COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Girls who like married men

littlecordelera said:
That's correct. I don't believe that lust, an entire human emotion, goes away just because we go through a ritual and call ourselves "married."
Click to expand...

I agree, but lust is only in the mix of "why people cheat," and not really even mentioned as such in the research (in the guise of higher sex drive, impulsiveness...). It's far more complex than just wanting sex with someone new.
 
jomar said:
I agree, but lust is only in the mix of "why people cheat," and not really even mentioned as such in the research (in the guise of higher sex drive, impulsiveness...). It's far more complex than just wanting sex with someone new.
Click to expand...


Yes, but again I think I will have to agree with Littlecordelera. It isn't only lust that makes people cheat but lust is the key ingredient. Without it the cheating more than likely doesn't occur and on its own it is enough to lead to extra-marital sex.

Yes women may be seeking comfort or appreciation more so than guys, but it is the lust that will trigger usually her actions.
 
jomar said:
But your emphasis is strongly that people cheat just to have sex with someone new. I think it's usually the opposite. That it is typically not the case simply to have sex with someone else. I read a study awhile back that supported my thinking (which is more of a duh study)...for women an affair is "almost always" because she is seeking something missing in her marriage (emotional intimacy, affection, etc...as in, feeling desired). For men, there is an element of opportunity (if no one will ever know...) that is sex for sex's sake, so I'll grant you that, though more often men too, are seeking something missing in the marriage.
Click to expand...

A study I saw a while back concluded that the root of most cheating is lack of appreciation, or at least the sense of it. So, what sends us to the arms and beds of another is the desire to be and feel appreciated. Sounds so simple, right?

Clearly there are some who just do it for adventure - but for many it is that desire to find that elusive "something missing" in the relationship that you wrote about. Oh, and the study suggested that that reason was at or near the top of the list of reasons for cheating for both men and women.
 
HornyVikingMN said:
A study I saw a while back concluded that the root of most cheating is lack of appreciation, or at least the sense of it. So, what sends us to the arms and beds of another is the desire to be and feel appreciated. Sounds so simple, right?

Clearly there are some who just do it for adventure - but for many it is that desire to find that elusive "something missing" in the relationship that you wrote about. Oh, and the study suggested that that reason was at or near the top of the list of reasons for cheating for both men and women.
Click to expand...


Seems to me that just about any study is based upon the feedback provided by the people interviewed - presumably the cheaters. Any conclusion is asked upon the efficacy of their answers. Even if the survey is anonymous and there is limited reason to lie, most people lie to themselves. It is a lot easier to find a reason than to say it is purely for lust because that would mean accepting their own shallowness.
 
policywank said:
Yes, but again I think I will have to agree with Littlecordelera. It isn't only lust that makes people cheat but lust is the key ingredient. Without it the cheating more than likely doesn't occur and on its own it is enough to lead to extra-marital sex.

Yes women may be seeking comfort or appreciation more so than guys, but it is the lust that will trigger usually her actions.
Click to expand...


policywank said:
Seems to me that just about any study is based upon the feedback provided by the people interviewed - presumably the cheaters. Any conclusion is asked upon the efficacy of their answers. Even if the survey is anonymous and there is limited reason to lie, most people lie to themselves. It is a lot easier to find a reason than to say it is purely for lust because that would mean accepting their own shallowness.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how you are defining it... Of course there will be an attraction and connection, but factors lead up to people having sexual feelings for others in the cases we're speaking of.

You're citing opinion, which is fine, but it's not what the research is indicating. You are also disavowing the research based on opinion. Which is also fine as long as you both understand that.
 
Last edited:
jomar said:
I guess it depends on how you are defining it... Of course there will be an attraction and connection, but factors lead up to people having sexual feelings for others in the cases we're speaking of.

