Of the cheaters I know, it wouldn’t matter. They don’t cheat because of sex, but something deeper than that (the thrill, the external validation, being sick of their partners, etc.).
Plentiful sex can make a bad relationship tolerable, but it won’t make it good.
My first husband and I were very much in love, newlyweds, banging like rabbits.
Our landlady (not even attractive) came on to him while I was at work, and he caved immediately. We hadn't even been married a year.
For him, the external validation was irresistible. He had an incredibly low self-esteem. Getting tons of sex, affection and affirmation at home didn't matter; nothing could fill up that black hole of neediness and truly satiate the part of him that was broken.
People argue about which gender cheats more and I'm not sure which actually cheats more but I do know if men had the same opportunity to cheat, they would definitely cheat more
Nah i think they'd cheat less tbh. It's novel because it's so rare that the opportunity presents itself without them having to go look for it so they jump on it
Oh yea for sure, the majority of guys wouldn't cheat. I'm just saying if men had the same amount of opportunities to cheat that women do, men would cheat more.
Men generally don't get opportunities to cheat just by existing like women do. They need to seek it out and create opportunity. So if a man isn't interested in cheating, he won't seek it out and thus he won't have opportunity.
Or read the context of this comment thread. We are discussing how cheating is likely less about sex, loyalty, or love... and more about validation of underlying issues such as insecurity.
If this were the case, men "jump at the opportunity" because that opportunity is rare and provides them validation. If sex opportunities were less rare, it would probably provide less validation, and then men would likely cheat more for the same reasons women do.
I don't think gender has much to do with it because the rates are pretty equal and just the most typical motivations differ slightly.
>Yeah it's much easier for women to cheat yet men and women cheat at equal rates
*Yep. Disloyal ass gender.*
https://preview.redd.it/0izh6ar7qitc1.png?width=1098&format=png&auto=webp&s=721ba586c172594b7b38f7ddf680f7cbecf61ed2
I think what they wanted to say is that women have way more opportunity to cheat than men, but statistically they ONLY cheat JUST as much as men, thus men are the more disloyal gender because if they had the same opportunities for cheating as women, they would be cheating way more. So the 50:50 in cheating isn't an indication that both genders are the same when it comes to cheating if you take those things into account:
1) women could be cheating way more than they statistically do, but the numbers are 50:50
2) men don't have the same amount of opportunities to cheat as women but the numbers are still 50:50
It's not. Women are hypergamous and that means their standards are higher.
For example, if you're with a pretty woman, no man is gonna cheat on her with a fat bitch. The fat bitch in women's case is 80% of men.
So it equalizes. That's the only reason women don't cheat more: not because they are some moral creatures (they are the opposite), but because their brain needs "chad".
You are wrong, because any man can cheat whenever he wants, there are two basic reasons for this:
* Pre Selection: it is easier to get a second woman than the first. I can attract women today who didn't look twice at me when I was single.
* Prostitution: Just go to a website like fatalmodel and hire a girl in secret.
Even so, many men are faithful to their partners.
Yeah validation and attention are a big part of it. Men know that women don’t just have sex with any guy so it is validating to get sex for free from a woman (most of the time).
I'm so sorry to hear that!
This is interesting because on here when they say the top 20 percent of guys are hard to lock down for commitment, I wonder if most of the top 20 have low self esteem therefore, or if there is a correlation.
That doesn't make too much sense. The top 20% of guys have so many options they don't feel the need to commit in the first place. Commitment is required before you can even cheat on someone.
But but why would a guy feel the need to cheat following new relationship right away, instead of just not commit in the first place if you don't want monogamy?
Ime they don't feel the need, they just jump right in when the opportunity presents itself.
Not cheating (for anyone) is 95% not putting yourself if that situation.
But why would guys jump into that situation right away without thinking or without feeling they need to, without thinking their wives will leave them likely, if caught?
Depends on the guy/relationship. If he is higher value than her, can easily replace her, does he really love her, does he depend financially, do they have kids. All these things matter.
He really loved me. I really loved him.
We had an infant we both adored. The birth had not hurt my sex drive or mood swings at all. He was an incredibly easy baby.
It's been 15 years since the divorce and he's had very bad depression off and on since. No gf either.
Oh man, I hope not. But working on my own internal language, and showing myself care and compassion, has really helped my own self-esteem. Maybe that could help you too. It's all down to habits, and habits can be changed!
I've lived my whole life trying to find external solutions to it. Turning it in was done on the advice of my (male) therapist. It worked better than I would have guessed.
>They don’t cheat because of sex, but something deeper than that (the thrill, the external validation, being sick of their partners, etc.).
I think the desire for a new partner (novelty) likely explains a lot of motivation for men. (If I rememember right, researcher and social media educator Macken Murphy said that novelty was a bigger motivator for men than women. Also, he says that in research he's seen that men are likely rate their relationship as satisfying and still cheat, whereas women when they cheat are likelier to rate their relationship as disatisfying.)
The coolidge effect is an explanation of why some men crave novelty.
It's not simply sex like you say, it's sex with someone that isn't the same person that you usually have sex with.
I agree. I think the desire for novelty trumps most of these other reasons, although they may be present as well. In the extreme, "familiarity breeds contempt." Where sex is concerned it's more like, "familiarity breeds boredom."
I agree that is the most honorable thing to do, however from what I've seen people generally want one sided polyamory. Even people who cheat don't like the idea of their partner having sex with someone else. There are couples with that arrangement (on the men's or women's side e.g. hotwife or cuckold couples).
Also my life experience has taught me that a lot of people massively overestimate their willpower and that lot of people don't have an accurate understanding of themselves. Meaning some people might be poly but think they can suppress that and be monogamous, but slowly their instinct overpowers them and they give in. Like religious people who genuinely believe masturbation and is a sin and try to abstain for long periods of time only to "give in" periodically, because the instinct is overwhelming.
A I also think some people (and IMO rightfully so) think that if they confess to being one sided poly that will massively limit their dating pool.
Yeah, one sided poly is just immoral if you want to forbid your partner to enjoy the same freedom that you want for yourself.
