Ok, I'm not looking for judgement, just an opinion to a hypothetical situation:

Situation:
Two adults are in a normal, closed, hetrosexual, long-term relationship. We'll call the man M, and the woman W.

M went to a party without W with one of his friends (who by the way hates W) -- we'll call her H. M gets drunk with H and cheats on W with her and a few others at the party.

Simplified:

M = Man
H = Man's Friend
W = Man's Girlfriend

M cheats on W with H and random party people.

Aftermath:

M realizes that what he did was wrong and apologizes to W. W says that she is willing to forgive M and continue the relationship, but has a hard time trusting him from then on -- and kindly requests that M no longer hang out with H if he wishes to continue their relationship.

M thinks that this is unfair, because he is very close friend's with H, and doesn't want to choose between H and W. W finally cracks and decides that M and H can be friends only if H apologizes for what she did with her man.

H will not apologize as she says that she has done nothing wrong. M backs her up saying that the blame is his, not H's. W is of the firm belief that since M did not rape H, that H played a part and if H wants to be a part of their lives, H should have to shape up and be kind to her and apologize.

Question:
What do you think? Do you find your empathy swayed one way or the other?

If M has had an affair with H, having this "close friend" (with benefits?) nearby will put a constant and non-negligible strain on the relationship. W and H will probably never become friends.

I have always been of the opinion that M is the responsible party in this case, especially since H and W did not like each other (or at least H did not like W). However, if H wants to keep M as a friend, she may have to accept that it was a "bad" thing that she did and apologize to W. But since she doesn't want to, you can pretty much assume that she doesn't want to be a part of M+W's life - only M's.

Imo, M has to make a choice.

I'd agree with W about fault. Both M and H acted consentually, if inebriated, and both/neither are responsible (depending on your views of responsibility of acts while under the influence), not just one or the other. As for apologies, it'd probably be something I'd only be able to decide knowing M, W, and H personally. Making H apologize probably isn't going to do anything except increase animosity since she doesn't want to, and forcing it won't really gain anything since she could just say it to get everyone to shut up, leaving everyone in a state of quiet, or not so quiet, distrust.

In W's position, I'd politely and civilly talk to H and find out why she thinks she didn't do anything wrong, and try to convince her, civilly, otherwise, and let her make her own decisions.

Of course, the biggest issue is M and W's trust. If W can't trust M anymore, then the relationship isn't worth persuing, regardless of H. If W can, in time, honestly trust M again, then that's what they need to work on privately (H was not a root cause, at least as far as I can assume in this hypothetical situation). Knowing why M cheated on W, and working that out, is more important than H not apologizing. H apologizing is only needed for W.. but H hating W makes W unable to trust H, so it really doesn't matter what H does (even if H apologizes, they don't trust each other, so she'll never believe the apology is sincere anyway).

Do we know this wouldn't happen again with someone else whenever M gets drunk? Do we know this wouldn't happen again whenever H can get any influence over M? Is M secretly/unconsciously looking for a "better deal" over W, and H (being such a person) happened to be there with lowered inhibitions?

IMHO, at least.

thanks guys, more opinions welcome.

What Jonathan said. M can't expect the other letters in his alphabet soup to get along.

W should be M's priority. M should be thankful W forgave him at all and stop seeing H.

I'd say W is right. I'd further say that I don't think M and H should continue seeing each other while M would still like to be with W, or at the very least have some considerable cooldown period.
I'd also expect M to cut down on alcohol intake.
Other stuff I thought about has already been mentioned.

W is absolutely right

W has made a very generous act for still being with M and still trusting him. He should be thankful.
Basically like Trent Gamblin said:

Once a cheater, always a cheater. The girlfriend should just kick the guy between the legs and say goodbye.

And the man should realize that getting drunk is incredibly stupid, and getting drunk with a "best friend" is more stupid than anything Neil Black's friend has done. Guys don't have "best female friends" without benefits, especially when drunk.

So if cheating isn't a good enough reason to dump the guy, his stupidity definitely is.

Oh, and as a side note. Giving up the "best friend" is a stupid condition because it doesn't solve the problem. It's not like a man has a girlfriend and then one other woman with whom he would cheat. He has a girlfriend and millions of other women with whom he would cheat. Getting rid of one of them will do nothing to prevent it from happening again with another woman ... which it will.

Is H > W? If so, I'd say M->H.

You said M cheated with more than just H anyway, so meh.