You're citing opinion, which is fine, but it's not what the research is indicating. You are also disavowing the research based on opinion. Which is also fine as long as you both understand that.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I am stating opinion and I make no bones about that. However, I am not stating opinions about conclusions so much as about the nature of the data inputs. What I am also observing is that the research is a compilation of what people state are their reasons for cheating. Whether their stated reasons are in fact their real reason is open to question.

Most studies tackle a given subject based upon a given testing and statistical approach. The people who run them understand that often no one approach is absolutely definitive. Even in hard science (biology, chemistry, physics) each study or sample group or question set or whatever has its own biases and set of resulting strengths and weaknesses. Social sciences are far less precise.

The strength of this sort of polling data (why do people cheat?) is that it is reasonably easy to find a broad cross section of real cheaters so there is a good sample set. The weakness or rather unpredictable aspect of the sample is that the people giving response are themselves expressing opinion in relation to a topic on which they are not entirely objective. The sample size and statistical approach may mitigate individual biases but would not reasonably be expected to entirely mitigate our bias in how we view ourselves. We can all imagine more extreme examples of polls that would be biased by the input data - the fact that we have a relatively liberal society in the west does not mean our responses would be 100% objective, infinitely insightful and unfailingly true and accurate.

All the scientific rigour available can't overcome a bias or imperfection in the data set. That is the point I am making. Whether that is the case or not here is not something I can't ascertain. But I know few "cheating" spouses are entirely honest with themselves let alone a researcher. Therefore, I can see that we aren't dealing with purely scientific inputs so we shouldn't expect entirely scientific outputs.

Does that mean my opinions are any more accurate? Fuck no, of course not. However, I can see that the data set is biased so my view of that bias is as valid as any other at this stage.
 
@policywank: you've hit the nail on the head. Self-reported data from a population that's known to be unreliable on the subject being studied is a double whammy. I'm also of the opinion that motivations vary widely enough that it would be foolish to try to describe the phenomenon in simple terms.
 
Hi PW, I do know more thn you might guess about research so I won't champion surveys, though will remind you that sophisticated businesses are built on them and they can be quite accurate.

I also don't disagree that people rationalize things and that's probably in the mix somewhere. And I don't know the particulars of the research, but if I were doing it I'd try to tee it up so that folk are swayed toward the bartender syndrome...total honesty with a stranger. Point is, the same things are coming up over time and across studies, and lust isn't a driving force.

But, we're going to start splitting hairs since there does have to be a go switch. My whole contention is that for most cheaters, a lot of stuff has to fall into place before the switch is flipped. I think people who cheat simpy due to and because of lust are in the minority...my opinion based on the world around me.

ETA: Upon more reflection...I have talked with more than a few cheaters over the years and most knew why they cheated. Some didn't, like the guy who started to stray when depressed, or the compulsive guy who might have had a sex addiction. But for the most part, people knew, though might have been shocked to find themselves in that position. Your experience?
 
Last edited:
jomar said:
Hi PW, I do know more thn you might guess about research so I won't champion surveys, though will remind you that sophisticated businesses are built on them and they can be quite accurate.

I also don't disagree that people rationalize things and that's probably in the mix somewhere. And I don't know the particulars of the research, but if I were doing it I'd try to tee it up so that folk are swayed toward the bartender syndrome...total honesty with a stranger. Point is, the same things are coming up over time and across studies, and lust isn't a driving force.

But, we're going to start splitting hairs since there does have to be a go switch. My whole contention is that for most cheaters, a lot of stuff has to fall into place before the switch is flipped. I think people who cheat simpy due to and because of lust are in the minority...my opinion based on the world around me.

ETA: Upon more reflection...I have talked with more than a few cheaters over the years and most knew why they cheated. Some didn't, like the guy who started to stray when depressed, or the compulsive guy who might have had a sex addiction. But for the most part, people knew, though might have been shocked to find themselves in that position. Your experience?
Click to expand...


As you say surveys are a critical tool for a lot of business decisions as well as political policy and other decisions. They are broadly separated into qualitative and quantitative research covering everything from real hard data analysis to collection of opinions. How many times someone has cheated is quantitative research. Why they cheat is qualitative.