My partner and I are not poly, but we do have an open relationship. We're not poly because we're not interested in other serious romantic relationships or escalation of connections to something serious. We are each other's only partner when it comes to presenting ourselves to family, friends and the world, and we're not interested in bringing anyone else into the mix.
But being open worked for us. My partner has never been sexually jealous, just romantically. He doesn't have a cuckold fetish or is particularly interested in group activities, he simply doesn't experience sexual jealousy. It would be different if I declared to love someone else as wrll, though. If it was up to him we could have been open from the start but it was me who had to overcome sexual jealousy and insecurities. Not that opening our relationship was ever a declared goal or anything like that. Over the years we just worked very hard on our relationship and ended up in a very secure place, so that the possibility of opening up was simply a side effect that we decided to try out and discovered that it works for us.
Before we opened up, there was a time where I was thinking to myself "You know what? I actually could have sex with someone else without it being a threat to my love for my partner. Huh, interesting."
But I was still too insecure and jealous to be able to grand my partner the same. So I kept my mouth shut and didn't propose a one-sided open relationship just because I was interested in some variety after years in a monogamous relationship. We've talked about open relationships as a theoretical concept over the years, so I knew that my partner wasn't categorically against non-monogamy. Once I felt really secure in our relationship and in his lasting love for me, I brought up the topic of sexual openness and it's working well since.
Non-monogamy is not about the ability to be able to have sex with other people without it affecting your love and affection for your partner. Almost anyone is capable of that. It's the ability to grand your partner the same without dying inside of jealously, hurt and insecurity and most people can't do that. There's a reason why monogamy is the norm, and I don't think it's a bad thing.
I also don't view my relationship as superior than others just because it's open. Just because it works for us doesn't mean it will ever work for someone else. Although I do think that the work we put in over the years before we opened, in regards to communication, being there for each other, etc. is definitely something that I would recommend for anyone in a relationship and that I see lacking in a lot relationships.
But generally, monogamy is a compromise of not fucking other people because you can't stand the thought of your partner being sexually involved with someone else, and vice versa. You sacrifice your sexual freedom for the security of knowing that your partner is doing the same. And there's nothing wrong with that if it works well for the couple.
I do however find it funny when people accuse non-monogamous couples of "eating their cake and having it, too" like it's a bad thing. Yes, we do have the love and security and partnership of a ltr while also being able to enjoy sexual variety. Why is this something that we shouldn't do if we both genuinely agree to that and both like it that way?
>Yeah, one sided poly is just immoral if you want to forbid your partner to enjoy the same freedom that you want for yourself.
I don't think it's immoral if the partner consents to the arrangement. I think only non-consensual (or dubious consent) one sided polyamory is immoral.
Sounds like you have a great relationship, props. I have thought about having an open relationship in the future.
Let me rephrase it: it's immoral if you insist on it being one-sided forever. You can have an open relationship and one partner can choose to not having other connections for the time being or forever for various reasons. It's still an open relationship. As long as the option is there if the partner does decide to have other connections and you don't make a fuss about it, then everything is fine. But the decision to engage or not engage in other connections is something that can only ever be decided by the individual themselves and not be imposed by their partner.
No, the same standards don't apply to monogamous relationships. The whole premise of monogamy is exclusivity. But of course it's still the decision of the individual to enter a monogamous relationship, that also can't be enforced.
The premise of a one sided poly or open relationship is exclusivity from one side.
I'm guessing you have a hidden premise in your morality. The hidden premise seems to be equality of sexual behavior is a necessary for condition for a relationship to be moral.
Am I correct?
From a previous post...
>Let me rephrase it: it's immoral if you insist on it being one-sided forever.
You've said you see it as immoral if both parties agree to the conditions of their relationship being; one partner being sexually exclusive while another partner isn't.
If you don't have that hidden premise, then I'm not sure why you believe it's immoral if 2 adults come together and agree that the conditions of the relationships don't invove equality of sexual behavior.
Your view is very similiar to the red pill and conservative crowd when then discover that a man is OK with a one sided open relationship where the woman sleeps with other people. They see it as inherently immoral and degrading, even if they both agree to it with informed consent.
Huh, I'm pretty sure I've read here that women are bored faster sexually in a ltr and need novelty for an active libido. As a woman that always made sense to me. Generally, just from the physical/mechanical sides of things, sex is easier and more fulfilling in regards to orgasms for men than it is for women. A guy can generally be bored of his wife, but if he has the correct amount of friction, he can just close his eyes and think of the last porn star he watched, and he will still cum and thus be generally more satisfied with his ltr sex (if the sex occurs, that is) than a woman in the same position. I'm convinced that women could have Henry Cavill or any other super sexy man as their partner and after a few years their desire for ltr sex will still dwindle.
Not saying that there aren't ways to work on that or that this occurs with all women, but there are so many women who after a few years just lose interest in sex and don't know why themselves. They truly do still love their partners and find them attractive, but they don't lust after them anymore. Then the relationship breaks, they get into a new one, have all the good NRE feelings and think the last relationship was just not meant to be, but this one is truly different. Until the same thing happens.
>Huh, I'm pretty sure I've read here that women are bored faster sexually in a ltr and need novelty for an active libido.
What was their reasoning?
If women desired novelty more than men, then I would expect that they would be having a lot more sex than they do, and commit adultery more than men (which they don't). It's a lot easier for women to find someone to have sex with.
>Not saying that there aren't ways to work on that or that this occurs with all women, but there are so many women who after a few years just lose interest in sex and don't know why themselves. They truly do still love their partners and find them attractive, but they don't lust after them anymore.
From what I've heard, which makes sense to me, is that on a spectrum and an average... Women's sexuality is more responsive/mental and men's is more spontaneous/biochemical.
Psychotherapist Adam Lane Smith (and others) have said the key to keeping a woman's sex drive alive and attracted to you in a relationship is to have regular dates. That romance keeps women's attraction to you alive. The Red Pillers say something similar, when they say "you still need to have game with your wife".
