High Fidelity
Fidelity is not an immunity to the attractions of other members of the opposite sex. We don't have a switch we can turn off to say 'Thou shalt not look at another human being'. What fidelity is, in my mind, is not putting yourself in a potentially dangerous position.
To the girl who sleeps with her best friend's boyfriend and says "It just happened", I'd respond that she shouldn't have put herself in a position where that could have just happened. What, when you bumped into him whilst shopping for groceries? I think not.
I wouldn't expect a partner of mine not to find someone else physically and / or mentally attractive. I would however expect that, if he wanted to be with me, he should prevent himself from finding himself in that person's company in circumstances that could lead to infidelity. As I would do the same.
When I went on an overseas business trip with my ex, who had a girlfriend, I should not have got drunk on the plane or spent the entire night downing shots of Vodka until I nearly passed out and inevitably ended up in bed with him.
More to the point, he should not have found himself drinking himself silly and encouraging me to get equally drunk. He should have had a quick meal (not a candlelit restaurant affair) and gone to bed (alone).
We all have self-control, it's just that sometimes we forget how to use it. I know that personally, if I want to be with someone, I will not cheat. I know everyone's different and has different ideas of what counts as infidelity.
A partner of mine is not expected not to want to fuck anyone else ever. He's just expected not to follow up on it. And if he does, he's out the door*. Full stop.
*Unless of course I'm married with babies. I think I might see things a bit differently then. But hey, that's circumstantial.
To the girl who sleeps with her best friend's boyfriend and says "It just happened", I'd respond that she shouldn't have put herself in a position where that could have just happened. What, when you bumped into him whilst shopping for groceries? I think not.
I wouldn't expect a partner of mine not to find someone else physically and / or mentally attractive. I would however expect that, if he wanted to be with me, he should prevent himself from finding himself in that person's company in circumstances that could lead to infidelity. As I would do the same.
When I went on an overseas business trip with my ex, who had a girlfriend, I should not have got drunk on the plane or spent the entire night downing shots of Vodka until I nearly passed out and inevitably ended up in bed with him.
More to the point, he should not have found himself drinking himself silly and encouraging me to get equally drunk. He should have had a quick meal (not a candlelit restaurant affair) and gone to bed (alone).
We all have self-control, it's just that sometimes we forget how to use it. I know that personally, if I want to be with someone, I will not cheat. I know everyone's different and has different ideas of what counts as infidelity.
A partner of mine is not expected not to want to fuck anyone else ever. He's just expected not to follow up on it. And if he does, he's out the door*. Full stop.
*Unless of course I'm married with babies. I think I might see things a bit differently then. But hey, that's circumstantial.
posted by A Girl Like Me | 8:48 pm
Aristoteli; Absolutely. I was about to write what you did, except perhaps a bit more poisonously.
So...
As far as the post goes, what a bunch of BS. Removal of temptation such that fidelity isn't what remains, but all that can remain? That's farcical at best.
Doesn't the Good Book state that God places temptation in our midst to try our faith, and without such temptations our faith is meaningless? Doesn't the Good Book say that without the temptations, and our resistance to them, our faith is undefined and meaningless?
To be honest, I think the Good Book is a bunch of BS too (I only read it to make me a more efficient faith-slayer), but what it describes there is very relevant to this post.
Actually, I wasn't saying that temptation should be removed.
For example, you could go out with friends, start chatting to someone you quite *like*...
Doesn't mean you have to go back to his/her place, does it?
That's what I meant by compromising situations.
Duch: I agree, they are not the same thing. But only in the sense that sex and love aren't the same thing. Fidelity, realistically, is more to do with honesty and respect for one another, rather than not jacking off over your girlfriend's best mate's face.
Illegible: You did say that temptation should be removed, and you just said it again. Where are you drawing a line between a compromising situation or otherwise? If you examine it closely, I think you'll find you're drawing it exactly at where you would shag someone else. That's not fidelity, that's limiting your options such that all that's left is fidelity.
Re: gradients of unfaithfulness - I agree with you. My thoughts on it, in fact, are already in this comment.
Hrm, there are several posts on unfaithfulness flying around. It must be the season for shattering dreams. Bloody Christmas.