More proof that the relationship is doomed. If you really are committed, you never not back up your girlfriend, even when she is as wrong as can be. And this isn't even a case of her being completely irrational. If she wants the woman to apologize, then the least you can do is honor that request!

It sounds to me that the man should just hook up with his best friend and forget about his girlfriend. And then when he finds a new best friend, hook up with her instead.

I expect to see you, your best friend, and girlfriend on the Jerry Springer show soon!

Let me know what day, so I can watch too.

LMAO

That's a completely justified position. If W got drunk and fucked G what would M do? If I were M, G would bleed. IMO, it's clear that M likes H as more than a friend and if all it takes for them to step over the line is a few drinks then they shouldn't hang around together while in other relationships.

W is being more than understanding, IMO. I think it's clear that H is being a bitch and getting between M and W. The only question that remains: does M want W or does M want H. It's been made clear by W that he can't have both (at least not openly) and it's been made clear by M and H that it's more than just friendship (especially by H refusing to apologize).

Doesn't sound like M is all that interested in W. Either way he needs to make a choice.

This is not Algebra. I've named M Bob, W Alice, and H Eve.

Everything Matthew said is right. Especially the part where Bob decided to stay with Eve instead of Alice.

what Leverton says.

Seriously, the girlfriend is a dumbarse for giving this dick a second chance. They probably deserve each other.

Wherein and for whom lies the dilemma?

Wtf kind of depraved sex orgies are you attending anyway? Ever heard of STD's?!?!?

And no I'm not jealous.

No I'm not.

Really, I'm not.

It depends whether you are M, W or H

Now, seriously, forgive what has been done, but end the relationship. End as friends or enemies, but end it. Once a dog tastes human blood, you sacrifice him.

"and random party people"...

that was the bit that got me??

I think that W should own up to the fact that obviously he doesn't
want to be in an exclusive relationship, or isn't yet mature enough
to commit to the level of attachment that the "standard relationship"
requires.

Doomed I tell ye, you're all doomed....

[piccolo]
stay wit W only if you can get somethn out her and contnue your side project wit H. maximize your profits!
[/piccolo]

I felt his response was too long delayed.

"standard relationship"... Makes me wonder why we're even judging this by how well it stacks against the social norm, anyways. Their feelings for each other should be all that matters. How they conduct themselves -- that's up to the two of them to decide. None of our business.

I'd also like to know, if there was an asteroid hitting Earth tomorrow, how important would M and W's relationship remain, and how important would this quarrel be, by comparison? (Of course, that's a pointless question really, because they wouldn't have to deal with H in the picture for much longer, but you get the idea: they haven't run out of 1-ups because of something we might disapprove of)

that is his definition of a standard relationship. And obviously their feelings in this situation are affected by how they conducted themselves.

So don't try to be a trailblazer here for open relationships.

Also, the question of asteroids hitting the earth is not relevant to the question asked by the OP.

Well, I missed that. But still, there's naught to be done here but echo everyone else and make lame jokes, and that's gotten old. Every time there's a thread like this, it's just the same routine of looking up the most black and white, socially-acceptable, politically-correct answer, then add joke. What's the point of a forum if you can't consider everything?

And how is my theoretical testing how much this effects their relationship any more against the OP than everyone judging M when it says explicitly "I'm not looking for judgement"?

He contradicted that with the question, What do you think?

Agreed. An opinion on a moral situation like this is essentially a judgment.

And furthermore, it's not like we are judging the man to hell. We are just giving our opinion on what the man and girlfriend should do.

What Matthew said. You should break up with your girlfriend, since you ally with this other girl against her, putting the blame on yourself. That's not right, and if you think it is right, you have no future with your girlfriend. But you are in an awkward situation. Should you continue with this new girl? After all she seems to be of the type that doesn't take commitment seriously.

Sorry, of course I meant H, M and W.

excuse me? I've cheated on no one; Though the question is not as hypothetical as I claim it is, it still stands that I am NOT this M/bob person. Though, I had a feeling people would think it was me for asking the question, I had half a mind not to do it.

I think so too. I dunno why W should even be bothered with giving M a second chance.

Actually, I more or less wanted to know if people thought that W was being ridiculous or justified. And I see that my initial reaction is shared among the local allegators.

Wow, when I first read this, I thought the H was a guy who got M drunk who then slept with some girl from a bar. Okay, okay, W thinks H is a negative influence on their relationship, perfectly fair.