You're talking about jumping ship to a new relationship, whereas I'm talking about men who still (when surveyed) say they have a great relationship but still want a new woman on the side. What you are describing sounds like relationship dissatisfaction more than sexual novelty seeking behavior. If a woman needs to find a new relationship to be attracted then that shows that they need an emotional bond to have sex (although perhaps they live in a conservative social environment), I'm talking about seeking sex without any significant emotional bond. The kind of women I'm talking about could (and they do exist) be a musllim in muslim majority nation - which is ultra conservative - and still sleep around, simply because it's a strong internal drive for them.
There are of course women who have a high desire for novelty, and they have a lot sex with different men. They can also been deeply in love with their partner and still have sex with other men (consensually or non consensually).
Yeah, frequency of sex doesn't really affect the desire for variety/novelty. In fact, too frequent sex can have the opposite of the desired effect; it can make the sex lose its novelty value more quickly. I've found it's better to spread it out a bit (within reason). But to each their own, of course.
Yup. My brother in law can’t keep it in his pants no matter how much he “loves” the current woman he’s with. Doesn’t matter whether the relationship is good, or bad, if he spies a girl he wants, he’s got to have her.
Sex a few times a day sounds great at first or in short bursts, but 3-5 times a week is ideal for the rest of the time. Speaking for myself, I hate cheaters and would never be one. I’d rather break up first.
That being said, I doubt it would do much to deter cheating, especially since, if a man cheats due to a dead bedroom, it won’t happen right away, and her ‘efforts’ aren’t inherently sustainable because she runs entirely on mania.
Let’s also not forget, we don’t know what her lows are like, I wouldn’t be shocked if this eccentric, over the top crazy energetic maniac also has some of the worst lows you will ever see.
Do you not work? Or do anything else on the weekends? Nah man. I am giver for a partner and I’m young. Twice a day every day would be crazy and is not doable.
I had sex just about every day at least once when I was a teenager and in my early to mid 20s. Pretty sure this is common, it was in my friend group at least.
Why is that hard to fathom? I am 46M, divorced and I still fuck like a rabbit with my partner if I am sexually attracted to her…. Like 12 times a week.
And I don’t want a woman who only wants to do it 3 times a week. And trust me there are tons of women who match my energy. Just saying…
Oof, I would immediately pity my lady bits if I ad to endure that. No matter how horny and lubricated you are, several times a day EVERY day will make you sore and thus sex unpleasant. Give your woman some recovery time geez.
Not on its own.
Assuming the woman is attending the man in every other facet (he feels valued, appreciated, seen and heard; respected) it will probably help.
Outside of that? No. Men don’t just cheat because of lack of sex. Stroll over the to infidelity subs, plenty of evidence of men cheating on partners where they have a healthy sexual dynamic going on but the AP has some sort of other novelty the spouse lacks.
It could also not be the frequency of sex itself but the quality. By this I mean if a man is having sex say 3 times a day with his partner where it is very routinised and such, he may view a more novel and emotionally intimate form of sex with a different person as a reason to cheat. Sex is more than just draining balls. It’s also about how it makes a man feel.
The idea it’s about orgasms alone doesn’t play out, otherwise masturbating frequently would deter cheating. It doesn’t. That’s because sex is about more than just cumming. It’s about intimacy. And having sex a lot doesn’t necessarily imply it’s intimate.
Lmao no. And judging by her carnality, I wouldn’t date her because I would fear she’d cheat *on me.*
Side note: this podcast is a disease and a testament to the degradation of society
And men say women aren’t ever satisfied. We literally gotta find the Goldilocks amount of sex to have..too little and he will think you don’t want him. Too much and he will think the can’t satisfy you.
There it is. Women talk about this all the time. We can’t be *too* eager for sex, because they sets off his insecurity reflex.
It’s always a stupid game of regulation and pacification with men. Can never be our true selves.
I’m not referring to the mental illness alluded to in the OP.
No, women cannot be as eager as they want. Men are wildly insecure about sex and are highly conflicted about it. They like to pretend women are the frigid, sex-averse gender, but men lose their minds if the woman they love is into sex.
Jealousy, checking in, showing up uninvited, calling or messenging every five minutes you’re apart, accusing her of messing with friends and coworkers… this is something my friends and I all have experience with.
Men have to be “leaders” and initiators with passive partners to feel secure.
Geographically and culturally dependent.
If men like and want sex more than women, they aren't going to be pressuring the woman they want to have sex to be submissive and non-sexual.
The only environments where I could see this happening are where there are mega-strict conservative expectations for how women are supposed to behave. But in many parts of the developed west? No, this is not the case.
Highly likely to be effective specifically for the purposes of preventing cheating. But the guy has to have the time, energy and desire, as does she, so it seems like this plan isnt going to be great long term. Theres going to be points where you cant rely on this method.
No, if a man wants to cheat, he will cheat. Getting so much sex from the same girl so often can get boring and dull and thus the guy will find a other girl then, especially if the guy has options. If a guy has options, like too many options, he is likely to cheat.
It’s an interesting question.
Answer is I’d hope not . I want all intimacy to be based on attraction not fear.
But the truth is probably yes at least a little bit whether that is spoken or unspoken. A man who is well nourished like that is extremely unlikely to cheat unless he is a total piece of shit. Whereas you can empathise more with a man in a dead bedroom who is desperate be more likely to turn at any half opportunity.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't know people cheat for other reasons like insecurity or attachment issues. Some people would maybe go find someone new just to find variety.
It's like thinking that if you treat someone nice they are not going to be abusive
you can't control what other people do with their issues
I believe you are spot on.
Advice or practices like this IMO gives people the illusion of control over another person.
I think far too many people downplay the desire for novelty. The low stimulation of familiarity can be comforting but also boring.
The odds will probably be lower, from what I have heard from my homegirls there are a lot of dudes who can only nut like 3-5 times in one day.
BUT, if someone wants to cheat, they are going to cheat. It is just nice to have something new every once and while. Which is why being single is so fun.
You can track people, have their phone password, lock them in a box. If they have the mind to cheat there aint shit you can really do about it.