This type of research is a critical tool for testing hypotheses across a range of applications. However, the efficacy of any research conclusion is a function of how it was conducted and the abilities of the person interpreting the data. Few if any are perfectly definitive except when dealing with fairly simple interactions. In my humble opinion most of what is presented as research is flawed in two fundamental ways. Firstly, people tend to misrepresent results to imply excessive certainty. A real researcher will understand and impart the imperfections in the data or analysis - at best any serious study of a complex issue will demonstrate trends and probabilities not certainty or perfectly correlated outcomes. Secondly, audiences wrongly assume that if it comes from anything like a scientific place it is automatically perfectly accurate.

Take climate change as an example. Years of studies show that on balance it is highly likely that the world is warming up and sea levels will rise. I think that is all true. But in very simple mathematical terms it works out to for example a 50% chance that we have a notable problem, a 25% chance that we have a huge problem and a 25% chance that we have no problem at all. Still pretty compelling but not the same as 100% chance we have precisely this or that problem. The researcher that says sea levels will rise a specific amount by a specific date is sighting one of thousands of test models analyzed - the one she is sighting may be her expected case but she isn't actually saying the outcome will be precisely this (unless she is an arrogant tool).

As you note, one would hope that this type of survey would start with a scenario where the subject can be honest. But that can never be perfect. As an extreme imagine polling women in Saudi Arabia on cheating - no matter how safe you make the interaction they aren't admitting something that could cost them their lives. Obviously we don't have that situation but we aren't perfectly free of judgment either. And the core issue is how to control for people's own inclination to fool themselves. The safe environment survey only has efficacy if the subject has opened themselves up to the truth. And I think that a cheating spouse is the classic example of a person with a lifetime of expectations and smothering societal pressures that impair their ability to be honest with themselves.

In my experience most people have a view as to why they cheated. However, those views range from the very honest to the highly self-delusional. I think women in particular have a hard time being honest with ourselves - we are saddled with centuries of expectations imposed upon us and reinforced at every turn.

First on the list is difficulty in accepting sex for its own sake. Even women who enjoy the physical act are hardwired to believe it is better with someone you love. Either gender may genuinely feel that sex is better with someone you love, but women are compelled to feel this way by their assigned role in society (otherwise we are sluts). No matter how much men say otherwise they (generically speaking) will punish a woman who enjoys and engages in casual sex purely for her own satisfaction. And other women will do the same either because it is how they were taught to think or because they find promiscuous women threatening. The women attending "slut walks" are making the point that our attire doesn't give men the right to commit sexual assault, but most still disapprove of women who are actually promiscuous - its ok to dress slutty but still not ok to be slutty.

For married women cheating is made somewhat ok if it is an outlet for something else. Revenge, dissatisfaction with some aspect of the marriage, etc. It is a weird set of lies we tell ourselves but much as with single women we are compelled to provide "cover" for our activities. Society has a very hard time with women who enjoy sex solely for its own sake. Even porn stars must be doing it for the money or because they are under duress and it is made ok only by the proposition that they aren't really enjoying themselves. It is ok to prostitute ourselves to men in any number of ways - literally or figuratively - as long as we don't enjoy it.

So to try to see through my own fog and that of most women I ask "is there a time when cheating occurs absent lust for the other man/woman?" Not very often. It may not be the only factor but we generally don't fuck people we don't find at all attractive. Maybe someone seems more attractive because they offer something in particular that we have been missing and that missing something may or may not be physical, but the attraction is there.

Women in particular have a thousand ways of denigrating their spouse or glorifying a lover rather than just saying I wanted to fuck him. We will tell ourselves we fucked him because he listens better or understands more or, or, or - no we wanted to fuck him and those reasons helped justify our actions. Now if our husband had been more attentive or whatever maybe we wouldn't have fucked the other guy but we probably still wanted to or would have if our spouses hadn't recaptured our attention.