But now I see H was actually a woman, and the one M cheated with!?!?!

Holy crap. W is completely in the right. That's absurd. An no blaming it on the drink. Irresponsible cowards.

Quit with the HMW initials! (HeliuM Wheatley?)

But it's so much easier to say "you" than some random letters!

M - Man
W - Woman
H - Hoe

I can't believe the woman gave the man a second chance, and I can't believe the man is siding with the hoe. The least he should be doing in this situation is begging on his knees for forgiveness.

Yeah, we've found someone dumber than John.

Why the hell did M admit his cheating? Had he played his cards right he could have had H and W. If their periods ran in opposing cycles, he'd have been the happiest man on earth.

However, since he admitted (proving he's both a dumbarse AND a cheater), W should dump him. And shag his brother loudly, while he's next door, just to spite him.

[edit]
In all seriousness, W should dump M. Leopard, spots, no change.
[/edit]

Because cheating is wrong and he couldn't live with the guilt of having cheated on W?

See? So easy, even a woman understands it.

what does that mean?

Don't talk that way about 11 year olds! That's not even legal in Japan!

It means a leopard can't change it's spots, a saying that means someone can't change their own nature. In other words, M is a cheater and always will be. In general it's not a saying I agree with.

And he felt no pangs of guilt while sticking his dick where he morally shouldn't have? And no excuses that he was too drunk to realise - he still had to get hard, an extremely difficult feat if one is too inebriated to think.

Shortish for the saying "A leopard never changes his spots" - a cheater never changes his ways.

[edit]
beaten.
[/edit]

If you ask me, it sounds like both W and H are stubborn and stuck up b - people.
H is not the one in the relationship, and she isn't even friends with W, so it's not really her problem that M cheated on W. I don't think she needs to apologise. It was certainly in her power to stop M from doing something that he perhaps should not have done, but it is not her fault. But on the other hand, she doesn't lose anything from apologising. It would make all three of them more comfortable if she just apologised.
On the other other hand, it's a bit rude of W to be demanding an apology from H, and for she to tie H's response in with what she will allow M to do is a bit overbearing.

In short, either H should apologise or W should just back off. These things are only a big deal if one makes them a big deal. "Cheating" can only damage a relationship if someone won't let it go.

M, W, and H were all happy before this happened. That doesn't need to change.

W seemed to be under the impression this was a closed relationship. I might be able to forgive M for sleeping with H, but not other random people at the party. That's just unwise, and if I was W I would tell M to get lost.

I've been in the situation of M minus the multiple partners. It was only with H. W did not forgive me and I felt horrible for doing it.

You should switch the names around. M should be H, and H should be M (M for Moron). The man is the real hoe in this story. Multiple partners in one night? That's disgusting.

Let be equal to , the guy that has feelings for and is not equal to .

If she knew he had a girlfriend she is equally guilty.

As I said before, it isn't her in the relationship. She hasn't entered into any kind of "implied contract of love" or anything like that. So it really isn't her problem if M cheats on W. In what way do you think she is equally guilty?

In our* society, cheating is considered morally wrong. hasn't broken any criminal laws [that I'm aware of]. He's broken moral laws. Those same laws apply to .

_{* I can't speak for Australian society though.}

wrong again, but the possibilities are narrowing. Though W is very fucking hott.

Who says M had to be hard? There are all kinds of sex. Maybe it was M's first time being at that kind of party or being drunk? -- Maybe H should have been watching out for him...

As for Karadoc: It's not about H owing W an apology, it's about how W shouldn't even have to forgive M in the first place, and H should not be a part of M's life if the relationship continues. But M and H are close and stupid and don't want to break up so W says "fine, if H can promise that she won't let it happen again and quit being such a bitch to me, maybe she can stick around, otherwise: no."

I dunno, it seems like the only way to argue M/H's case is to miss the point...

edit: and also, I personally think H is equally guilty because she knew M and W were dating, it wasn't like H was raped or anything -- if she's not sorry for sleeping with W's man, then she shouldn't be able to be M's friend if M wants to date W.

Who in their right mind would date a man who kept friends around with him that would sleep with him without even caring about how his girlfriend felt?

You still have not articulated what you think those "laws" actually are, or why they should exist in the first place. I asked why you think H is guilty and your reply basically just says "because she did something wrong".