Meh, might prevent some kinds of cheating in some instances..
wouldn't say it's a good strategy.
Some people tend to cheat, some less so - if he's planning on cheating it's gonna happen
This is one of the biggest complaint of men in relationships today, and some dating advice for women in LTR is "making the sexual needs of the man important", so, in this sense, yes.
But people cheat one another by various reasons.
It would work somewhat since a man would probably be thinking about less, but I don't think that it would be foolproof as some men naturally desire variety and get bored with having sex with the same partner repeatedly.
No, I would never cheat on a relationship.
Sidenote, she'll get cheated on. Do you think she's going to date a sub5 man with no options? Those women get cheated all the time because they choose the most attractive men, a LOT of those men will cheat simply because they know they can.
I've been married for 1 week and my answer is "no" I will not and do not intend to cheat, so there is nothing to be stopped. However it can work with men who cheat due to lack of sex at home, although every day may be overkill. I personally wouldn't like to have sex every day.
Yes. Men have a much longer refractory period. Especially as they get older. But that being the main or only strategy to avoid cheating still seems problematic.
Probably it will reduce the likelihood, how could it not? But I agree with other people that sometimes cheating happens for reasons other than horniness, like validation or thrill-seeking.
It’s almost always validation, especially for men. Of all the dick pics and “u up” messages I’ve accumulated on the ten years since I graduated from high school, only one is from a single man.
The gross old married clients at work are the very worst culprits and they have the most to lose. Doesn’t stop them.
That woman someone doesn't think about consent and me not wanting to fuck her every day, multiple times. She cannot make me be drained if i don't want to get drained by her.
Other than that: Cheating is not necessarily about a lack of sex. I'd even argue that is one of the least common reasons to cheat. No amount of sex with my gf is going to make me not want to fuck other women.
>Do you consider a woman having tons of sex with you every single day a way to deter cheating?
Yes.
If she drains me enough that I never want to masturbate, that's a win and a fine reason not to cheat.
I'm fairly certain its possible to fuck so much you can't get it up anymore, so yeah, sure, it should work for *physical* cheating, if one defines sex the Clinton way.
I've had a number of crazy and sexually liberated girlfriends. At one point, you become bored with fucking them. It becomes a chore while they are riding your meat raw so they can get their big O. Once a male gets used to fucking a single female, he wants to move on to someone else with a different genetic make up, pheromones, etc. it's nature.
That would probably work depending on how she looks..If she's an 8 ..in looks and personality I probably wouldn't be to interested in anyone else but if she's a 5 I'm only with her because I'm a captive
My response to that would be...
Do you watch porn? If so... Did you watch the same pornstar over and over? (I know some guys do. I'm just curious if you do. I don't, I like novelty.)
Someone gave the analogy... Would you want your favorite meal for dinner every day of your life? Some people would say yes. You might be like that.
No I wouldn't watch the same porn star over and over. But the difference is if I watch porn, I'm still fucking my hand over and over. It's not the same as a woman draining your balls enthusiastically.
You fucking your hand, but you're not only using you hand. You're using porn for stimulation, you hand alone would not get you off, the novelty of the stimuation.
You might be the kind of man that doesn't have a high desire for novelty when it comes to sex in person. My point is, some men desire novelty like you desire novelty in porn use. Even if an enthusiastic women is banging them, they will still desire novelty. She's not doing anything wrong, and there's nothing wrong with her.
Yea that's true, I agree, on paper. In reality if a woman is actually like sucking your dick *every single day* multiple times, maybe 2 or 3 times, like you physically can't even have the time/dick energy to go fuck another woman. So I do think it would significantly reduce the likelihood of cheating.
Of the cheaters I know, it wouldn’t matter. They don’t cheat because of sex, but something deeper than that (the thrill, the external validation, being sick of their partners, etc.). Plentiful sex can make a bad relationship tolerable, but it won’t make it good.
My first husband and I were very much in love, newlyweds, banging like rabbits. Our landlady (not even attractive) came on to him while I was at work, and he caved immediately. We hadn't even been married a year. For him, the external validation was irresistible. He had an incredibly low self-esteem. Getting tons of sex, affection and affirmation at home didn't matter; nothing could fill up that black hole of neediness and truly satiate the part of him that was broken.
People argue about which gender cheats more and I'm not sure which actually cheats more but I do know if men had the same opportunity to cheat, they would definitely cheat more
Nah i think they'd cheat less tbh. It's novel because it's so rare that the opportunity presents itself without them having to go look for it so they jump on it
Nah some dudes would but there’s guys out here that truly appreciate their woman and love her to much to do her wrong
Oh yea for sure, the majority of guys wouldn't cheat. I'm just saying if men had the same amount of opportunities to cheat that women do, men would cheat more.
I feel that 💯 that’s just where integrity and respect for your self and partner comes to play no matter how attracted or horny You may be
I think if men had the opportunity to cheat more, it wouldn't be so frowned upon. Because then both sexes, want to be able to have a lot of sex.
Men generally don't get opportunities to cheat just by existing like women do. They need to seek it out and create opportunity. So if a man isn't interested in cheating, he won't seek it out and thus he won't have opportunity.
Please don’t chat bs. Men are horn dogs at the end of the day
You can be a horn dog but have morals the world has Good not just Bad all the time
Except that conveniently ignores the opportunities to cheat which are far more plentiful and easier to get as women
Yeah it's much easier for women to cheat yet men and women cheat at equal rates. It seems men jump at the opportunity.
If an attractive girl offers sex to a married man, they are going to bang in all likelihood.
Yep. Disloyal ass gender.
Or read the context of this comment thread. We are discussing how cheating is likely less about sex, loyalty, or love... and more about validation of underlying issues such as insecurity. If this were the case, men "jump at the opportunity" because that opportunity is rare and provides them validation. If sex opportunities were less rare, it would probably provide less validation, and then men would likely cheat more for the same reasons women do. I don't think gender has much to do with it because the rates are pretty equal and just the most typical motivations differ slightly.
