Women sometimes cheat on their husbands — but not for the reasons you think

Article here. Excerpt:

'They weren't looking for anyone to support them emotionally - they just wanted men who were sexually compatible.

"They were very practical and methodical in their decision making and then their vetting of who they were going to get involved with," Walker told Business Insider. "And they were very clear it had nothing to do with whether or not he was a nice guy ... So none of the sentimentality that we seem to want to assign women. They talked a lot about how participating in this was sort of this exercise of power and freedom for them."

The women weren't looking for love elsewhere, because all but two of them said they still loved their husbands. They were simply looking to be satisfied in bed.

"The women I spoke to are cheating to stay married," Walker said. "They're not cheating for revenge, or to get out of a marriage, or to get the husband to notice them through bad behaviour. It's none of those things."

Walker explained that they no longer had sex with their husbands at all, or at least their partners weren't bothered about giving them orgasms.
"By outsourcing the sex, they were able to come home and be more like the wife and mother that they really wanted to be."'

Like0 Dislike0


Women cheat on men in ostensibly mono rel'ps as much as do men. But they're inclined to justify it by putting it all on their husbands/bfs. No matter, it comes out the same: dishonesty.

"Outsourcing sex"... LMAO! When men "outsource" sex, the calls for blood fill the night air. Yet when women do it, that's fine. Any man who marries a woman these days and expects her NOT to come up w/ a rationalization to take her pussy out for a walk on the down-low is either an idiot, a fool, or both. I've heard of cases where the bride on her wedding night got caught fucking some guy in the janitor's closet off the hotel lobby. Not that there's anything wrong with it per se... just her new husband didn't know that was part of his new wife's celebration plan. :)

Cheating is a problem because mono rel'p terms are unrealistic and unnatural for ppl of both sexes. Monogamy is not natural. It is an imposed standard. "Socially-constructed" as some might say.

Ppl of both sexes cheat regularly. H@ving and/or wanting mult. sex partners is normal for humans. What isn't normal is making ppl think it isn't.

I'm 100% poly myself. I'm 100% up-front with women I get involved with sexually. I don't do monogamy and not only don't expect you to but encourage you not to try. They sometimes can't quite believe me. They think it's a shit test. But is isn't. I simply already know that in any given personal rel'p, no matter how good things are, your mate will cheat. So don't ask them not to. Give them a blank hall pass. Fuck whoever you want to, enjoy yourself. Since adopting this attitude, I'm much happier and so are any women I happen to start banging. It works out SOOO much better. And no one has to lie, live a double-life, etc.

Standard LTRs largely fail and are doomed from the outset bc the typical terms are onerous and unrealistic. Throw out the unrealistic terms then poof, LTRs start working again. Imagine that!

Like0 Dislike0

What a joke. This article say more about bias in social science reseach than anything else.
The author and the reseacher, support the use of a person as a prop in a woman's life. The unchallenged message is, "you can have it all", family career and sex. A man is nothing more than a tick-box on your bucket list, whether its the husband validating you as a mother, or the lover validating you as an empowered sensual woman. OMG

Like0 Dislike0

The thing about poly relationships is that typically only alpha males can pull them off.  There have been some studies to indicate that women would rather share an alpha male then be with a low ranking beta.  What happens is that alpha males have multiple women, higher betas have one, and low betas have none.

So for an average man, who is unwilling to invest financially into dating (always goes "dutch"), it would be very difficult to get one woman, let alone several, unless he is 70+ and mostly dating widows. So Matt, if you are  under 70 and having sex with multiple women without paying them in some way, you are like someone who has been struck by lightening - one in a million. Enjoy your status!

Like0 Dislike0

when a man goes outside of marriage for sex and helps create a new life,
he can be expected to pay pay pay. if it causes a divorce, he will pay both women. iow, he will be expected to support 2 families. rich guys like robin Williams get hit by multiple c.s. awards and multiple alimony awards, sometimes forever. sometimes women just don't tell the real father, if she is married, and some poor chump raises another man's child. if a divorce ensues, he is then expected to pay c.s. for a child that isn't his. the woman can even go to the real father, tell him the truth, and play both hands. happens more than u would think.

when a woman cheats and a new life is created, the husband usually has no recourse but to accept what she has done, and support same, if he finds out. most courts will not allow d.n.a. testing where a marriage license exists. its called 'presumption of fatherhood/paternity', and he will get tapped for c.s. for another man's child, no matter what. millions of guys support other men's children.

nowadays d.n.a. testing is everywhere. men are finding out what our forefathers could only wonder about.

just another 'perk' men have in our society.