Women are attracted to different things than men, but we generally don't fuck guys that we don't find attractive especially if it might endanger our marriage. The path to desire may be complicated and circuitous, but it is still desire that gets me to peel off my panties. If the other man is a great listener we may start with just coffee, but I am not going to a hotel with him in the middle of the afternoon unless I am hot for him. Maybe that lust wouldn't have come about if not for a host of other factors, but in that moment lust was more than likely the driver.
 
policywank said:
As you say surveys are a critical tool for a lot of business decisions as well as political policy and other decisions. They are broadly separated into qualitative and quantitative research covering everything from real hard data analysis to collection of opinions. How many times someone has cheated is quantitative research. Why they cheat is qualitative.

This type of research is a critical tool for testing hypotheses across a range of applications. However, the efficacy of any research conclusion is a function of how it was conducted and the abilities of the person interpreting the data. Few if any are perfectly definitive except when dealing with fairly simple interactions. In my humble opinion most of what is presented as research is flawed in two fundamental ways. Firstly, people tend to misrepresent results to imply excessive certainty. A real researcher will understand and impart the imperfections in the data or analysis - at best any serious study of a complex issue will demonstrate trends and probabilities not certainty or perfectly correlated outcomes. Secondly, audiences wrongly assume that if it comes from anything like a scientific place it is automatically perfectly accurate.

Take climate change as an example. Years of studies show that on balance it is highly likely that the world is warming up and sea levels will rise. I think that is all true. But in very simple mathematical terms it works out to for example a 50% chance that we have a notable problem, a 25% chance that we have a huge problem and a 25% chance that we have no problem at all. Still pretty compelling but not the same as 100% chance we have precisely this or that problem. The researcher that says sea levels will rise a specific amount by a specific date is sighting one of thousands of test models analyzed - the one she is sighting may be her expected case but she isn't actually saying the outcome will be precisely this (unless she is an arrogant tool).

As you note, one would hope that this type of survey would start with a scenario where the subject can be honest. But that can never be perfect. As an extreme imagine polling women in Saudi Arabia on cheating - no matter how safe you make the interaction they aren't admitting something that could cost them their lives. Obviously we don't have that situation but we aren't perfectly free of judgment either. And the core issue is how to control for people's own inclination to fool themselves. The safe environment survey only has efficacy if the subject has opened themselves up to the truth. And I think that a cheating spouse is the classic example of a person with a lifetime of expectations and smothering societal pressures that impair their ability to be honest with themselves.

In my experience most people have a view as to why they cheated. However, those views range from the very honest to the highly self-delusional. I think women in particular have a hard time being honest with ourselves - we are saddled with centuries of expectations imposed upon us and reinforced at every turn.

First on the list is difficulty in accepting sex for its own sake. Even women who enjoy the physical act are hardwired to believe it is better with someone you love. Either gender may genuinely feel that sex is better with someone you love, but women are compelled to feel this way by their assigned role in society (otherwise we are sluts). No matter how much men say otherwise they (generically speaking) will punish a woman who enjoys and engages in casual sex purely for her own satisfaction. And other women will do the same either because it is how they were taught to think or because they find promiscuous women threatening. The women attending "slut walks" are making the point that our attire doesn't give men the right to commit sexual assault, but most still disapprove of women who are actually promiscuous - its ok to dress slutty but still not ok to be slutty.

For married women cheating is made somewhat ok if it is an outlet for something else. Revenge, dissatisfaction with some aspect of the marriage, etc. It is a weird set of lies we tell ourselves but much as with single women we are compelled to provide "cover" for our activities. Society has a very hard time with women who enjoy sex solely for its own sake. Even porn stars must be doing it for the money or because they are under duress and it is made ok only by the proposition that they aren't really enjoying themselves. It is ok to prostitute ourselves to men in any number of ways - literally or figuratively - as long as we don't enjoy it.

