Is cheating natural?

a reply to: Annee

I obviously know humans are animals, that's why I said "what distinguishes us from the OTHER animals"... Ok, keep your opinion and I keep mine... This is going nowhere.

In reading the OP, I want to ask- what do you mean by cheating?

Cheating in general, or are we talking about relationships?

On cheating in general (in business, in a boardgame, etc.) there doesn't seem to be any clear cut natural instincts. Humans and other animals can and do use deception to increase survival chances.
Though some instinctual behaviors indicate that animals can have a sense of justice, or a form of ethic, theirs has much to do with group identification- members of their own group, they will be concerned about being "fair" with, but not of another group or species. You can see this with humans as well.

Some cultures embrace cheating and it is socially accepted. In a socialistic type of system, I have seen that it is considered healthy to cheat a bit (and expected). It is considered mature self expression as an individual. If you don't, you are immature and not yet "individualized" in will. So the person who does not cheat is less respected than the one that does.

On the subject of cheating in monogamous relationships.... there is different ideas of that. Sexual infidelity, emotional infidelity...?

Is it cheating to have a deep emotional tie to a person of the opposite who is not your life partner? Even if there is no sex involved?
I find that a natural and instinctive thing for me (a woman). I have troublenot loving other people!
I don't feel my ties and emotions for my husband to change in the slightest bit if I become emotionally engaged with another man.

Is cheating sexual? Men claim they feel a desire to have multiple sexual conquests, and that doesn't effect their feelings and bonds with their female partner at all.
Some women say the same too, but it seems to be less of them.

There is much claim that our "natural" instinct is to be sexually active with many partners. Okay... I was raised in a "free love" environment- my parents had various partners, they had group sex, they were a threesome for a while, I was taught that this is what is best and right. I now live in a country that is pretty open about sex, and less concerned with fidelity, and am at an age where it seems everyone is expected to become "libertin" (the french equivalent of swinging, very popular with the 40 and 50 year olds who finally have children out of the house).

So.... I would expect that I would find this all very easy to engage in, right?
Nope. I have made great effort- I went to swinging clubs with my husband to check it out, and my repulsion was visceral, beyond my minds ability to repress or overcome. Letting a stranger touch me sexually, or enter my body awakens every inch of survival instinct I have. I am not concerned about my mate having sex with others- I feel safe in his feelings and our commitment to each other- even if he were to have sex with another woman.

But I feel terribly bad about this inability to be sexually "free"- I feel like a freak. If it is supposed to be "natural" why, with the education I had, and my whole environment supporting it, can't I do it???

I need to establish a bond of trust with someone before being sexually intimate. I feel vulnerable in intercourse. I have tried talking with other swingers, discussing with them on forums, trying to change my perception, and none of it worked.
From once feeling a bit embarrassed at my sexual appetite and creativity with my mate, I know feel there is something inherently wrong with me. A genetic mishap?

If it is "natural" to cheat, then I guess there are some people who are born with handicaps in that area.Maybe there is a spectrum of libido, like the autistic spectrum.... I don't know. The question is still as sensitive one for me, and I have not come to a firm opinion on it yet (hence my long winded personal whining here....)

a reply to: Bluesma

I meant cheating in general but it can also be meant for cheating in relationships as well. because I still think that fits the general definition of cheating. Your cheating to gain an advantage in the relationship you have with the person

I don't know if this question has been asked yet but who is more likely to cheat the man or the woman? Personally I'm not sure if it's even possible to figure that out.There's men who don't cheat there's men who do and there's woman who cheat and woman who don't.Still I just it would be a question that I thought many would wanna answer and thought there would be some interesting ones.

a reply to: American-philosopher

Depends on what you mean by "cheating" and what you mean by "natural".

There are animals that have sex with more than one partner at a time.

I don't see any alternative to cheating being natural. I think everything human-made is a natural part of the environment, because people are inherently natural. By extension, everything they create is natural. If you have some kind of distinction to make between humans and animals, it has to have no metaphorical equivalent in any other species of animal. It must be completely and utterly unique to people.

a reply to: American-philosopher

There is a difference between what is natural and what is moral. I know this isn't exactly what you are asking, but it is the reason why many people pose questions about things like this. They are trying to make bad behavior acceptable in their minds somehow. Many people justify an action as moral or at least acceptable because it is "natural". This is not true however. Honesty is moral. Keeping promises is moral. Giving into biological imperatives is not necessarily moral, and in fact, can often lead to a great deal of suffering for ourselves and others.

To think about it from a purely social psychology perspective, the trick is learning when it is appropriate to act on the biology vs. maintaining (or at least not risking) those social relationships. You could say that both are "natural". In my experience, from a strictly self-serving perspective, maintaining the social relationships works out better in the end. From a moral perspective, I hurt less people if I keep the opportunistic, primal primate in check. Cheating is "natural" but lying is wrong and lying to someone you care about is kind of sick.

Biologically, males are driven to want to mate with as many partners as possible.

Males are forced to repress these urges in modern society, as we view monogamy as an ideal to strive for. Monogamy is diametrically opposed to what humans did for hundreds of thousands of years prior to the relatively recent formation of society.

So, we hold this lofty ideal of monogamy on high -- yet our biological programming tells us, "MATE! MATE! MATE!".

It isn't surprising people cheat.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Unfortunately, a conflicted "I can't help myself" excuse is exactly what someone who willingly chose to cheat without any negative repercussions would say.

a reply to: zackli

If there were no negative consequences why make an excuse?

a reply to: zackli

We have these things called hormones that can drive us to do all kinds of crazy things. Your be surprised at how chemical differences in your brain can effect you.

How you feel influences your emotions, your emotions influence your actions.

Even tweaking your gut bacteria with priobotics can alleviate depression in some people. Men with low testosterone can feel lethargic, causing all kinds of social and work-related problems.

So, sex hormones urging us to "mate" can drive people to do things their brain tells them society doesn't allow. We've built an artificial structure of monogamy. The majority of human existence was lived in monogamy, so when we force ourselves to conform to it -- it's not surprising to find some people having a hard time falling in line.

a reply to: corvuscorrax

I think I was tired when I wrote that, because I can't decipher what that meant.

What the rest of the post means is that saying you could not control yourself works to explain your transgression in both the case where you could control yourself and the case where you genuinely could not. It is not possible to tell which it is based solely upon that information.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

That is a wonderful explanation, and I'm sure it is true. My problem is not with the veracity of the science, it is with the consistency of the explanations a person uses, both to themselves and to others, about their behavior.