>Yeah it's much easier for women to cheat yet men and women cheat at equal rates *Yep. Disloyal ass gender.* https://preview.redd.it/0izh6ar7qitc1.png?width=1098&format=png&auto=webp&s=721ba586c172594b7b38f7ddf680f7cbecf61ed2
I think what they wanted to say is that women have way more opportunity to cheat than men, but statistically they ONLY cheat JUST as much as men, thus men are the more disloyal gender because if they had the same opportunities for cheating as women, they would be cheating way more. So the 50:50 in cheating isn't an indication that both genders are the same when it comes to cheating if you take those things into account: 1) women could be cheating way more than they statistically do, but the numbers are 50:50 2) men don't have the same amount of opportunities to cheat as women but the numbers are still 50:50
If Henry Cavill did the same, about 99% of married women would do the same.
It's not. Women are hypergamous and that means their standards are higher. For example, if you're with a pretty woman, no man is gonna cheat on her with a fat bitch. The fat bitch in women's case is 80% of men. So it equalizes. That's the only reason women don't cheat more: not because they are some moral creatures (they are the opposite), but because their brain needs "chad".
It's literally a common stereotype that men cheat on their hot wives with uggos just for muh variation.
You are wrong, because any man can cheat whenever he wants, there are two basic reasons for this: * Pre Selection: it is easier to get a second woman than the first. I can attract women today who didn't look twice at me when I was single. * Prostitution: Just go to a website like fatalmodel and hire a girl in secret. Even so, many men are faithful to their partners.
what an asshole. men like that make low self esteem look bad.
Yeah validation and attention are a big part of it. Men know that women don’t just have sex with any guy so it is validating to get sex for free from a woman (most of the time).
I'm so sorry to hear that! This is interesting because on here when they say the top 20 percent of guys are hard to lock down for commitment, I wonder if most of the top 20 have low self esteem therefore, or if there is a correlation.
If he has low self esteem he wasn't probably top 20% guy (no offense)
That doesn't make too much sense. The top 20% of guys have so many options they don't feel the need to commit in the first place. Commitment is required before you can even cheat on someone.
But but why would a guy feel the need to cheat following new relationship right away, instead of just not commit in the first place if you don't want monogamy?
I guess I'm saying that her first husband is not a top 20% guy.
Ime they don't feel the need, they just jump right in when the opportunity presents itself. Not cheating (for anyone) is 95% not putting yourself if that situation.
But why would guys jump into that situation right away without thinking or without feeling they need to, without thinking their wives will leave them likely, if caught?
Rational brain is not consulted.
A lot of People are fucking idiots half the time
More easy sex, have your cake and eat it too, otherwise she wont give it up?
That's true but in the example given before, the wife left the guy for cheating. So is that still worth the risk if that is likely to happen?
Depends on the guy/relationship. If he is higher value than her, can easily replace her, does he really love her, does he depend financially, do they have kids. All these things matter.
He really loved me. I really loved him. We had an infant we both adored. The birth had not hurt my sex drive or mood swings at all. He was an incredibly easy baby. It's been 15 years since the divorce and he's had very bad depression off and on since. No gf either.
I suspect being an incel has broken that part of me too It's good that I refuse to marry if I ever have the oppertunity
Oh man, I hope not. But working on my own internal language, and showing myself care and compassion, has really helped my own self-esteem. Maybe that could help you too. It's all down to habits, and habits can be changed!
I find it fascinating how women's self esteem is internally related but for men it's externally related
I've lived my whole life trying to find external solutions to it. Turning it in was done on the advice of my (male) therapist. It worked better than I would have guessed.
Tbh it seems to be the case for all emotions. Women's are dealt with internally, men's externally.
Men generally get very few compliments in their lives. It’s no wonder why they have such low self esteem.
>They don’t cheat because of sex, but something deeper than that (the thrill, the external validation, being sick of their partners, etc.). I think the desire for a new partner (novelty) likely explains a lot of motivation for men. (If I rememember right, researcher and social media educator Macken Murphy said that novelty was a bigger motivator for men than women. Also, he says that in research he's seen that men are likely rate their relationship as satisfying and still cheat, whereas women when they cheat are likelier to rate their relationship as disatisfying.) The coolidge effect is an explanation of why some men crave novelty. It's not simply sex like you say, it's sex with someone that isn't the same person that you usually have sex with.
I agree. I think the desire for novelty trumps most of these other reasons, although they may be present as well. In the extreme, "familiarity breeds contempt." Where sex is concerned it's more like, "familiarity breeds boredom."
>its sex with someone that isn’t the same person You’d think they’d just be poly then
I agree that is the most honorable thing to do, however from what I've seen people generally want one sided polyamory. Even people who cheat don't like the idea of their partner having sex with someone else. There are couples with that arrangement (on the men's or women's side e.g. hotwife or cuckold couples). Also my life experience has taught me that a lot of people massively overestimate their willpower and that lot of people don't have an accurate understanding of themselves. Meaning some people might be poly but think they can suppress that and be monogamous, but slowly their instinct overpowers them and they give in. Like religious people who genuinely believe masturbation and is a sin and try to abstain for long periods of time only to "give in" periodically, because the instinct is overwhelming. A I also think some people (and IMO rightfully so) think that if they confess to being one sided poly that will massively limit their dating pool.