Like0 Dislike0

... solution: don't get married. Really, 90% of the hazards associated with h@ving a rel'p of any kind w/ a woman go away if you minimize the time spent in their company. Clearly, marriage addresses much of this. Given how readily it appears so many women will either make things up to suit their aspirations or practice double-think and re-arrange the narrative of some series of events to make themselves out to be some kind of victim, the safest bet is minimal contact.

Alas it is a shame it's come to this and I don't make the recommendation lightly. Personally I have no trouble being single and never have. Not everyone is like me though. Some percentage of any given group of ppl, incl. men, are the kind who really feel the need to be in an LTR. And these men are "hopelessly" heterosexual. If they cannot or will not re-adjust their own sense of what they need in life so that it excludes an LTR w/ a female, they have to live with the risks associated with cohabiting and/or being married to one. So long as any given man goes into that deal with eyes wide open, at least no one can say he wasn't warned.

If marriage were a consumer product, it would justifiably come with a large red label on it reading "WARNING: Highly Hazardous Activity Especially For Men". Then the fine print'd have stats on the state's laws re paternity, stats on how "equitably" joint assets are divided, how many divorces are complicated by accusations of DV/child abuse made by whom, etc. Then both parties need to sign informed consent waivers.

Marriage no longer serves any purpose which it was invented to serve. The purpose(s) in question are no longer extant. The need for it is vacated. All that's left is a series of woefully outdated legal norms that penalize men in marriage arising from outdated assumptions about society and sex roles. The drill is simple: Just never sign a marriage license nor stand in front of a judge/clergyman and say "I do". You can avoid much of the risks associated with being around females if you just don't marry one. As for at other times, keep contact minimal and as-needed. If you do decide to have a gf / fwb / bang hookers, stay focused on what you want from them. Once they start pestering you for "more", walk away. It's the beginning of the end. The sooner you end it, the better.

There's the way things ought to be, and the way they are. The more you live in touch w/ the way they are, and adjust expectations accordingly, the happier you are. At least, that idea works REALLY well for me.

Like0 Dislike0

Am I REALLY an alpha male? Why Kris, you flatter me! :)

Polyamory ("poly") isn't polygamy (1 man, n women), nor polyandry (1 woman, n men). It's not assumed regarding sexes. The typical poly arrangement is either a triad or quad, or a primary-secondary(ies) thing. Triads are three ppl involved with one another, not 1 involved with 2, but those 2 involved with the 1. That's the "sister wives" thing. That's polygamy, not polyamory. Triads are either MMF or MFF where A and B are together, B and C are together, and A and C are together. Quads are like triads only it's 4 people.

Primary-secondary is typically two people involved as primaries to one another (eg, a married or LTR cpl) while one or both have one or more bfs or gfs on the side. That is the most common form of poly and it helps keep the primary rel'p viable for many ppl. Mono is often boring and leads to bed-death over time. For many married cpls, going poly allows them to stay together and actually brings them closer.

In my case, I am what's known as a "single poly" person. This is a poly person who is not in a primary rel'p but is involved (or willing to be, when not) with one or more others who are also involved with one or more others. Poly ppl who have rel'ps with another person's primary partners typically don't regard their rel'p with that person as their primary. Thus a poly person can be in 1+ rel'ps w/ others while still effectively being "single" in the poly sense that they do not have (and at times don't want) a primary rel'p w/ anyone. "Primary" is defined as paramount, ie, that rel'p and its needs come before the needs of the secondary rel'p(s).

Ppl who are in secondary rel'ps to ppl in primaries w/ someone else know this and accept it. Playing well in poly circles means the secondary doesn't try to usurp the primary's partner. (BTW, the person or ppl who are involved with someone you're involved with are known as "metamours" to you and each other.) You may be surprised to learn that this kind of arrangement works out well much of the time. Sometimes jealousy/possessiveness comes up in poly rel'ps but poly ppl stop to discuss it and work through it. The more typical response among non-poly ppl is to start fighting over it instead of owning the feelings and working through them.

One critical diff in the rel'p model is that jealousy/possessiveness is viewed as a sign of insecurity, something the feeler of it has to own and work on. In typical rel'ps, jealousy/possessiveness is instead viewed as a sign of rel'p dedication or a form of righteous indignation. A lot of otherwise perfectly good LTRs end due to jealousy, even when it isn't warranted.