So to try to see through my own fog and that of most women I ask "is there a time when cheating occurs absent lust for the other man/woman?" Not very often. It may not be the only factor but we generally don't fuck people we don't find at all attractive. Maybe someone seems more attractive because they offer something in particular that we have been missing and that missing something may or may not be physical, but the attraction is there.

Women in particular have a thousand ways of denigrating their spouse or glorifying a lover rather than just saying I wanted to fuck him. We will tell ourselves we fucked him because he listens better or understands more or, or, or - no we wanted to fuck him and those reasons helped justify our actions. Now if our husband had been more attentive or whatever maybe we wouldn't have fucked the other guy but we probably still wanted to or would have if our spouses hadn't recaptured our attention.

Women are attracted to different things than men, but we generally don't fuck guys that we don't find attractive especially if it might endanger our marriage. The path to desire may be complicated and circuitous, but it is still desire that gets me to peel off my panties. If the other man is a great listener we may start with just coffee, but I am not going to a hotel with him in the middle of the afternoon unless I am hot for him. Maybe that lust wouldn't have come about if not for a host of other factors, but in that moment lust was more than likely the driver.
Click to expand...

Nicely said
 
If I understand correctly the survey being discussed indicated that a relatively small proportion of cheaters acknowledge that they did it just for the sex. Presumably then the remaining respondents had a reason for their cheating.

This aligns more or less with my anecdotal observations. Another anecdotal observation is that among those who say they have a reason about half are flimsy ass excuses.

As a man I take it as a given that a monogamous relationship involves some degree of sacrifice specifically in the sex with other people department. The love and devotion we receive in return from our partner may be well worth that sacrifice, but it is a sacrifice nonetheless. Like most guys I have lust for other women whether or not I choose to park it.

Relationships are by definition challenging and there will be times when that monogamy sacrifice seems less appealing especially when the challenges are in the bedroom. From the end of the "honeymoon" onward there will always be some issue that isn't perfect or as you expected.

The degree to which any of those issues is a valid excuse to cheat is in the eye of the beholder. But I think that most of us know people whose reasons are thinly veiled excuses to do as they please. And the thinner the logic the more desperately they cling to it. Unless the researchers spent 6 months with each subject and talked to everyone in their lives they couldn't know where on the continuum of reasons they exist.......only that they have an excuse for their actions.

So a small portion of people own up to having sex just for the sake of it. Everyone else has an excuse - ranging from flimsy and self serving to very compelling. And presumably a lot of them are enjoying the sex so there is lust involved.

It stands to reason that the real proportion of people who are "doing it for the sex" includes some unknown portion of the people who say they have a reason. Is there data to indicate what proportion, because otherwise it all falls back to opinion in relation to 90% of the data set.
 
policywank said:
...

So to try to see through my own fog and that of most women I ask "is there a time when cheating occurs absent lust for the other man/woman?" Not very often. It may not be the only factor but we generally don't fuck people we don't find at all attractive. Maybe someone seems more attractive because they offer something in particular that we have been missing and that missing something may or may not be physical, but the attraction is there.

Women in particular have a thousand ways of denigrating their spouse or glorifying a lover rather than just saying I wanted to fuck him. We will tell ourselves we fucked him because he listens better or understands more or, or, or - no we wanted to fuck him and those reasons helped justify our actions. Now if our husband had been more attentive or whatever maybe we wouldn't have fucked the other guy but we probably still wanted to or would have if our spouses hadn't recaptured our attention.

Women are attracted to different things than men, but we generally don't fuck guys that we don't find attractive especially if it might endanger our marriage. The path to desire may be complicated and circuitous, but it is still desire that gets me to peel off my panties. If the other man is a great listener we may start with just coffee, but I am not going to a hotel with him in the middle of the afternoon unless I am hot for him. Maybe that lust wouldn't have come about if not for a host of other factors, but in that moment lust was more than likely the driver.
Click to expand...