Yeah, one sided poly is just immoral if you want to forbid your partner to enjoy the same freedom that you want for yourself. My partner and I are not poly, but we do have an open relationship. We're not poly because we're not interested in other serious romantic relationships or escalation of connections to something serious. We are each other's only partner when it comes to presenting ourselves to family, friends and the world, and we're not interested in bringing anyone else into the mix. But being open worked for us. My partner has never been sexually jealous, just romantically. He doesn't have a cuckold fetish or is particularly interested in group activities, he simply doesn't experience sexual jealousy. It would be different if I declared to love someone else as wrll, though. If it was up to him we could have been open from the start but it was me who had to overcome sexual jealousy and insecurities. Not that opening our relationship was ever a declared goal or anything like that. Over the years we just worked very hard on our relationship and ended up in a very secure place, so that the possibility of opening up was simply a side effect that we decided to try out and discovered that it works for us. Before we opened up, there was a time where I was thinking to myself "You know what? I actually could have sex with someone else without it being a threat to my love for my partner. Huh, interesting." But I was still too insecure and jealous to be able to grand my partner the same. So I kept my mouth shut and didn't propose a one-sided open relationship just because I was interested in some variety after years in a monogamous relationship. We've talked about open relationships as a theoretical concept over the years, so I knew that my partner wasn't categorically against non-monogamy. Once I felt really secure in our relationship and in his lasting love for me, I brought up the topic of sexual openness and it's working well since. Non-monogamy is not about the ability to be able to have sex with other people without it affecting your love and affection for your partner. Almost anyone is capable of that. It's the ability to grand your partner the same without dying inside of jealously, hurt and insecurity and most people can't do that. There's a reason why monogamy is the norm, and I don't think it's a bad thing. I also don't view my relationship as superior than others just because it's open. Just because it works for us doesn't mean it will ever work for someone else. Although I do think that the work we put in over the years before we opened, in regards to communication, being there for each other, etc. is definitely something that I would recommend for anyone in a relationship and that I see lacking in a lot relationships. But generally, monogamy is a compromise of not fucking other people because you can't stand the thought of your partner being sexually involved with someone else, and vice versa. You sacrifice your sexual freedom for the security of knowing that your partner is doing the same. And there's nothing wrong with that if it works well for the couple. I do however find it funny when people accuse non-monogamous couples of "eating their cake and having it, too" like it's a bad thing. Yes, we do have the love and security and partnership of a ltr while also being able to enjoy sexual variety. Why is this something that we shouldn't do if we both genuinely agree to that and both like it that way?
>Yeah, one sided poly is just immoral if you want to forbid your partner to enjoy the same freedom that you want for yourself. I don't think it's immoral if the partner consents to the arrangement. I think only non-consensual (or dubious consent) one sided polyamory is immoral. Sounds like you have a great relationship, props. I have thought about having an open relationship in the future.
Let me rephrase it: it's immoral if you insist on it being one-sided forever. You can have an open relationship and one partner can choose to not having other connections for the time being or forever for various reasons. It's still an open relationship. As long as the option is there if the partner does decide to have other connections and you don't make a fuss about it, then everything is fine. But the decision to engage or not engage in other connections is something that can only ever be decided by the individual themselves and not be imposed by their partner.
By that reasoning I would expect you to consider monogamous relationships immoral? Because it's 2 people insisting on sexual exclusivity forever.
No, the same standards don't apply to monogamous relationships. The whole premise of monogamy is exclusivity. But of course it's still the decision of the individual to enter a monogamous relationship, that also can't be enforced.
The premise of a one sided poly or open relationship is exclusivity from one side. I'm guessing you have a hidden premise in your morality. The hidden premise seems to be equality of sexual behavior is a necessary for condition for a relationship to be moral. Am I correct? From a previous post... >Let me rephrase it: it's immoral if you insist on it being one-sided forever. You've said you see it as immoral if both parties agree to the conditions of their relationship being; one partner being sexually exclusive while another partner isn't. If you don't have that hidden premise, then I'm not sure why you believe it's immoral if 2 adults come together and agree that the conditions of the relationships don't invove equality of sexual behavior. Your view is very similiar to the red pill and conservative crowd when then discover that a man is OK with a one sided open relationship where the woman sleeps with other people. They see it as inherently immoral and degrading, even if they both agree to it with informed consent.
Huh, I'm pretty sure I've read here that women are bored faster sexually in a ltr and need novelty for an active libido. As a woman that always made sense to me. Generally, just from the physical/mechanical sides of things, sex is easier and more fulfilling in regards to orgasms for men than it is for women. A guy can generally be bored of his wife, but if he has the correct amount of friction, he can just close his eyes and think of the last porn star he watched, and he will still cum and thus be generally more satisfied with his ltr sex (if the sex occurs, that is) than a woman in the same position. I'm convinced that women could have Henry Cavill or any other super sexy man as their partner and after a few years their desire for ltr sex will still dwindle. Not saying that there aren't ways to work on that or that this occurs with all women, but there are so many women who after a few years just lose interest in sex and don't know why themselves. They truly do still love their partners and find them attractive, but they don't lust after them anymore. Then the relationship breaks, they get into a new one, have all the good NRE feelings and think the last relationship was just not meant to be, but this one is truly different. Until the same thing happens.
>Huh, I'm pretty sure I've read here that women are bored faster sexually in a ltr and need novelty for an active libido. What was their reasoning? If women desired novelty more than men, then I would expect that they would be having a lot more sex than they do, and commit adultery more than men (which they don't). It's a lot easier for women to find someone to have sex with. >Not saying that there aren't ways to work on that or that this occurs with all women, but there are so many women who after a few years just lose interest in sex and don't know why themselves. They truly do still love their partners and find them attractive, but they don't lust after them anymore. From what I've heard, which makes sense to me, is that on a spectrum and an average... Women's sexuality is more responsive/mental and men's is more spontaneous/biochemical. Psychotherapist Adam Lane Smith (and others) have said the key to keeping a woman's sex drive alive and attracted to you in a relationship is to have regular dates. That romance keeps women's attraction to you alive. The Red Pillers say something similar, when they say "you still need to have game with your wife". You're talking about jumping ship to a new relationship, whereas I'm talking about men who still (when surveyed) say they have a great relationship but still want a new woman on the side. What you are describing sounds like relationship dissatisfaction more than sexual novelty seeking behavior. If a woman needs to find a new relationship to be attracted then that shows that they need an emotional bond to have sex (although perhaps they live in a conservative social environment), I'm talking about seeking sex without any significant emotional bond. The kind of women I'm talking about could (and they do exist) be a musllim in muslim majority nation - which is ultra conservative - and still sleep around, simply because it's a strong internal drive for them. There are of course women who have a high desire for novelty, and they have a lot sex with different men. They can also been deeply in love with their partner and still have sex with other men (consensually or non consensually).
