Seems to me that quite a few men have already commented that they do practice double standards or know alot of men who do.

Only know what I see.

Seems to me that quite a few men have already commented that they do practice double standards or know alot of men who do.

Only know what I see.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So maybe we should also add 'more likely to be honest' to Sheryl's list of attributes that males are more likely to display, do you think?

It seems there's an interesting double standard going on right here. Misandristic remarks are deemed to be somewhat acceptable, but i wonder what the response would be to misogynistic comments....

Don't worry, i have no desire to test that one out

Maybe we all practice double standards, at times.

well if he is a hansum man prepare for the worst

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He doesnt need to be handsome ! Be afraid be very afraid !

Seems to me that quite a few men have already commented that they do practice double standards or know alot of men who do.

Only know what I see.

So maybe we should also add 'more likely to be honest' to Sheryl's list of attributes that males are more likely to display, do you think?

It seems there's an interesting double standard going on right here. Misandristic remarks are deemed to be somewhat acceptable, but i wonder what the response would be to misogynistic comments....

Don't worry, i have no desire to test that one out

Maybe we all practice double standards, at times.

Would you prefer the statement "women perceive men to be selfish and self-centered" instead?

My question is, should I be scared of moving to Thailand?,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, mica, you should be scared. Sorry, but that’s the reality.

You say you are open-minded and adaptable. As hinted by poster ayakiawe this could be an opportunity rather than a disaster.

What my girlfriend did was to “get in touch with her other side,” so to speak. The initial hint came from her, not me (I’d never done this, either), after we’d started going to go-gos together and she was open-minded and self-confident enough to admit to herself that she felt a little attracted. (Are you other ladies on the forum never so attracted?) And even then it took her about a year of mulling it over before she finally got up the courage to try what she would once have regarded as unthinkable—that is, threesomes.

The key was that the girls are pros. We got to be passing friends with some of them, just as one can become friends with one’s hairdresser, but because of their “pro” status, our emotional relationship never felt threatened. In fact, it got a lot deeper. We were best friends besides lovers, so it was rather like helping each other have a great massage. We both enjoyed watching, too. There was no feeling at all of disloyalty or infidelity, I suppose because what were doing was open and honest and together and by mutual agreement. Though there was sometimes a tiny bit of jealousy (on both our parts), it was never serious—we trusted each other and we’d talk and offer sincere reassurances. After a “session” we’d have our own private loving sex (a lot more than just a massage!) as well; and then we’d stay charged up for weeks and weeks. (I go into such detail merely to show you that this can be possible though it may seem shocking and crazy from your present perspective.)

Though I was approached numerous times by “good” ladies who might otherwise be a significant threat, I never had any impulse to accept any invitations. My own girlfriend was just TOO exciting. And we stayed happy and very much in love.

Thanks for the input, JSixpack.

And Glauka your posts were great!

Just to clarify that Scaramanga(I think) and I are not trying to look for excuses for men for fidelity but rather trying to see why things are the way it is regardless of right or wrong.

I would also like to ask why love and sex has to be bound together. Isn't it like saying if you want to kick football you have to play basket-ball as well?(calm down ladies!)

I get the point some of you ladies say that "I don't care if you are polygamous but don't lie to me so I can choose to stay or not.", but let's see if this is why this happens:

The society makes us know from a very young age that monogamy is the only right thing to do. You have no choice. If you choose to be polygamous, you will be frowned upon. But then a man grows up to find out that biologicaly and psychologically he wants to have more than one woman. He can't admit it because of surrounding pressure. So the only way is cheating. Perhaps it's like being gay but still get married and have kids.

And also when do you think is the appropriate time for a man to clarify to a woman that he is going to have more than one woman? The first time they meet? The moment before sex? Or after the first sex? Do women ask first before the relationship ever starts?

I totally agree that lying is wrong. But the present societal environment and expectations of women make most men think the best way to do is to lie.

My question is, should I be scared of moving to Thailand?,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, mica, you should be scared. Sorry, but that’s the reality.

You say you are open-minded and adaptable. As hinted by poster ayakiawe this could be an opportunity rather than a disaster.

What my girlfriend did was to “get in touch with her other side,” so to speak. The initial hint came from her, not me (I’d never done this, either), after we’d started going to go-gos together and she was open-minded and self-confident enough to admit to herself that she felt a little attracted. (Are you other ladies on the forum never so attracted?) And even then it took her about a year of mulling it over before she finally got up the courage to try what she would once have regarded as unthinkable—that is, threesomes.