While I appreciate the time and effort in your wide ranging response, these three paragraphs get to the heart of things and is what I've been saying (with the exception of your last sentence which I will address) and what the studies have said.

Yes people lust after that sexy co-worker or have 24 hour crushes on a spouse's friend. But if they are satisfied in their primary relationships they don't act on their lust/crush. But if they are unhappy and/or not getting what they need, be it emotional or physical, a vulnerability is created in which the person can let an outside relationship develop develop into a physical one.

I agree that an attraction is necessary, and eventually a desire, but it doesn't have to be lust (as I see it defined) as the clothes come off, could be just a slow burn, simply a willingness and acceptance for it to happen. And as you said, both desire and lust come after all the pieces fall into place.
 
jomar said:
While I appreciate the time and effort in your wide ranging response, these three paragraphs get to the heart of things and is what I've been saying (with the exception of your last sentence which I will address) and what the studies have said.

Yes people lust after that sexy co-worker or have 24 hour crushes on a spouse's friend. But if they are satisfied in their primary relationships they don't act on their lust/crush. But if they are unhappy and/or not getting what they need, be it emotional or physical, a vulnerability is created in which the person can let an outside relationship develop develop into a physical one.

I agree that an attraction is necessary, and eventually a desire, but it doesn't have to be lust (as I see it defined) as the clothes come off, could be just a slow burn, simply a willingness and acceptance for it to happen. And as you said, both desire and lust come after all the pieces fall into place.
Click to expand...


We are both talking about the fact that sometimes cheating starts from a place of sexual desire and sometimes it starts from a place of other issues in the relationship. Apparently, we do agree that whether the sexual desire leads or follows it is part of the formula (the only consistent ingredient).

The debate is about the proportions of each motivation. And SlutAddicted explained better than I how taking the cheater's representation as to why they cheated at face value is fundamentally flawed in this context. I do not accept the premise that the only cheaters in the sample who were doing it for primarily reasons of sexual desire are the ones who acknowledged that as their motivation.
 
I wasn't going to post in this thread anymore because I feel we have hijacked the original topic, but I would like to add the following.

I like what policywank has written. The whole idea of monogamy is cultural (religious, actually). There are numerous other cultures that do not practice monogamy and yet divorce is almost unheard of. The point being: humans were not meant to be monogamous, so the idea that people cheat because they are not satisfied at home is not supported. This is based on research. If you want to read this research, see Dr. Helen Fisher's work. She is a biological anthropologist and she is an expert in what makes up our motivations behind love and sex and monogamy.

But does it really matter why? Are we trying to blame the spouse for the actions of the cheater? If you love your spouse, you should not do something that will cause them pain.
 
Probably not, PW.

Interesting, LC. I certainly haven't read much, but her article on infidelity says a prominent psychological factor associated with infidelity is the degree of satisfaction with one's primary committed relationship. Love all tne angles.

I don't think we're trying to blame the spouse for the cheater's behavior, they have to own that decision. I think we're talking about the environment/dynamics in which it can happen.
 
Last edited:
I have no special attraction to married men. I do my best to avoid them. Of course, some men are just irresistible.
 
I enjoy being their desire, what they dream of n knowing they can have there way n then go makes me feel so good.
 
Big fan of married men. I've been enjoyed by three of them. They're always appreciative and take charge, taking what they want and giving what I need. And they've never been all clingy. Yes please.
 
Sometimes it's as simple as a woman not wanting all the drama that a regular relationship can bring about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Cum in hair
Replies
8
Views
328
Piper1971
P
angela40
Still Hot
3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
4K
angela40
angela40
N
What exactly turns you on about your wife or girlfriend being with another man? Past or Present?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
1K
Strongbutcurious
S
S
What Is Actually The Level Of Inhibition that Defines Weird?
Replies
7
Views
467
Erosfan
E
Samuelx
Taylor Swift is a closet lesbian...but so is Candace Owens
Replies
13
Views
1K
StudlyCowboy
StudlyCowboy
Back
Top