Difference between cybersex and erotica - need some help

[crabbypatty]

-----

 

[Belegon]

Hi all.

I have a little problem: My husband recently discovered some erotica I was writing to submit on my computer, and also some notes I had copied and pasted from chat. He's accusing me of cybersex, since I was playing out a sexual scene with another chat user to use in my writings. I've tried to convince him otherwise, but now need some convincing myself.

What's the difference between cybering someone, and "acting out a scene" with someone. I'm happily married and don't want to hurt that. I'm unsure what to do now.

Thanks.
CP

Patty, I'm afraid the answers to this are as varied as the ones asking the question. And the only person whose answers really matter are yours and your husbands.

It sounds like you should take the opportunity for you both to sit down with each other and figure out what each other's barriers are. I know from personal experience that the sooner you have such a talk the better. If either of you make the assumption that you know where the other draws their "line in the sand", you are leaving things open for further misunderstandings.

The communication can be intimidating, even frightening. But believe me, it is what will be best. Better to figure it out now, while the pain involved is still light.

Good Luck.

 

[gordion]

u can think like tennis & squash...

 

[English Lady]

Patty, I'm afraid the answers to this are as varied as the ones asking the question. And the only person whose answers really matter are yours and your husbands.

It sounds like you should take the opportunity for you both to sit down with each other and figure out what each other's barriers are. I know from personal experience that the sooner you have such a talk the better. If either of you make the assumption that you know where the other draws their "line in the sand", you are leaving things open for further misunderstandings.

The communication can be intimidating, even frightening. But believe me, it is what will be best. Better to figure it out now, while the pain involved is still light.

Good Luck.

I completely agree because in my opinion there is no difference but I'm sure others won't see it like that.

Talk to your husband and sort this out -it's the only thing you can do

 

[Vermilion]

Of course there is one obvious difference between the two: namely that writing erotica involves only one person (as a general rule) whereas cyber-sex requires at least one other person besides you. Perhaps it is this that has upset your husband, that you went elsewhere for inspiration, and not into your own mind or to him. Writing erotica is fiction, you shouldn;t need to *have* an actual cyber conversation in order to be able to write it.

Good luck, I hope you sort things out
x
V

 

[impressive]

*cough* Um, "acting out a scene" ...

You got off with another person while chatting? It's cyber. No matter why you did it or what you did with the "research material" afterward, it's cybering.

Now, is it also cheating? That's where you & your hubby need to be clear on your definitions & rules of engagement.

From an old thread on fidelity, I'll paraphrase a wise post: Cheating is anything you feel the need to hide from your partner.

I am TOTALLY on board with that definition. In fact, it applies (for me) to non-sexual stuff as well.

 

[Pure]

Hi all.

I have a little problem: My husband recently discovered some erotica I was writing to submit on my computer, and also some notes I had copied and pasted from chat. He's accusing me of cybersex, since I was playing out a sexual scene with another chat user to use in my writings. I've tried to convince him otherwise, but now need some convincing myself.

What's the difference between cybering someone, and "acting out a scene" with someone. I'm happily married and don't want to hurt that. I'm unsure what to do now.

Thanks.
CP

Many have tried the 'research' idea to explain our presence in gay bars, dungeons, or in the neighbor's underwear drawer. There have been mixed results. What sociology degree program are you enrolled in?

"playing out a sex scene with another chat user' is in fact the definition of 'cybering' if one or both are getting off, and both know it.

so possibly he (cyber partner) was conducting research too, or only 'getting off' to provide you with authentic material; he's free to try that one on his SO.

---

there are other approaches: "it was an accident" "it was large black man and i felt i had to go along." "i always have a wide stance" "i wasn't wearing underwear because all of it was in the laundry" "i didn't really cum, excpet maybe a little," "it's not love, just mechanical, he means nothing."

if all this fails, you could be direct and say "yes i was cybering and yes i jerked off with a stranger, on screen; i did not consider it 'infidelity' since i did not fuck anyone or have phsycial contact. however we'd better discuss this; for instance whether you may jerk off on screen with others. what would bother whom."