The key was that the girls are pros. We got to be passing friends with some of them, just as one can become friends with one’s hairdresser, but because of their “pro” status, our emotional relationship never felt threatened. In fact, it got a lot deeper. We were best friends besides lovers, so it was rather like helping each other have a great massage. We both enjoyed watching, too. There was no feeling at all of disloyalty or infidelity, I suppose because what were doing was open and honest and together and by mutual agreement. Though there was sometimes a tiny bit of jealousy (on both our parts), it was never serious—we trusted each other and we’d talk and offer sincere reassurances. After a “session” we’d have our own private loving sex (a lot more than just a massage!) as well; and then we’d stay charged up for weeks and weeks. (I go into such detail merely to show you that this can be possible though it may seem shocking and crazy from your present perspective.)

Though I was approached numerous times by “good” ladies who might otherwise be a significant threat, I never had any impulse to accept any invitations. My own girlfriend was just TOO exciting. And we stayed happy and very much in love.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So how would you feel if your girlfriend proposed a threesome with another guy? A spitroast I believe the expression is. Would you be equally "in touch with your other side"?

The Gentleman Scamp could always do with a few extra baht....

Hello Boo,

Why do some cheat when others do not?

It's like "why do some dance better than others?""why do some ski better than others?"

Different people different demands, different capabilities, different beliefs, different .... so on.

Some men don't like sex too.

One more thing I would like to ask the ladies here is, what do you think the reaction of your husbands or boyfriends will be if you told them they are free to shag other women? And it's now not considered cheating because I now allow you to do so?

"Thank you honey, I love you so much!"

I think that would make it less fun.

So how would you feel if your girlfriend proposed a threesome with another guy? A spitroast I believe the expression is. Would you be equally "in touch with your other side"?

The Gentleman Scamp could always do with a few extra baht....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know all these nifty expressions. But it's not usually the guy who's worried about his girl running around after they both move to Thailand, is it? (Unless perhaps she's Thai and there's the old boyfriend or hubby around.)

Not to dodge your question. In fact, she asked the same question, of course.

Fair is, um, fair. Now, me, I (cough) just ain't never been interested in touching any other blokes. When and where I grew up, you did that, you died. It might take a lot longer than a year to consider that possiblity. When she and I discussed the matter, I said I would have been willing participate in a three-way that would involve touching her only. Again, the guy would have had to have been a pro or somebody very, very cool I trusted a lot--if that's what she wanted. We did go to some Thai boy go-gos, the sort usually frequented by gays, and she didn't feel interested. Had they been Chippendale's dancers, that might have been another story.

I know, through a friend, of an old couple who swing this way, however, and I am astounded at what a hot sex life they have. I suppose other old folks do, too, but I just don't happen to know of any.

Edited December 23, 200520 yr by JSixpack

So how would you feel if your girlfriend proposed a threesome with another guy? A spitroast I believe the expression is. Would you be equally "in touch with your other side"?

The Gentleman Scamp could always do with a few extra baht....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't know all these nifty expressions. But it's not usually the guy who's worried about his girl running around after they both move to Thailand, is it? (Unless perhaps she's Thai and there's the old boyfriend or hubby around.)

Not to dodge your question. In fact, she asked the same question, of course.

Fair is, um, fair. Now, me, I (cough) just ain't never been interested in touching any other blokes. When and where I grew up, you did that, you died. It might take a lot longer than a year to consider that possiblity. When she and I discussed the matter, I said I would have been willing participate in a three-way that would involve touching her only. Again, the guy would have had to have been a pro or somebody very, very cool I trusted a lot--if that's what she wanted. We did go to some Thai boy go-gos, the sort usually frequented by gays, and she didn't feel interested. Had they been Chippendale's dancers, that might have been another story.

I know, through a friend, of an old couple who swing this way, however, and I am astounded at what a hot sex life they have. I suppose other old folks do, too, but I just don't happen to know of any.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I appreciate your candour!

Hi Meemaithai,

your post is exactly why I don't put much stock in the "it's in a mans nature" argument, as, if the reason men cheat is becuase they are genetically programmed to do so because of nature, then it stands to reason that all men WILL cheat. Which we know to not be true

It's like "why do some dance better than others?""why do some ski better than others?"

Different people different demands, different capabilities, different beliefs, different .... so on.