You're right. W doesn't have to forgive M in the first place. But that would be a completely different hypothetical situation, wouldn't it?

then? I hope it's not ...

What do you mean by shouldn't have to forgive M? Are you implying that M isn't at fault or that W doesn't have to forgive him for it? I disagree with the first and agree with the second.

Cheating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia#Personal relationships.

As I mentioned in my first post, W did not freely forgive M. Maybe it wasn't clear, so I will elaborate: W told M that her forgiveness rests upon the fact that M is not to see H again, or that H can at least make some sort of apology to W for sleeping with her man.

Edit:

I am implying that M IS at fault, but that W doesn't have to forgive him for it. W could tell him to get lost.

As she should.

Seriously. Once you cross that line once it's easier to cross it the next time. W is smart in insisting the M no longer associate with H, but it's really a futile effort. I agree with "once a cheater always a cheater" as well.

bamccaig, I'm asking what you think. I'm not asking for a research project. Most of that stuff that you linked to has nothing to do with this situation.

I think most americans feel the same way about what the dating laws/cheating are in normal relationships.

The basic concept here is that you don't just go around fucking other people without permission, especially not if it's someone who hates your girlfriend.

Being on the other side of the wheel, I think that if someone cheats on you, you should be able to be as unreasonable as you want if that person wants to continue the relationship and that it's not unreasonable per say...

By that logic I can run off with someone's car without permission as long as I bring it back before they need it.

Neil Black, your analogy seems to assume that W owns M.

Michael Jensen, I'm not sure if you are talking to me or not. I'll reply just in case. What you are saying seems fair enough to me, but it doesn't say anything about whether or not H has done something wrong. It seems to me that M and W had some kind of agreement that they were not going to be with other people. M broke that agreement, and he is sorry about that. W can basically impose whatever consequences she likes on M, but she should remember that her relationship is at stake as well as his. H was not part of any such agreement and so she hasn't really done anything wrong. The problem is between M and W. W should not be demanding anything of H.

Clearly the solution is H and M have an affair. Eye for an eye you know? Then everyone can forget anything happened and move on.

On a side note,

This quote sickens me.

Yeah, he has no chance. She should just divorce his loser ass. /sarcasm

You sicken easily.

Its the ideology behind the phrase that sickens me. It is a very rampant one.

You'll have to spell it out for me, since no one could blame her for walking out on him for it. The least he could do is get his knees a little dusty; not like she has to forgive him (most women wouldn't).

Karadoc:

So you say there's nothing wrong with sleeping with a person who's in a serious relationship? Can I sleep with your girlfriend? Oh wait, you won't be mad at me if I do, because I've done nothing wrong.

Neil Black, for a start, my relationship with my girlfriend is none of your business. So if you want to continue to talk about this, keep it with M and W.
More to the point, if I was M (and in an exclusive relationship with W) you don't need my permission to slept with W. It is W who needs my permission to sleep with you! Do you not see this?
If I W breaks her promises to me, it makes sense for me to be upset with W. It does not make sense for me to be upset with some other guy who has nothing to do with me.

Karadoc:
The you'd have no reason to be mad at me. But you did seem to get a little upset when I put you in the position of W.

[piccolo]
M |W| =w*H^2
[/piccolo]

J/K

M should be carefully H probably did it because M is with W he mite wine up with zero

on the other hand

W should stay with M until she finds another M and always use rubbers

H has her own issues this is her way of dealing with them

edit:

this is the affect of some type of drug and most likely leads to STDs

edit: people cheat because they are afraid of being lonely so they look for back up mates

What about rapping? Surely if M freestyle raps to W, then it will all be okay? Or maybe H should rap to W?

Dude, you have no idea. I'll say again: don't try to bring my personal life into this. That's just rude. I stand by what I have said. There is no reason for you to be passing judgements about me or my girlfriend.

I'm not passing judgements. I'm just saying that you need to look at it from the perspectives of the people involved, namely M, W, and H. If I've hit on a sensitive spot with my example I'm sorry.

It's not that it is a sensitive spot. I've been living with my girlfriend for more than four years, and we have never fought about any of these sorts of topics.
I just find it rude and unnecessary to bring my personal life into this discussion. So I prefer to keep things general or hypothetical. That's all.

I was just trying to show you what things looked like from W's perspective. Looking at it from you point of view (i.e. saying it happened to you) is just a way to get you to see it from W's perspective. I didn't mean to actually say "your girlfriend" and I didn't even know you have a girlfriend. It was just a way to make you look at this from another angle. Again, I'm sorry for any offense.