---
Note to imp:

Cheating is anything you feel the need to hide from your partner.

I don't agree with this "guilt based" approach. If you hide the fact** that you jerk off with zucchinis covered in ketchup, that is not cheating. your past before you met your partner may be concealed without it being cheating, unless it's your positive AIDS status.

I'd propose, "Cheating* is sexual happeningswith others --after you've committed to your partner---which would, not in a small way, upset your partner, if he or she found out."

However, whether cybering, and erotic emailing or PMing counts as a 'sexual happenings with another' has often been debated; lately the 'yes's seem to predominate.

====
* For clarification, *sexual* or *sex- or love- related cheating.

** For clarification: without telling lies or actively deceiving. in simple terms, mainly by "keeping quiet" about it (it being assumed that no questions one's doing it about it have arisen.)

 

[BlackShanglan]

Good points above. Once you've had your conversation about general boundaries, there's a simple rule to follow to make sure that ongoing activities are appropriate: let your husband know what you're up to. If you feel that you can't reasonably say "Honey, can you handle the phone for the next half hour? I'm busy acting out a sex scene with an online friend," that's a sign that in your heart, you know that's a no-go in this relationship. Keep the lines of communication open and seek answers before rather than after the action.

 

[impressive]

Note to imp:

Cheating is anything you feel the need to hide from your partner.

I don't agree with this "guilt based" approach. If you hide the fact that you jerk off with zucchini's covered in ketchup, that is not cheating. your past before you met your partner may be concealed without it being cheating, unless it's your positive AIDS status.

I'd propose, "Cheating is sexual happeningswith others --after you've committed to your partner---which would, not in a small way, upset your partner, if he or she found out."

However, whether cybering, and erotic emailing or PMing counts as a 'sexual happenings with another' has often been debated; lately the 'yes's seem to predominate.

Cheating is "being unfaithful." It is not a sexual issue to me. It is a trust issue.

I don't consider this more of a "guilt-based approach" than any other. If you know the fact that you jerk off with zucchini's covered in ketchup would have an adverse impact on your relationship -- and you thus conceal it from your partner -- you're cheating. Period. You're presenting yourself to your partner as something/someone you're not.

It happens all the time in a huge variety of ways. The key is that line in the sand: what level of "cheating" is acceptable? The little white lie variety is typically allowed to slide. The I-fucked-your-best-friend-while-you-were-at-your-mother's-funeral whopper is often a deal breaker.

To me, any level of "cheating" takes a bite out of trust -- be it a nibble or a gouge. While absolute trust is not required for all partnerships, it is my objective for an ideal partnership. Perhaps I have unrealistic expectations.

 

[maggot420]

Perhaps I have unrealistic expectations.

I don't think so.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I don't think so.

*pounce*

You don't see a horse pounce very often, do you? But maggots bring out the best in us.

Damned good to see you.

I like your answer to Pure, Impressive, and I agree. It's not a question of whether the act itself is "wrong" or "bad"; it's a question of whether one is honest with one's partner.

If the zucchini/ketchup issue is a problem for my partner, I have two honorable options available to me: desist from my sexual exploitation of potential side dishes, or acknowledge my continued participation and deal with the consequences to my relationship. The consequences might be one of those agonizingly long "state of the relationship / what are our expectations" talks, or it might mean sharing my vegetable excesses with the SO to demonstrate their innocent pleasures, or it might mean ending the relationship with an SO who simply cannot brook the addition of the ketchup, under any circumstances. Any of those would be a reasonable option, and would allow me to continue my sexual exploits as I liked.