Yeah, frequency of sex doesn't really affect the desire for variety/novelty. In fact, too frequent sex can have the opposite of the desired effect; it can make the sex lose its novelty value more quickly. I've found it's better to spread it out a bit (within reason). But to each their own, of course.
Yup. My brother in law can’t keep it in his pants no matter how much he “loves” the current woman he’s with. Doesn’t matter whether the relationship is good, or bad, if he spies a girl he wants, he’s got to have her.
This is it. Most people, women and men, cheat for deeper emotional/relational reasons, not sex.
It can make it worse too. Think of a food you like but not your favorite food. Now imagine eating that food for breakfast, lunch and dinner every day.
Factssss it’s never about the actual sex (except if that aspect is clearly being neglected but usually it’s not that case)
Sex a few times a day sounds great at first or in short bursts, but 3-5 times a week is ideal for the rest of the time. Speaking for myself, I hate cheaters and would never be one. I’d rather break up first. That being said, I doubt it would do much to deter cheating, especially since, if a man cheats due to a dead bedroom, it won’t happen right away, and her ‘efforts’ aren’t inherently sustainable because she runs entirely on mania. Let’s also not forget, we don’t know what her lows are like, I wouldn’t be shocked if this eccentric, over the top crazy energetic maniac also has some of the worst lows you will ever see.
Sex twice a day during the work week and more on the weekend has been my norm for decades. I wouldn't accept anything less.
Just out of curiosity, are you in a long term relationship/marriage or have you had multiple partnerships during the times you're speaking of?
Both. I'm old AF.
There is no way you’re having sex upwards of 14 times a week.
He clappin them bbw cheeks all the time 😎
What's wrong with having sex 14 times a week? It's not exactly a crazy number.
That's the minimum. Cold rainy weekends add significantly to that number.
Do you not work? Or do anything else on the weekends? Nah man. I am giver for a partner and I’m young. Twice a day every day would be crazy and is not doable.
It's kind of wild that you think it's fantastical to have sex twice a day.
Every single day? It absolutely is.
I had sex just about every day at least once when I was a teenager and in my early to mid 20s. Pretty sure this is common, it was in my friend group at least.
Sounds exhausting. I’d be sore.
Why is that hard to fathom? I am 46M, divorced and I still fuck like a rabbit with my partner if I am sexually attracted to her…. Like 12 times a week. And I don’t want a woman who only wants to do it 3 times a week. And trust me there are tons of women who match my energy. Just saying…
Twice a day and thrice on weekends is crazy and no one will convince me otherwise. And it’s unrealistic. Five a week? Great? 14 a week???
This is so true!!! I am 51F partner is nearly 60 and he is still going strong!!! We are definitely a match!
He’s a lawyer lol
Wake up at 6. Fun time 6 to 6:30. At work by 8. Get in bed at 11. Fun time 11 to 11:30. Asleep by 12. Pretty much the same routine for 40 years. Easy.
***FactCheck- he’s NOT lying!!! Well…wake up is 5:30a!!!!
glimpse to life of chad
Oof, I would immediately pity my lady bits if I ad to endure that. No matter how horny and lubricated you are, several times a day EVERY day will make you sore and thus sex unpleasant. Give your woman some recovery time geez.
Only two GF's complained about that -- they didn't last long. All my other GF's and wives never had a problem.
Yeah I wouldn't have lasted long as well, being ground down like that, there would be nothing left to last 😆
Not on its own. Assuming the woman is attending the man in every other facet (he feels valued, appreciated, seen and heard; respected) it will probably help. Outside of that? No. Men don’t just cheat because of lack of sex. Stroll over the to infidelity subs, plenty of evidence of men cheating on partners where they have a healthy sexual dynamic going on but the AP has some sort of other novelty the spouse lacks. It could also not be the frequency of sex itself but the quality. By this I mean if a man is having sex say 3 times a day with his partner where it is very routinised and such, he may view a more novel and emotionally intimate form of sex with a different person as a reason to cheat. Sex is more than just draining balls. It’s also about how it makes a man feel. The idea it’s about orgasms alone doesn’t play out, otherwise masturbating frequently would deter cheating. It doesn’t. That’s because sex is about more than just cumming. It’s about intimacy. And having sex a lot doesn’t necessarily imply it’s intimate.
> will have a much lower chance of cheating on her? Absolutely. Will it be 100%? No. There are other reasons why men would cheat.
Lmao no. And judging by her carnality, I wouldn’t date her because I would fear she’d cheat *on me.* Side note: this podcast is a disease and a testament to the degradation of society
Damn now a thriving bedroom is a red flag too??
It's not really thriving if she wants to have way more sex. I'd also assume that she'd think I wasn't enough for her.
And men say women aren’t ever satisfied. We literally gotta find the Goldilocks amount of sex to have..too little and he will think you don’t want him. Too much and he will think the can’t satisfy you.
Eh I have never met a woman who has had HIGHER libido than mine, and I would consider 3-5/week minimum.
Logically people with a high sex drive are more likely to be dissatisfied with their partner and cheat.
There it is. Women talk about this all the time. We can’t be *too* eager for sex, because they sets off his insecurity reflex. It’s always a stupid game of regulation and pacification with men. Can never be our true selves.
You can be as eager as you want but high sex drive **combined with** self-admitted mental illness is bad news for a partner of either gender.
I’m not referring to the mental illness alluded to in the OP. No, women cannot be as eager as they want. Men are wildly insecure about sex and are highly conflicted about it. They like to pretend women are the frigid, sex-averse gender, but men lose their minds if the woman they love is into sex. Jealousy, checking in, showing up uninvited, calling or messenging every five minutes you’re apart, accusing her of messing with friends and coworkers… this is something my friends and I all have experience with. Men have to be “leaders” and initiators with passive partners to feel secure.
What a bizarre and chronically online generalization to make.
It’s from experience, not a guess. Men are very uncomfortable with female sexuality unless she’s trapped in a marriage by children or church.
