Early yesterday morning, a conversation about men cheating on their wives or girlfriends broke the naivety of some amongst us prior to timing in for work. Enlightening viewpoints from opposing sides were shed. From that of our end, the women were quite surprised to find out likely reasons as to why. The most intriguing revelation for them though was how a female’s sexual organ could possibly differ from another. It was bared when one female colleague expressed how a man could find satisfaction from having to have another when in fact, according to her, vaginas are all in the same way ‘holes’ if only for its counterpart’s intended purpose.
From there on, it was raised why is it that infidelity has to be correlated with sex… Sex isn’t the only reason as to why men cheat. While sex poses as (possibly) an irresistible factor in luring men into such inducement, it’s actually what drove him into it that triggered such. Sex is such a unifying bond that it seems to attach the involved twosome (literally as well). Thus, sex with another other than your legitimate partner becomes the ultimate form of cheating (or so they think). Subsequently, in the absence of it, “Nothing happened to us!” apparently appeases the supposedly aggrieved party. In that case, are the feelings involved immaterial? Does it qualify having casual sex to be more unacceptable than getting involved with, say, someone whom emotions were invested with?
Under such consideration that sex isn’t the only ground for unfaithfulness, why do men cheat? Differentiating that query answerable by reasons such as immaturity, discontented, “men will be men” kind of logic, the lust for the forbidden, deprived, weak or what have you from that of a more considerable inquiry based on the underlying cause, the question will be - what leads men into sailing in more than one river:
From there on, it was raised why is it that infidelity has to be correlated with sex… Sex isn’t the only reason as to why men cheat. While sex poses as (possibly) an irresistible factor in luring men into such inducement, it’s actually what drove him into it that triggered such. Sex is such a unifying bond that it seems to attach the involved twosome (literally as well). Thus, sex with another other than your legitimate partner becomes the ultimate form of cheating (or so they think). Subsequently, in the absence of it, “Nothing happened to us!” apparently appeases the supposedly aggrieved party. In that case, are the feelings involved immaterial? Does it qualify having casual sex to be more unacceptable than getting involved with, say, someone whom emotions were invested with?
Under such consideration that sex isn’t the only ground for unfaithfulness, why do men cheat? Differentiating that query answerable by reasons such as immaturity, discontented, “men will be men” kind of logic, the lust for the forbidden, deprived, weak or what have you from that of a more considerable inquiry based on the underlying cause, the question will be - what leads men into sailing in more than one river:
1. "Women on top"
There are those who deem cheating or any wrongdoing against them as something that isn’t justifiable no matter what. It is such belief that gives such kind of woman haughtiness in impulsively acting with insensitivity towards her man with the belief that despite such, he is still expected to be accepting being in an exclusive commitment with her. A seeming allegiance taken for granted where he is to accept her imperfections since that’s how love is believed to be rather than to mutually self-initiate in meeting halfway for harmony amidst differing personalities as that is how love should be. Breaking up, calling it quits or letting go is easier said than done. Hence, incompatibility isn’t the issue but who’s at fault were pride overpowers the sanity of each other making parting ways a difficult option leaving either one (or in this case, the men) with what other opportunity?
2. “Women on a mission”
A missionary position could be boring for either one but worse when it’s selfishly preferred because the one assuming the position is conventionally insipid. More than the (other) positions, unaccommodating to assume the responsibility to intimately correspond shuts the interchange even before an anticipated collaboration comes. Sexual intercourse as it suggests is an interaction. A nourishing exchange of ideas wherein when communicated well, what could not be addressed by either one?
3. Women vs. Women
What triggers it further is the fact that women because of such doubt engage in low self-esteem and conjure up their possible competitor as an irresistible prize as compared to their insecurity-caused-self-proclaimed so-so status. On the other hand, they become overbearingly confident in measuring up themselves against alleged rival. Either way, they’re pushing men away. If they’re expecting their men to be the gentleman-type who’d assure them of relationship stability, they’re just contradicting their assumption about men. And in being those kinds of women that they are, are they actually presenting us with choices?