The only thoroughly unreasonable option, in my opinion, would be lying to my partner actively ("Heavens no, I never do that any more") or deceiving him or her passively (sneaking off to wallow in zucchini/ketchup debauchery while the SO imagines that I am at work). In either case, as Imp points out, I'm damaging the trust in the relationship. I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too by getting my thrills on with the produce drawer while enjoying the misplaced and oblivious trust of my SO.

While I recognize that some folk will say to this, "What the SO doesn't know won't hurt him/her," that to me is a quick road to Hell (or, for the non-religious, ethical bankruptcy) that lacks even the smooth pavement of good intentions. Staggering numbers of people learn every day that what they thought would never be known is, in fact, known, and if the thing I'm hoping that the SO doesn't know is something I plan to continue doing, then I haven't really got a fair argument that it won't hurt the SO. Not knowing what I'm doing leads to the SO being lied to continuously and repeatedly, and no one really desires that sort of relationship, however attractively I might try to paint it to myself. It's true that the revelation of my activities and my refusal to end them may result, in the short term, in painful scenes, but to argue that years of deception are better is, I think, ultimately self-serving.

 

[impressive]

*pounce*

You don't see a horse pounce very often, do you? But maggots bring out the best in us.

Damned good to see you.

I like your answer to Pure, Impressive, and I agree. It's not a question of whether the act itself is "wrong" or "bad"; it's a question of whether one is honest with one's partner.

If the zucchini/ketchup issue is a problem for my partner, I have two honorable options available to me: desist from my sexual exploitation of potential side dishes, or acknowledge my continued participation and deal with the consequences to my relationship. The consequences might be one of those agonizingly long "state of the relationship / what are our expectations" talks, or it might mean sharing my vegetable excesses with the SO to demonstrate their innocent pleasures, or it might mean ending the relationship with an SO who simply cannot brook the addition of the ketchup, under any circumstances. Any of those would be a reasonable option, and would allow me to continue my sexual exploits as I liked.

The only thoroughly unreasonable option, in my opinion, would be lying to my partner actively ("Heavens no, I never do that any more") or deceiving him or her passively (sneaking off to wallow in zucchini/ketchup debauchery while the SO imagines that I am at work). In either case, as Imp points out, I'm damaging the trust in the relationship. I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too by getting my thrills on with the produce drawer while enjoying the misplaced and oblivious trust of my SO.

While I recognize that some folk will say to this, "What the SO doesn't know won't hurt him/her," that to me is a quick road to Hell (or, for the non-religious, ethical bankruptcy) that lacks even the smooth pavement of good intentions. Staggering numbers of people learn every day that what they thought would never be known is, in fact, known, and if the thing I'm hoping that the SO doesn't know is something I plan to continue doing, then I haven't really got a fair argument that it won't hurt the SO. Not knowing what I'm doing leads to the SO being lied to continuously and repeatedly, and no one really desires that sort of relationship, however attractively I might try to paint it to myself. It's true that the revelation of my activities and my refusal to end them may result, in the short term, in painful scenes, but to argue that years of deception are better is, I think, ultimately self-serving.

Amen. A-fucking-men.

 

[maggot420]

*pounce*

You don't see a horse pounce very often, do you? But maggots bring out the best in us.

Damned good to see you.

I like your answer to Pure, Impressive, and I agree. It's not a question of whether the act itself is "wrong" or "bad"; it's a question of whether one is honest with one's partner.

Damned good to see you too

I like both yours and Imps answers so much that there's really nothing to add...
except for my disgust of both ketchup and zucchini.
Ick.

 

[MagicaPractica]

Hi all.

I have a little problem: My husband recently discovered some erotica I was writing to submit on my computer, and also some notes I had copied and pasted from chat. He's accusing me of cybersex, since I was playing out a sexual scene with another chat user to use in my writings. I've tried to convince him otherwise, but now need some convincing myself.

What's the difference between cybering someone, and "acting out a scene" with someone. I'm happily married and don't want to hurt that. I'm unsure what to do now.