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Whoa, whoa! Neil Black and yourself don't have an agreement with each other for him to not discuss your girlfriend does he? Then I guess with your logic he can discuss your girlfriend all he wants!

I've gotta disagree with your logic... Eminem rapped to his wife on almost every album and it just kept getting more and more fucked up between them.*

Neil Black was speaking hypothetically about your girlfriend. That's all.

Why are you sorry? All you did was reference his hypothetical girlfriend. Meanwhile, he's arguing that has no right to be upset with for FUCKING her boyfriend! So by his standards what right does he have to be upset with you for REFERENCING his hypothetical girlfriend?

_{* See '97 Bonnie and Clyde, Kim, [Soldier], I Love You More, Crazy In Love, [When I'm Gone], [Hey Lady (Obie Trice feat. Eminem)], among others. (Those in square brackets aren't really focussed around her though)}

so if freestyle rapping doesn't work then imitate a bat?

bamccaig, rack off. Or perhaps you'd like me to start speaking "hypothetically" about your girlfriend being a hoe? I've said that enough is enough. I think that Neil now sees where I am coming from, and he has kindly agreed to respect my wishes on this issue. I don't need you jumping in to fill the gap. Don't make it personal.

Does H have a M?
If so, M might be in an even worse position!

On a side note, does anyone else find it amusing that it was defined as:
M:Man ok, good
W:Woman ok, got that
H:Man's friend Well...I can only imagine what the "H" is for

And as to rapping to anyone, I would imagine that W would rap this to M and H! Even though they are better to look at!::)

"Hey, M...what does W say about H's hoe level?!?"
"It's over 9000!"

Don Freeman, you are awesome!

Karadoc is funny.

You don't apologize for having a problem. You apologize for being at fault (which she half is). The fact you're getting mad when you get put in the position of W is proof enough; H did something very wrong. I agree that W's main concern is M, but that doesn't mean H should be ignored. I guess the only reason this is coming up though is because of ...

... which is bloody stupid of W, frankly. Exactly what was this "cheating"? Making out on a couch?

I always apologize for offending people, even if the whole thing was a misunderstanding. I find it helps me get along with people better.

Yes, you've struck the same ideology again. I find this bizzare fascination with cheating in humanity strange. An ideology that would warrant getting on your knees.

Its not one I find healthy.

Cheating is bad, mmmkay?

W has control over whether M and H can still be friends. As H is generally a mean person to W, and slept with her boyfriend, I don't think that it's wrong for W to ask for an apology from H for being such a bitch to her throughout their acquaintanceship, W has actually asked for an apology of this, and that further fowl behavior stop. I just don't understand how that could be unreasonable to ask for. Karadoc please help me to understand your POV. (The reason I started this thread was to see if any sane person could hold this POV, and how.)

.

edit: While it is true that W has something to lose too -- she is not afraid to lose it, and to get an evil bitch like H out of her life, M might be worth sacrificing -- either H can stop being an evil bitch, or H can get out of W's life. And if M makes the decision to keep being friends with H, well then, M obviously wasn't worth keeping around. I cannot, for the life of me, come to grip how this could possibly be wrong.

Would it still sicken you if the genders were reversed, or do you just think that cheating should be ok? I'm confused.

Actually H is the first letter of the offender's name.

W doens't have the details of exactly what happend (and I assure you, she does not want them) but M called whatever happend "having sex" so I would assume that it was sex.

Michael Jensen, I'm not sure what else I can say to make my point more clear. But I will try.

From my point of view, H has not done wrong in this case. She acted in her own interests, perhaps at W's expense, but she had every right to do so. It may be that H has done some other wrong to W, but that's not what I'm talking about. All I'm saying if that H should not apologise for M breaking his agreement with W (ie. "cheating on her").

M gave H permission to be with him, and H took that offer. W does not own M. H does not need to seek W's permission to be with M, only M's permission.

It is M's responsibility to make sure that he doesn't break his agreement with W. It is not H's responsibility. M is in the wrong for cheating on W. H did not cheat on anyone.

Like I said before, H should just apologise. But not because she has broken some kind of unspoken law, but just because it would help smooth over these troubles. W should not have asked for an apology from H. W may have an alliance with M but she doesn't have an alliance with H, so she should really be asking anything of H. M's affections are M's to give, not W's. H did not take anything from W.

