling them.
And I don't think, in the sum of things, this mindset is only harmful to the individuals, look at what it has done to society's idea of the family today.
I would have to say that however you value societal interest in family matters, you shouldn't stay in an unhappy marriage for the sake of society.
"Everyone has to make that call for themselves." Of course they do. But that doesn't deny that there IS a right and a wrong, or a good and an evil choice.
Well, it makes the discovery of "right and wrong" pretty darn subjective, then.
Yeah, people make stupid choices all the time. Sometimes those stupid choices are affairs, or divorces. Sometimes those stupid choices are unsuitable marriages. There really is only one person who knows whether you should be in a particular marriage, and that one person is you. Nobody else can make that call.
I think a lot of people can alter their behavior to make a marriage work -- it's easy in some respects, simply submit yourself to the will and whim of the other person. But to anyone who wants to live a self-respecting life, that is not the right answer. And you only have so much control over a spouse. If they don't want to change, then happiness will not be yours. You get to choose then, live with it, or bolt.
There is actually a large societal pressure to marry and stay married. Given the fickleness of humans, the divorce rate is actually surprisingly low. So I think a LOT more people are unhappy and unfulfilled in their marriages than actually ever divorce.
At the end of their lives, should I feel happy for them that they stuck it out in an unhappy relationship, rather than broke free and found something better? I find it hard to get excited about the former.
You should be sharing those things with the one you are committed to, ie NOT your internet 'lover'.
I understood the "what." Explain the "why." When someone says you "should" or "shouldn't" there should be a logical explanation for it.
I agree, but you're taking the rare (as in the truly miserable, i.e. abusive) and assigning it the norm.
If people make their choices to marry poorly in the first place, chances are, the majority of them will make a poor choice in the second, third, ....place, too. Maybe if they were held more seriously accountable by society for their choices, the trend to wisely consider before committing oneself to such a challenging and daunting relationship as marriage, would increase.
There is actually a large societal pressure to marry and stay married.
Sorry, I totally don't see that. Where do you? On television? No. In Music? No. Movies? No. The local clubs or bars? Nope. Even (in many) churches? Nope. I'm not meaning to be flippant, but if you see this I would appreciate being directed to the source.
"Everyone has to make that call for themselves." Of course they do. But that doesn't deny that there IS a right and a wrong, or a good and an evil choice.
Well, it makes the discovery of "right and wrong" pretty darn subjective, then.
No, a solid right and wrong always exists, accepted or not. It makes whether or not the person will be subjective TO the right or wrong, the discovery that is made.
At the end of their lives, should I feel happy for them that they stuck it out in an unhappy relationship, rather than broke free and found something better? I find it hard to get excited about the former.
So do I. But I also find it hard to get excited about those that go from one failed marriage to another and another, leaving a collection of unhappy lives (especially children, who are learning well these patterns) in their wake, as they follow their quest to discover the "better" that may be available to them. Better they just decide not to get involved with anyone until they can figure themselves out first. It's true, that has to be and can only be, decided by the individual. But because the results of their choices do not stop with the effects on them alone, society should take a more serious stand on the value of this basic and foundationally important commitment.
On a lighter note: Hope you have very happy holidays!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.