Thanks.
CP

For me, the question would be if you were role-playing a character or being yourself in the scenario? But that doesn't really matter in terms of your relationship. You need to work out what's acceptable with your spouse, as many others have said. It sounds like you already have some trust issues if he's going through your stuff looking for signs of infidelity. I would suggest a long talk and perhaps some marriage counseling. Best wishes.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Damned good to see you too

I like both yours and Imps answers so much that there's really nothing to add...
except for my disgust of both ketchup and zucchini.
Ick.

I can enjoy either of them seperately and on a plate, but together and in the bedroom ... no. Nor together and on a plate, to be honest. I think about the only thing that could tempt me would be together and on some very enticing choice of person.

 

[Pure]

answer to shanglan and imp and co.

shang If the zucchini/ketchup issue is a problem for my partner, I have two honorable options available to me: desist from my sexual exploitation of potential side dishes, or acknowledge my continued participation and deal with the consequences to my relationship. The consequences might be one of those agonizingly long "state of the relationship / what are our expectations" talks, or it might mean sharing my vegetable excesses with the SO to demonstrate their innocent pleasures, or it might mean ending the relationship with an SO who simply cannot brook the addition of the ketchup, under any circumstances. Any of those would be a reasonable option, and would allow me to continue my sexual exploits as I liked.

P: 1) I may not know it's a problem, but merely guess it might. IOW, we're NOT talking about a situation where I know my partner hates smoking, and so i smoke on the sly (through fake trips to the bathroom).

2) You imply that anything other than full disclosure is dishonorable. I do not agree. You are plainly not talking of 'honor,' but relationship sainthood as you see it.


shang The only thoroughly unreasonable option, in my opinion, would be lying to my partner actively ("Heavens no, I never do that any more") or deceiving him or her passively (sneaking off to wallow in zucchini/ketchup debauchery while the SO imagines that I am at work). In either case, as Imp points out, I'm damaging the trust in the relationship. I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too by getting my thrills on with the produce drawer while enjoying the misplaced and oblivious trust of my SO.

P: I would agree with this, and suggest that your focus on this [lying]--as if i recommended it-- has biased your conclusions.


shang While I recognize that some folk will say to this, "What the SO doesn't know won't hurt him/her," that to me is a quick road to Hell (or, for the non-religious, ethical bankruptcy) that lacks even the smooth pavement of good intentions. Staggering numbers of people learn every day that what they thought would never be known is, in fact, known, and if the thing I'm hoping that the SO doesn't know is something I plan to continue doing, then I haven't really got a fair argument that it won't hurt the SO.

P: I don't agree. The issue not addressed has to do with *reasonable expectations* on the part of one's partner. If I form an equine partnership with Shanglan, I can reasonably expect--hearing nothing to the contrary-- that there are no sordid doings with Liath Macha. Hence Shang's omission or concealment--even, without active deception-- is culpable. However the equine's unnatural delights in owner initiated episodes of electroejaculation or artificial insemination (as the case may be) do not give rise to a duty to disclose.

i will agree that, *where there is significant liklihood of something [known to likely upset my partner] coming to light,* then there is a *prudential duty* to disclose. keeps life simple.

shang Not knowing what I'm doing leads to the SO being lied to continuously and repeatedly, and no one really desires that sort of relationship, however attractively I might try to paint it to myself. It's true that the revelation of my activities and my refusal to end them may result, in the short term, in painful scenes, but to argue that years of deception are better is, I think, ultimately self-serving.

P: The first sentence is untrue, for the cases i'm considering. There are no lies, and no active deceptions. Further as stated above, there are [need be] no covert violations of reasonable and normal expectations.

 

[impressive]

shang If the zucchini/ketchup issue is a problem for my partner, I have two honorable options available to me: desist from my sexual exploitation of potential side dishes, or acknowledge my continued participation and deal with the consequences to my relationship. The consequences might be one of those agonizingly long "state of the relationship / what are our expectations" talks, or it might mean sharing my vegetable excesses with the SO to demonstrate their innocent pleasures, or it might mean ending the relationship with an SO who simply cannot brook the addition of the ketchup, under any circumstances. Any of those would be a reasonable option, and would allow me to continue my sexual exploits as I liked.