Keep looking.

People who agree with me on these things are definitely a minority. I realise that. But I do think that my reasons make sense.

Actually, like I was saying at the start, this cheating business is only a big deal if someone makes it a big deal. The whole problem is all in one's mind. For example, if someone cheats but then they have their memory of those events wiped somehow, then it will have no effect on the relationship. So the effect that it does have must be "made up" in some sense. The cheating itself isn't what hurts the relationship, it's the response. If some guy is neglecting his girlfriend to be with another girl, it isn't the "being with another girl" that's the problem but the neglect of the girlfriend.

Your reasons would make sense, except...

M is in an agreement with W not to sleep with other people. I agree that H is in no agreement with W, however, society, (in the U.S. at least) imposes on us all an agreement not to help someone break the type of agreement M and W have. I'll admit that in recent generations this imposed agreement has gotten weaker, but it is still there. It is considered morally wrong to sleep with someone who is in an exclusive relationship.

There weren't any of these problems in hippy communes. Bring back those good old days

Not by me, apparently. That's where the crux of the issue is. If the person says it is ok, then it's ok.
Part of the reason I dropped the idea that it is morally wrong to sleep with someone who is in an exlusive relationship is that it is not always clear if someone is in an exclusive relationship. There are many kinds of relationships. The line between exclusive and non-exclusive starts to blur. The only people who can say for sure whether or not the relationship is exclusive are the people who are actually in the relationship. When M give H permission to sleep with him, he's effectively saying "this is no longer an exclusive relationship, you've got the all clear".

But he was in an exclusive relationship. Another part of the moral code is that you should inform another person when you are changing your relationship to them. You shouldn't suddenly decide you are no longer exclusive with someone without telling them. Of course, that would be all M's fault. If M had lied to H and told her that his relationship with W was over or not-exclusive, then H wouldn't be at fault here. But if you use a different moral system, that's okay, as long as you remember that people who use the more common moral system will often get angry at you. I think there's even a law in some states where, if you catch a man sleeping with your wife and attack him, you don't get punished as harshly as you would if you attacked him a few days later. Although, of course, you do still get punished.

I agree. That's why M is in the wrong. He changed the relationship to being non-exclusive without first agreeing with W.

M and H freely admit to W that they were together. There is no lying or conspiring going on. M is flat out saying "I stuffed up. Forgive me" and H isn't hiding anything either. There's nothing wrong with H and M being together other than the fact that M had some kind of relationship with W. That relationship is between M and W. It's M's business, not H's. H never made an agreement with W that she would never be with M. If they had been friends such an agreement may have been implicitly made. But they weren't friends.

So, why should H be to blame for this? Aside from the whole "that's just how things are done in the US" mumbo jumbo, I'd like to hear an explanation as to why people think H has done wrong.

to some extent they do.

Oh the fun relationships I could have with these devices. You don't even know.

Yeah, I suppose home wrecking is really frowned upon in the US. It has a bad stigma attached to it. Basically if you're breaking up a relationship you're looked at as doing something wrong. And until tonight I didn't think H was trying to break up M and W's relationship. If you break up a relationship and didn't mean to -- or for that matter, cause a problem for someone that you didn't mean to, IMHO you owe them an apology. Does that make sense?

OTOH If H meant to cause a problem, then no she has nothing to be sorry about, she's just an evil bitch.

Yeah, but I mean, M was horribly drunk -- for the first time in his life... that's gotta account for something... You'd think your close friends would look out for you in this kind of situation, but how fucked up is someone (H) who takes advantage of you, the first time you've been drinking? I guess M was stumbling around and said "I don't feel drunk..." (while unknowningly drunk) and H was like "well that's cause you haven't drunken enough..." wtf?

Actually, H had full knoweldge that M/Ws relationship was completely exclusive.

H hasn't made any contact with W, (and likely will not) and actually probably would have been much happier had W not known.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if H wants to be friends with M then the least she can do is be sorry for the trouble she caused M at the least, instead what does she do? She asks M out earlier tonight. M of course told her to take a hike, but M continues to text/online-chat with H which W is upset about.

I think that if W holds the keys to M and H's friendship in her hands, then the least H could do is contact W, say something nice. I don't think H should get to keep on being a rude bitch to W if W is going to allow her man to be friends with H.