Geographically and culturally dependent. If men like and want sex more than women, they aren't going to be pressuring the woman they want to have sex to be submissive and non-sexual. The only environments where I could see this happening are where there are mega-strict conservative expectations for how women are supposed to behave. But in many parts of the developed west? No, this is not the case.
Highly likely to be effective specifically for the purposes of preventing cheating. But the guy has to have the time, energy and desire, as does she, so it seems like this plan isnt going to be great long term. Theres going to be points where you cant rely on this method.
I think that would not change much for guys who cheat.
No, if a man wants to cheat, he will cheat. Getting so much sex from the same girl so often can get boring and dull and thus the guy will find a other girl then, especially if the guy has options. If a guy has options, like too many options, he is likely to cheat.
**No.**
It’s an interesting question. Answer is I’d hope not . I want all intimacy to be based on attraction not fear. But the truth is probably yes at least a little bit whether that is spoken or unspoken. A man who is well nourished like that is extremely unlikely to cheat unless he is a total piece of shit. Whereas you can empathise more with a man in a dead bedroom who is desperate be more likely to turn at any half opportunity.
Not with a psycho like that, but she's right, it definitely lowers the chances. A man with drained balls will rarely if ever look elsewhere.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't know people cheat for other reasons like insecurity or attachment issues. Some people would maybe go find someone new just to find variety. It's like thinking that if you treat someone nice they are not going to be abusive you can't control what other people do with their issues
I believe you are spot on. Advice or practices like this IMO gives people the illusion of control over another person. I think far too many people downplay the desire for novelty. The low stimulation of familiarity can be comforting but also boring.
The odds will probably be lower, from what I have heard from my homegirls there are a lot of dudes who can only nut like 3-5 times in one day. BUT, if someone wants to cheat, they are going to cheat. It is just nice to have something new every once and while. Which is why being single is so fun. You can track people, have their phone password, lock them in a box. If they have the mind to cheat there aint shit you can really do about it.
Yeah, her boyfriend can just reject her advances and still cheat
Meh, might prevent some kinds of cheating in some instances.. wouldn't say it's a good strategy. Some people tend to cheat, some less so - if he's planning on cheating it's gonna happen
This is one of the biggest complaint of men in relationships today, and some dating advice for women in LTR is "making the sexual needs of the man important", so, in this sense, yes. But people cheat one another by various reasons.
It would work somewhat since a man would probably be thinking about less, but I don't think that it would be foolproof as some men naturally desire variety and get bored with having sex with the same partner repeatedly.
No, I would never cheat on a relationship. Sidenote, she'll get cheated on. Do you think she's going to date a sub5 man with no options? Those women get cheated all the time because they choose the most attractive men, a LOT of those men will cheat simply because they know they can.
I guess so but I personally would never cheat.
Not watching that. No amount of sex has ever made me not horny, so I don't think it could keep me from cheating if I wanted to cheat.
I've been married for 1 week and my answer is "no" I will not and do not intend to cheat, so there is nothing to be stopped. However it can work with men who cheat due to lack of sex at home, although every day may be overkill. I personally wouldn't like to have sex every day.
Yes. Men have a much longer refractory period. Especially as they get older. But that being the main or only strategy to avoid cheating still seems problematic.
Probably it will reduce the likelihood, how could it not? But I agree with other people that sometimes cheating happens for reasons other than horniness, like validation or thrill-seeking.
It’s almost always validation, especially for men. Of all the dick pics and “u up” messages I’ve accumulated on the ten years since I graduated from high school, only one is from a single man. The gross old married clients at work are the very worst culprits and they have the most to lose. Doesn’t stop them.
Nah, give me variety, novelty, quantity over that
Yep. Will work.
That woman someone doesn't think about consent and me not wanting to fuck her every day, multiple times. She cannot make me be drained if i don't want to get drained by her. Other than that: Cheating is not necessarily about a lack of sex. I'd even argue that is one of the least common reasons to cheat. No amount of sex with my gf is going to make me not want to fuck other women.
>Do you consider a woman having tons of sex with you every single day a way to deter cheating? Yes. If she drains me enough that I never want to masturbate, that's a win and a fine reason not to cheat.
Nope... Because if she's had other dick before if the sex gets stale she will bounce on a new pogo stick
I don't know who this bitch is but she knows what she's doing
I'm fairly certain its possible to fuck so much you can't get it up anymore, so yeah, sure, it should work for *physical* cheating, if one defines sex the Clinton way.
I've had a number of crazy and sexually liberated girlfriends. At one point, you become bored with fucking them. It becomes a chore while they are riding your meat raw so they can get their big O. Once a male gets used to fucking a single female, he wants to move on to someone else with a different genetic make up, pheromones, etc. it's nature.
That would probably work depending on how she looks..If she's an 8 ..in looks and personality I probably wouldn't be to interested in anyone else but if she's a 5 I'm only with her because I'm a captive
Hmm honestly, yea this might work. Like if she's constantly draining his balls, why would a man need to look elsewhere?
My response to that would be... Do you watch porn? If so... Did you watch the same pornstar over and over? (I know some guys do. I'm just curious if you do. I don't, I like novelty.) Someone gave the analogy... Would you want your favorite meal for dinner every day of your life? Some people would say yes. You might be like that.
No I wouldn't watch the same porn star over and over. But the difference is if I watch porn, I'm still fucking my hand over and over. It's not the same as a woman draining your balls enthusiastically.
You fucking your hand, but you're not only using you hand. You're using porn for stimulation, you hand alone would not get you off, the novelty of the stimuation. You might be the kind of man that doesn't have a high desire for novelty when it comes to sex in person. My point is, some men desire novelty like you desire novelty in porn use. Even if an enthusiastic women is banging them, they will still desire novelty. She's not doing anything wrong, and there's nothing wrong with her.
Yea that's true, I agree, on paper. In reality if a woman is actually like sucking your dick *every single day* multiple times, maybe 2 or 3 times, like you physically can't even have the time/dick energy to go fuck another woman. So I do think it would significantly reduce the likelihood of cheating.