P: 1) I may not know it's a problem, but merely guess it might. IOW, we're NOT talking about a situation where I know my partner hates smoking, and so i smoke on the sly (through fake trips to the bathroom).

2) You imply that anything other than full disclosure is dishonorable. I do not agree. You are plainly not talking of 'honor,' but relationship sainthood as you see it.

There's a reason things are considered "ideals."

If you "merely guess" something might be a problem and if you value the relationship and want it to last, then you'll find a way to discuss it and reach a consensus on how it should be approached.

Just the fact that you think it might meet with disapproval is enough of clue that communication is needed.

If you already know something is problematic, then you have to choose where your priorities lie. Either you want to keep your guilty pleasure & doing so is worth the potential repercussions to the core relationship, or you value the core relationship enough to get over your reticence to disclose it.

 

[Vermilion]

you know what? I tried to read and understand all those arguments, but was so struck by the mental image of someone jacking off with a courgette and ketchup completely ruined me for anything else.

<snigger>

The tomatoes would smart, wouldn;t they? And the vinegar...

x
V

 

[3113]

You imply that anything other than full disclosure is dishonorable. I do not agree. You are plainly not talking of 'honor,' but relationship sainthood as you see it.

I have to agree, and it's really just a matter of how we see relationships. If my husband masturbates in the shower while fantasizing about sex with a chicken, and telling me about this would ruin his enjoyment (not to mention knowing that it wouldn't excite me), then why should I have a problem with him keeping it *private*? I don't know everything he does in his alone time. Maybe he does do things with a zucchini and ketchup. If that makes him happy...and more important, if keeping it between him and the zucchini makes him happy, why should I take that away from him in the name of "honor" or honesty or anything else?

My point is, my view of relationships include private things, things that involve concealment because being personal and private is what makes them special and enjoyable, be it zucchini and ketchup or a hot bath. And a good partner, IMHO, should allow for that, for the fact that not every act of the partner, not every fantasy, dream, wish, or kinky feelings is something they're going to want to share. Where that fantasy, dream, wish or kinky feeling might cross the line between being something personal and private that we *all* need now and then and cheating...that's up to the couple. But just because you want a relationship where you tell your partner everything and your partner tells you everything doesn't mean that the couple who don't tell each other everything is being less than honorable and honest, let alone cheating. The definition that cheating is what you keep from your partner defines you to victory--I question this thesis because it doesn't jive with some very real and happy couples I know. If they wouldn't define it that way, why should it *be* defined that way?

Concealing things from your partner *MIGHT* be being less than honorable, and might be viewed by the partner as cheating, as in this case. But that's for the couple to decide and define, not anyone outside the relationship.

 

[Tzah]

.....

 

[Quiet_Cool]

I have to agree, and it's really just a matter of how we see relationships. If my husband masturbates in the shower while fantasizing about sex with a chicken, and telling me about this would ruin his enjoyment (not to mention knowing that it wouldn't excite me), then why should I have a problem with him keeping it *private*? I don't know everything he does in his alone time. Maybe he does do things with a zucchini and ketchup. If that makes him happy...and more important, if keeping it between him and the zucchini makes him happy, why should I take that away from him in the name of "honor" or honesty or anything else?

My point is, my view of relationships include private things, things that involve concealment because being personal and private is what makes them special and enjoyable, be it zucchini and ketchup or a hot bath. And a good partner, IMHO, should allow for that, for the fact that not every act of the partner, not every fantasy, dream, wish, or kinky feelings is something they're going to want to share. Where that fantasy, dream, wish or kinky feeling might cross the line between being something personal and private that we *all* need now and then and cheating...that's up to the couple. But just because you want a relationship where you tell your partner everything and your partner tells you everything doesn't mean that the couple who don't tell each other everything is being less than honorable and honest, let alone cheating. The definition that cheating is what you keep from your partner defines you to victory--I question this thesis because it doesn't jive with some very real and happy couples I know. If they wouldn't define it that way, why should it *be* defined that way?