Because it is considered morally wrong in our society to sleep with someone who is in an exclusive relationship. It isn't mumbo jumbo. Societies have been creating rules to get along with themselves for millenia, and the funny thing is that as long as everyone follows those rules, they get along. Yes, the rules are arbitrary, and yes, a wildly different set of rules could work. But these are the rules our (America's) society has created, so these are the rules that Americans have to follow if they want to get along with their fellow Americans.

I'm not sure he should be allowed to make that call when drunk off his rear. Maybe H intended that from the get go; who knows? H is either a lousy friend, or a straight up conniving little bitch.

Madness ....

I would like to know why W didn't go with M to the party? Then M+W+H could've happened. Or WHOOOM (H and a few others). Maybe M thought he had to because H came on to him and he didn't want to look ~~~;D And yes, we want to know, H > || <= W?::)

@Karadoc ~~: As far as we know, did know that was in an exclusive relationship. Afterall, and 's relationship was long term and and were good friends so obviously she knew. Obviously if was under the impression that was single then she wouldn't have knowingly done wrong and wouldn't be liable for her actions. Instead, willing slept with knowing that he was in an exclusive relationship. That's morally wrong.

Claiming that what somebody doesn't know can't hurt them (which is essentially what you were getting at with the loss of memory) doesn't change the moral of the action. I could steal your car, go for a joy ride, and return it exactly as I found it. Does that make it OK to steal your car? The answer is no.

You made an argument that doesn't belong to . In a material sense, you're correct. However, everybody in an exclusive relationship feels possessive of their partner (i.e. my girlfriend). You don't have control of what they do (they're free to do as they please), but you still have every right to have rules in the context of the relationship.

In the same sense, the government doesn't own me, but they can still control my actions to an extent. For example, the law says I'm not allowed to steal a car. I'm still free to steal that car, but if I do (and get caught) there will be consequences.

You argue that cheating isn't a problem in itself. You claim that neglecting the exclusive partner is the problem. I have no doubt in my mind that people cheat without neglecting their exclusive relationship. If you were in an exclusive relationship with somebody would you not mind that they were fucking their boss on the side? I mean, when your girlfriend's at work (or perhaps when you're at work) you obviously aren't with her so I guess she's open game then? Whew, pass that pussy around!

In case it wasn't obvious, I was being sarcastic. The very definition of an exclusive relationship limits sexual and romantic relations to that relationship.

Someone wants to keep his girlfriend and the right to fool around with other girls as well, methinks...;D.

It's not right, unless M would accept the reverse (i.e. W to occasionally fool around with other men).

"Once a dog tastes human blood, you sacrifice him."

In England, we usually allow them one mistake. Second time it's straight down to the vet's. On these terms, W should beat M with a stick until he howls. If he goes sniffing around H's stinky bottom again, it's time to take him behind the barn with a shotgun.

Yes it would sicken me if the genders were reversed. Maybe a little less since I am a male, but not much.

Cheating should be okay or not okay if you want or don't want it to be. The idea that someone should beg on their knees for anything is a decrepit idea.

Even with that aside, we don't know the details. Maybe M has been thinking of leaving W for a long time. Maybe their relationship is mostly over and W is hanging on to the last thread and the real sin is M leading on W. Without more details I have no grounds to make a moral judgment on this cheating scenario, besides the fact that I believe people should confront their lives with confidence and self-esteem. No matter what situation they happen to be involved in at the moment.

Like you said, H didn't commit any wrong, she merely participated in M's wrongdoing. Now read up on aiding and abetting

I actually agree with something bamccaig has to say about relationships and women. I'm scared.

This thread is harder to follow than threads about linux..

This is not cryptography .

M = Me
W = Whoever will agree to sleep with me
H = Hoe

you nasty

Just like you baby!

What Dustin said is what I was trying to communicate. It's not a game over situation just because the societal norm says it must be.

I've never thought it should necessarily end the relationship. but H should at least admit that she was in the wrong too. However, m's future relationships shouldn't depend on what h says because H isn't a part of that relationship. As long as he stays faithful from now on (I'm not going to comment on the chances of that, I don't know enough about the people involved) W shouldn't base her decision on H's words.

There, problem solved. In a way that actually makes sense.

If only there was a D too we could make Weapons of Mass Destruction..

We can make Weapons of Mass Harmfulness.

H hates W, why would H invite W to the party?

WTF

Nope. M keeps verbally planning out a forever with W. Either that or M is just really good at leading W on. M, you fucking wierdo.

