I was monogomous and had no probblem staying that way forever. I was content. So I disagree with your theory.
Mistress? good or bad?
- Thread starter DutchJazzer
- Start date
I was monogomous and had no probblem staying that way forever. I was content. So I disagree with your theory.
jazz_fanatic
Well-Known Member
Cheaters can die. And go to hell.
DutchJazzer
Banned
that can also be said for non cheaters.
Attraction is more than just physical. The physical is the obvious first step, to get the ball rolling. I will flatly acknowledge that my wife is not the best looking girl I ever dated. But she was the only one I would want to be married to. Looks alone get old fast. I dated one girl who was just plain hot, but after the third date, I couldn't take the conversations, or her lack of a decent sense of humor any longer. My friends thought I was an idiot for not sticking with it, but I probably would have ended up strangling her.
I also worked with a girl who was married to a guy much, much better looking than me. But she flirted like crazy. We had a lot of common interests, and she would always tell me that I was "intriguing", whatever that meant. She would call her husband "boring" on nearly a daily basis. I flirted back, a little, but never let it get to a point where I might be inviting a proposition. I wasn't married at the time, but she was. I don't know if she would have followed through, had I played along. Maybe I'm remembering it for more than it actually was, but in retrospect, it seemed like it would have been an easy score. Point is, I think she got bored with her husband, despite the fact that he was a better than average looking dude.
Gojazz79 is right, in that you should marry for love. If you want to keep your options open, don't get married. If you are married, and feel the need to stray, as difficult as it may be, you need to tell your spouse, and open the communication. Trying to salvage a marriage, or dissolve it, is easier (tactically) before someone cheats on the other.
My ex wife (not babies mama) cheated on me and I threatned to have her deported if she did not sign the divorce papers. So I know how being the "victim" feels. I will never do that. yes I have had chances but I can promise you that the same girl never tried twice. SO much so that my babies mama used to find it funny when someone tried to get with me.
Add me to the list of guys who didn't marry the best looking girl I could have. I've known my wife since I was 13 and we didn't start dating until I was 19. I was pretty resistant to dating her because I wanted to date better looking girls, but we were good friends for a long time and I really liked her.
Then, one drunken night...we took it to the next level and the rest is history.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
The only time I ever cheated was at gameface's poker tourney. Hehepeepeecaca
I thought my cat seemed particulaly happy the next day.
OK, I overstated the case. A lot of men are happy to be monogamous, particularly those who have had a particularly bad wife before, and whose hormone levels are well below their IQ levels as "decision factors". And a large number of other men are happy being gay, I know, though I'd just get into a lot of trouble trying to explain that. Bisphenol A, and experience with particularly troublesome moms/sisters might be somewhere on the list. Some others are justly satisfied with their moral ideals about what is involved in being a good husband and father, and putting the welfare of others on a high priority.
I don't think I really want to just go back to the bronze age. Polygamy was never very prevalent, always limited by means or other factors figuring in the level of opportunity and acceptability of it to women. The men of no means often went into some kind of army, which was often a gay thing, and women of no social standing often just became professionals in some sense of the word. Not really a very good situation generally. But still, the decsion by the Roman Catholics to codify monogamy was linked to the church/state priorities of degrading the power of the self-sufficient family.
Claiming all the rights to regulate marriages went a long way towards making eunuchs of men, and men have never regained control of the families they work to support. Well, unless they were fortunate enough to have a wife who was secure enough in herself to be able to afford to honor him somehow as the head of the family. Traditionally, the unhappy wife and the drinking man have fed off one another in a virtually powerless dance of death. And polygamy was never a very happy system. In fact, Mark Twain wagged that Mormon polygamous men should be honored for taking care of all the ugly women they had, and Ambrose Bierce hit it pretty good with his definition:
"Polygamy, n. A house of atonement furnished with multiple stools of torment, as opposed to monogamy, which has only one."
Well, it usually takes some form of insanity to get something going. . . . even the inevitable.
Duck Rodgers
Well-Known Member
I've never seen the marriage rebound post-affair ever work out in any couple I know in life. They all seem to go Kobe Bryant eventually. People just need to drop their "exceptions". Even the little celebrity fantasies that everyone pretends are so cute shouldn't ever be thought about in a serious manner. No free passes, ever, no matter who might become interested in you down the road. You're married, you chose to be with one person, and you do whatever you can to hold that bond together forever. It's a big commitment, but that's the way it works in my mind. Never look back.
And never look around, either.
I remember not long ago trying to give you the sage advice to not get too concerned if your luck holds out for a while, and you just don't subject yourself to a really bad marriage.
The problem is, God made men and women with each their own insanity hormones, specifically because unless we suspend our judgment we'd never procreate. Men don't have a very strong connection, hormonally speaking, that creates attachments. Women have oxytocin that also creates the mother/child bond strong enough to glue aircraft carriers together. It carries over to bonding to a specific male, unless . . . . well,. . . . unless they get set on a generalized dependency on whatever males are available, sometimes the result of episodic abuse/abandonment or some uncle or father who ought to be shot. Well, I admit there are some pretty nice girls who somehow just "understand" every man who talks to her. And who, somehow, seem to be no worse for the wear. But there are a whole lot of ruined women whose lives went the way of "Looking for Love in all the Wrong Places", or "Looking for Mr. Goodbar", who just are not OK with the deal. No way am I ever going to understand women, and this is just a despairing attempt to cast a net of reason over the subject, much like some "Scientists" think they understand and can explain that religion is just ignorance.
But resolve like Ducks, if it can survive a really pretty girl's smile and cooing praise, is a good start in regard to a man's best chances of having an actually good marriage.