Concealing things from your partner *MIGHT* be being less than honorable, and might be viewed by the partner as cheating, as in this case. But that's for the couple to decide and define, not anyone outside the relationship.

Okay, cleverly stated.

Question...

If you don't know about your husband and the zucchini, how would you yourself decide whether or not you define it as cheating? It's an "observation on your statement" sort of question, not a challenge to the truth behind it. I'm simply curious.

However the equine's unnatural delights in owner initiated episodes of electroejaculation or artificial insemination (as the case may be) do not give rise to a duty to disclose.

And a question to you:

When we begin talking about "duty to disclose," aren't we giving rise to the construct of "rules" as opposed to boundaries?

There is a distinctive difference between the two, a distinctive difference between regulations and ideals. Rules are there to define behavior, more specifically, to regulate one's behavior, whereas ideals aren't so much structured patterns of behavior, what you can or can't "get away with," but instead are overall values, meant to be respected so as to better oneself and guide one's behavior. I guess what I mean is, rules give us "no-no's" whereas ideals give us direction.

Dunno if that's clear or not.

More importantly than all this crap.

What's Squash?

Seriously.

Not the fruit, that one apparently might masturbate with, but the sport?

Anyone?

Q_C

 

[damppanties]

What's Squash?

Seriously.

Not the fruit, that one apparently might masturbate with, but the sport?

Anyone?

Q_C

Squash

I think 3113 is approaching it from one side, from the pov of one partner, while Imp is from the other's.

 

[BlackShanglan]

P: 1) I may not know it's a problem, but merely guess it might. IOW, we're NOT talking about a situation where I know my partner hates smoking, and so i smoke on the sly (through fake trips to the bathroom).

But there's a very simple answer to this, as I observed above. "Honey, I'm just popping out for a cigarette." Disclose, and you will know. The only reason not to disclose, in this example, is a suspicion that the loved one will object.

2) You imply that anything other than full disclosure is dishonorable. I do not agree. You are plainly not talking of 'honor,' but relationship sainthood as you see it.

No, I'm talking of a perfectly normal state of affairs in which people know what is honorable and what is not, and sometimes choose to do one and sometimes choose to do the other. That people sometimes do things that are wrong is not a reason to give up on humanity, but neither is it a reason to keep moving the goal posts back until everyone has already achieved the goal. We have standards of what is right and good in order that we may strive for them, not in order to describe how people would behave without any concept of restraint or ethics.

shang The only thoroughly unreasonable option, in my opinion, would be lying to my partner actively ("Heavens no, I never do that any more") or deceiving him or her passively (sneaking off to wallow in zucchini/ketchup debauchery while the SO imagines that I am at work). In either case, as Imp points out, I'm damaging the trust in the relationship. I'm trying to have my cake and eat it too by getting my thrills on with the produce drawer while enjoying the misplaced and oblivious trust of my SO.

P: I would agree with this, and suggest that your focus on this [lying]--as if i recommended it-- has biased your conclusions.

Deliberately avoiding the discovery of the truth - as in the case of sneaking about for one's zucchini fix while telling oneself that one doesn't know for certain that one's partner would object - is a particularly silly method of lying. It involves not only deceiving one's partner as to one's actions, but attempting to lie to oneself about why one might be choosing to conceal those actions. It's still deceit.

shang While I recognize that some folk will say to this, "What the SO doesn't know won't hurt him/her," that to me is a quick road to Hell (or, for the non-religious, ethical bankruptcy) that lacks even the smooth pavement of good intentions. Staggering numbers of people learn every day that what they thought would never be known is, in fact, known, and if the thing I'm hoping that the SO doesn't know is something I plan to continue doing, then I haven't really got a fair argument that it won't hurt the SO.