Admittedly, poly is not currently normative in the US. But it's becoming a lot more common these days (esp. among Millennials) as the old mono model has shown itself to be unworkable in most cases.

Rel'p systems should serve the needs/wants of the ppl in them, not the other way around. Problems arise when legal systems get built up around rel'p model assumptions (eg, marriage) and then the rel'p model changes. In that case, it's then the law that fails to serve the ppl and instead insists that the ppl serve the law. And that's ass-backwards. That's what we have now with marriage, esp. if you happen to be a man.

Like0 Dislike0

Well this is awkward....

I wasn't calling you an alpha male, Matt, but I am calling you extremely lucky :)

In today's world, alpha males have above average careers and above average salaries and they usually pay for female companionship in some way (for example meet a woman at a bar, buy her a drink.  Ask a woman out on a date and pay for the date)

Alpha males often have more than one woman, it could be in any variety of ways.  For example, being single yet sleeping with different women fairly often, or the man could have an open poly relationship with his main female partner, or he could have a partner who has not agreed to poly, so the alpha male keeps it on the down low from her.  We see all of these situations fairly often with athletes and entertainers, it is not rare nor surprising.  It is generally thought that a man can have as many women as he can afford.

However, it is very RARE (hence the "one in a million" phrase, I used in my comment above) for a NON-alpha male AND particularly one who does not pay for dates,  to have multiple women willing to have sex with them in the form of an open poly relationship. - So Matt, although you are not alpha (unless I have made a mistake and you DO have an above average career and salary).  But you, my friend, are a very lucky duck!

Like0 Dislike0

PS -
I once infiltrated several swingers/poly groups (my friend is a private investigator and I was helping her with a case). I only participated online, but here's what it was like:

Anyone can sign up and create a profile, I saw mostly single men and couples (often married couples) I don't recall seeing any single women.    Of the couples, they nearly all consisted of western older men (aged 50 to 70) with young Asian/Russian/Ukraine  wives/girlfriends.  Often a married couples profile would only consist of a pic of the wife/girlfriend, and the man would do all the seeking and planning for poly dating or swinging.

To actually participate in any physical meetings, the rule for all the sites I joined,  was that a man had to bring at least one woman who was open to poly relationships, otherwise just a bunch of single men would show up.  Many men spoke about how difficult this was.  So why were nearly all the women participating from poor Asian counties or Russia or Ukraine?  Because by marrying or partnering into this, they were getting citizenship into a better country (the man always pays for this).  For those that were being "kept" in their native countries, the men were supporting them (paying their living expenses, in poor countries, this could be about $300/month).

The bottom line, was there was ALWAYS  financial benefit to the women.

...and sites like OK Cupid, Plenty of Fish or even Craigslist NSA ads, any ad that is a female advertising free sex, you are most likely either going to get set up for robbery, or it is just a bait and switch for prostitution (some men dont even recognize the prostitution, the woman just says she needs $100 for "cab fare") or she just needs a drug fix.  There may be  few willing drug-free females giving sex for the price of a fancy meal, entertainment or free travel, but that's about the cheapest sex being offered.

Like0 Dislike0

Promise. :)

And you're right, I'm no alpha male type with oodles of fawning hot women attracted to my wealth, power, and superior DNA. I live a completely ordinary, workaday, humdrum life, more of an existence really, no fanfare, drama, etc., just a plain old low-key puttering about. I'll probably be found alone when I'm 90, a half-starved old bag of bones, with only the meowing of my hungry cats to herald my departure to whatever-is-next-if-anything, said meowing alerting the neighbors to my fatal fate.

My aged remains will likely be cremated by the county along with the rest of the unclaimed bodies. And there shall exist as my legacy only this web site and a fair number of very hungry cats who waited days for their kibble... but got a head start by snacking some off my stringy remains. (Yeah, shit like that does in fact happen.)

But it could be much worse. I could've had a rousingly successful career and be known by millions, maybe billions, rich and famous, only in my late 70s to be publicly villified and have my entire career in entertainment vacated based an a few anonymous claims of some kind about me. I am of course referring here to Garrison Keillor.

So maybe here in The Age of Vile Feminism, an obscure existence for a man isn't so bad. After all, one way to avoid being mugged, or defrauded, or blackmailed, etc., is simply to have nothing worth stealing. :)

Like0 Dislike0