Bamccaig is weird like that, one minute he'll be right on, and the next you feel like shooting him -- and everywhere inbetween... how many people have the password to your account bamccaig?

So have you asked out this woman you love yet?

If I wanted to be dating her, I would be. I have a girlfriend, remember?

But if you did, you could restart this thread.

how so? (I feel like this is leading up to a punch line...)

M = Matthew Leverton
W = Wearetheborg
H = HoHo

I figured it out! HoHo you hoe!

/me ques drumroll

You mean she actually stayed with you after that? Wow, girls are weird.

Well, yeah -- after she apologized.

I suspect that a long-handled implement having a thin, flat blade usually set transversely, used to break up the surface of the ground, destroy weeds, etc. would have a hard time posting on a forum.

Nah, computers are pretty user friendly anymore. I suspect even some women have begun to figure out how to use them by now -- let alone your ordinary outdoor garden tools.

I'm training an empty soda can to code for me. Some people say it's stupid, but when I show them some code I've written in the past, they agree that no one will know the difference.

but if you're the only one teaching it, it will never be better than you...

Whats with all the letters?

Now let me tell you a story.

A = One legged woman
B = Sister of one legged woman
C = Sister of sister of one legged woman
D = Sister of her uncles daughter
E = Guy from down the street that is D's uncle
F = Friend of the guy from down the street
Y = Me ( or you, depedning on whos reading this )

So, once, a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

A went to the grocery store when she always did. Nothing irregular happening. Untill E comes and robs that store. And she is the only witness to this crime. E leaves the shop and goes meet F.

Now, Y is a friend of F. When E tells F what he did, F tells Y what E did. So, now that Y knows what E did, he has to tell his friend A what F told him E did. When A hears about what E did, she is outraged, as E is D's uncle. She hurrys to D to tell her. D is suprised when she hears what Y told her that F told him what E did. Now, D tells B. B is the sister of A, but A already knows what E did. So she tells B. B tells C and C goes kill E for doing that. C tells A what she did and A tells Y.

Now, what should Y do?

Foo(&bar);

Fuck letters! Use names! ( not real ones, but use NAMES )

I have never had a girlfriend (i so kewl) so all I can give is this- if I was Willow, I would break up with Mike. Or would I? Well...it's hard to say. So I will just go with this-

M: Mike
W: Willow
H: Haley

What names start with W?
Name (Popularity ranking)
1980:
Wendy (75)
Whitney (219)
Wanda (447)
Wendi (534)
William (766) (wtf?)
Windy (970) (bwahahhaaa)

1992:
Whitney (85)
Wendy (222)
Whitley (845)

2000:
Whitney (270)
Wendy (317)
Willow (760)

Wow... W names got much less common. I am voting for Willow. Because it has two w's and is almost a palindrome.

Yay, me neither! \o/

We should start some "never had a girlfriend" threads so our fellow sufferers don't feel alone

(Cough.)

Anonymity

I chose M and W for Man/Woman, but H was for someone's name.

You know, lets say your friends name is Micheal. You could name him Marwin in the forum. Wendy => Lisa or something. Just not damn letters... Its easier to remember a name then a bunch of letters everywere!

I have a friend who calls herself "K" here, because we uneducated English typesuh would misread her Japanese name as "Karaoke". Good luck with her.

Richard: You're twisted.

IMO, , , and was very easy to follow.

I've had 2, HA! Of course, neither one lasted a week, and I never got past first base, but still... uhm...

Ok, that's not a girlfriend. That's just a date.

A date can last five days?

Try Viagra.

you can have sex with a girl evey day for a week and she is still not consider your girl friend.

she is not your girl friend until she ticks you into saying your her boy friend

She ticks you? ...Are you dating a clock?

Do clocks 'tick you'?

Only in Soviet Russia.

She nagged me into saying I'm her boyfriend! Now I'm ticked off!

Well you could have 5 dates. One week is hardly enough to consider someone else as your girlfriend/boyfriend. Usually, you have to pass the one month mark.

Well in that case I'll never have one.

You are all so wrong... We here do it like this:

And BIIING you got yourself a girlfriend.

I consider a girl my girlfriend when she considers me her boyfriend.

boy: "I consider a girl my girlfriend when she considers me her boyfriend."

man: "she is not your girl friend until she ticks you into saying your her boy friend"

piccolo ftw.