P: I don't agree. The issue not addressed has to do with *reasonable expectations* on the part of one's partner. If I form an equine partnership with Shanglan, I can reasonably expect--hearing nothing to the contrary-- that there are no sordid doings with Liath Macha. Hence Shang's omission or concealment--even, without active deception-- is culpable. However the equine's unnatural delights in owner initiated episodes of electroejaculation or artificial insemination (as the case may be) do not give rise to a duty to disclose.

Every person in an emotionally intimate relationship has a reasonable expectation of being told the truth about a partner's significant actions, and with the exception of relationships where such things are agreed explicitly, it's a normal expectation that one will be privy to the general run of one's partner's sexual actions. Every stray thought? No. Actual actions regularly taking place? Yes. Things that the partner has good reason to suspect the other partner would object to, sexual or otherwise? Yes.

I'm not suggesting that every act in one's life requires reporting, of course. Nothing so silly as that. But partners have a right to general understanding of what's going on. If I tell the SO that it's my habit to engage privately in certain vegetable/condiment acts of autoerotica, and that I prefer not to share the details each time, that's perfectly fine if the SO is happy with it. However, if I'm sneaking about the home in the middle of the night telling myself that I'm not lying, I just happen to not want to trouble with ever discovering the SO's stance on my behavior so that I can't be asked to change it, then I'm violating the SO's reasonable expectation of trust in both our sex lives and our communication with each other.

i will agree that, *where there is significant liklihood of something [known to likely upset my partner] coming to light,* then there is a *prudential duty* to disclose. keeps life simple.

That's not an ethical standard. That's just covering one's rump.

shang Not knowing what I'm doing leads to the SO being lied to continuously and repeatedly, and no one really desires that sort of relationship, however attractively I might try to paint it to myself. It's true that the revelation of my activities and my refusal to end them may result, in the short term, in painful scenes, but to argue that years of deception are better is, I think, ultimately self-serving.

P: The first sentence is untrue, for the cases i'm considering. There are no lies, and no active deceptions. Further as stated above, there are [need be] no covert violations of reasonable and normal expectations.

I disagree. If you're avoiding disclosing an activity to your SO because you don't know the SO's position on it, you're lying to yourself if you suggest that it's not deception. You can see it in your own words - you had to invent the concept of "active deception" to skirt around what was occurring, because it was impossible to say that no deception existed. Any time at which one is deliberately allowing a loved one to labor under the apprehension that one's actions are substantially different to what they actually are and continue to be, a reasonable expectation - that one is honest with one's partner - is being broached.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I have to agree, and it's really just a matter of how we see relationships. If my husband masturbates in the shower while fantasizing about sex with a chicken, and telling me about this would ruin his enjoyment (not to mention knowing that it wouldn't excite me), then why should I have a problem with him keeping it *private*? I don't know everything he does in his alone time. Maybe he does do things with a zucchini and ketchup. If that makes him happy...and more important, if keeping it between him and the zucchini makes him happy, why should I take that away from him in the name of "honor" or honesty or anything else?

I've got no problem with that. Your relationship, one presumes, includes an understanding that masturbation is acceptable. That's enough to cover this action. Similarly, if it's been made clear that in your relationship, it's fine to play with pretty much any inanimate object or other masturbatory item, then you've already covered the zucchini issue in enough depth to satisfy you both. I'd only call the actions dishonorable if the reason for avoiding discussion was uncertainty about whether you'd find the practice acceptable, or certainty that you would not find it acceptable. Then, it needs to be discussed and negotiated - not because of the action itself, but because we have a duty to the trust and feelings of our partners.

My point is, my view of relationships include private things, things that involve concealment because being personal and private is what makes them special and enjoyable, be it zucchini and ketchup or a hot bath. And a good partner, IMHO, should allow for that, for the fact that not every act of the partner, not every fantasy, dream, wish, or kinky feelings is something they're going to want to share. Where that fantasy, dream, wish or kinky feeling might cross the line between being something personal and private that we *all* need now and then and cheating...that's up to the couple. But just because you want a relationship where you tell your partner everything and your partner tells you everything doesn't mean that the couple who don't tell each other everything is being less than honorable and honest, let alone cheating. The definition that cheating is what you keep from your partner defines you to victory--I question this thesis because it doesn't jive with some very real and happy couples I know. If they wouldn't define it that way, why should it *be* defined that way?

I agree. I don't have a problem with people having private time and actions; indeed, I think that they are vital. My only objection is to keeping things hidden when one has no reasonable expectation that they are acceptable to the partner - either when one knows that the partner would object, or when one is deliberately avoiding learning the partner's opinion.

Concealing things from your partner *MIGHT* be being less than honorable, and might be viewed by the partner as cheating, as in this case. But that's for the couple to decide and define, not anyone outside the relationship.

Perfectly so. I think that we actually agree. I think that every couple has the right to define what matters to them, and that in terms of ethics anything that is agreed with full understanding and free will is right for that couple. I'm not saying that that means that every tiny variation of action has to be individually OK'd; I am saying that the couple needs that general agreement and decision to happen, and when one is avoiding an entire topic and has no agreement or decision agreed to despite regularly partaking in actions of that sort, that's a sign that one is straying from ethical behavior.

 

[3113]

If you don't know about your husband and the zucchini, how would you yourself decide whether or not you define it as cheating?

I don't know about anyone else, but I've a pretty clear idea of what I consider cheating. Granted, sometimes it takes trial and error. Sometimes something my husband does bothers me (like hanging with a certain old girlfriend) and I never thought it would, and I need to chat with him about why it got to me. But what I DO I know is that whatever he does with an inanimate object in a private place is okay with me. So if he goes into the bathroom carrying something under a towel, I'm not going to ask about it or worry about it. It's his thing and his business.

Here's the other thing: my husband knows me better than anyone else in this world, and I TRUST him to know if he's doing something that would hurt me, that I'd see as "cheating." And not to do that. Is he capable of slipping up on that score? Sure. We all are. But there's no point in having a relationship without that trust.

My husband and I come from a background where neighbors and family used to really butt their noses into our private spaces. Private times and private moments are very important to us. We don't like anyone looking over our shoulders or asking questions. And if we need private time, we say as much to each other, and we give it to each other, no prying. There was one time, in fact, when my husband said to me, "I need to go on a trip and be on my own." And I said, "Fine by me. I won't even ask where you're going." He left for four days, and I still don't know where he went or what he did while he was gone. I only know that I trusted him to do right by me, and to have a good time. He needed it, I gave it to him. End of story.

I don't read his e-mail, I don't check to see what websites he's on, I don't ask to read what he's writing or what friends he's having drinks with. When he wants me to see something, he'll shows me; if he thinks it important that I know where he's going and who he's going to be with, he tells me. In fact, from my point of view, by NOT making him tell me everything, I let him know that I trust and respect him as an adult, as my partner, as someone who deserves to have whatever space he needs. I trust, as well, that if he ever feels he needs to do something that he fears might hurt me, he'll let me know and we'll talk it over.

Understand, I'm not talking about a couple having two secret lives, like in the movie Mr. & Mrs. Smith. I usually *DO* know what coffee house or bar he's at and who he's having coffee or drinks with. I usually *DO* know his sexual wants and needs. I'm simply saying that a relationship doesn't need to be open door, open book all the time, in every instance, no exceptions whatsoever or else it's "cheating!" And for the record, while I think Crabbypatty should have been open with her boyfriend about her needs or what she was up to on the internet (to know if he considered this cheating), I also think the boyfriend was VERY wrong to read her smut/on-line conversations.