Some men don't like sex too.

Seems to me that quite a few men have already commented that they do practice double standards or know alot of men who do.

Only know what I see.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So maybe we should also add 'more likely to be honest' to Sheryl's list of attributes that males are more likely to display, do you think?

It seems there's an interesting double standard going on right here. Misandristic remarks are deemed to be somewhat acceptable, but i wonder what the response would be to misogynistic comments....

Don't worry, i have no desire to test that one out

Maybe we all practice double standards, at times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Would you prefer the statement "women perceive men to be selfish and self-centered" instead?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Scaramanga, you can't win this. You're not playing on a level playing field, as you appear to know....

boo hoo

And Glauka your posts were great!

I get the point some of you ladies say that "I don't care if you are polygamous but don't lie to me so I can choose to stay or not.", but let's see if this is why this happens:

The society makes us know from a very young age that monogamy is the only right thing to do. You have no choice. If you choose to be polygamous, you will be frowned upon. But then a man grows up to find out that biologicaly and psychologically he wants to have more than one woman. He can't admit it because of surrounding pressure. So the only way is cheating. Perhaps it's like being gay but still get married and have kids.

And also when do you think is the appropriate time for a man to clarify to a woman that he is going to have more than one woman? The first time they meet? The moment before sex? Or after the first sex? Do women ask first before the relationship ever starts?

I totally agree that lying is wrong. But the present societal environment and expectations of women make most men think the best way to do is to lie.

Well I do agree with you that monogamy is the well accepted social behaviour...

However IMHO monogamy is chosen because you avoid social problems...

For instance in a wolf pack the alpha male will be able to mate with all the females or as many as he choses...this kind of agreement avoid confrotation among male members and killing each other, so that the pack can survive and so the genes and so on and so forth...

Humans the same (think about harems , 1 alpha male several females)...monogamy will avoid confrotation among males...well if is well established in society that you should respect someonelse´s woman( is is not always the case, though) you will avoid males fights for females...IMHO is a way to help the survival of the specie.

I agree that sometimes you are in a relationship were honesty is just not possible. Sometimes we just cannot bear the truth and we don´t want our situation to change... we prefer to be lied, this can create a personal conflict to person who has to cheat because is not allowed to be honest.

Right time...if you know yourself you know what is the right time...

1. before relationship starts---you know yourself, you know that you like to be with other women...

2. During relationship...you have evolved and have changed your mind about being monogamous...well inform your lady.

3.Never before sex...if you still want to have sex

4. Never after sex if you want to keep intact your lower parts

Well I normally ask at the beginnig of the relationship...what is your opinion about sleeping around with other people?

One more thing I would like to ask the ladies here is, what do you think the reaction of your husbands or boyfriends will be if you told them they are free to shag other women?  And it's now not considered cheating because I now allow you to do so?

WIFE:  "Honey, I ´ve been thinking...you can go and sleep with other girls, i don´t mind so much. I know you really love me."

HUSBAND: "  WHO ARE YOU SLEEPING WITH B*TCH? Is David isn´t it?

or Paul, is it Paul?

"Thank you honey, I love you so much!"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Edited December 23, 200520 yr by Glauka

But why is there the demand for monogamy in the first place? What is it that actually hurts? It's irrefutable that a male who has selected a female for his specific reproductive purposes wants to be guaranteed that it is him who gets to reproduce with her, or else what is the point in him being with her? The fact is that the successful completion of his goal is, to some extent, reliant on her fidelity. The successful completion of her reproductive goal, is not reliant on his fidelity. Hence it is not as much of a double standard as it appears, as their situations are different.

One of the things that most distinguishes humans from other mammals is the extent to which their behavior is learned and chosen as opposed to instinctive. Of course, other mammals also have learned behavior and some degree of choice, and humans (particulalry in extreme situations) sometimes act out of instinct. But the proportional contribution of these motivational forces is very different.

Human sexuality is biologically different from that of other mammals (all as far as I know?) in that the sexual urge exists separate from the reproductive urge...women are sexually responsive irrespective of ovulation, and men's sexual attraction to women is not dependent ipon their fertility. Even our closest genetic cousins, the chimpanzees, differ from us in this respect.

How much of male human sexual behavior is reproductive in intent? Very little. For that matter, human males exhibit a great capacity for loving and tending to young they know are not their biological offspring, often going to great lengths to adopt children etc. True, one sometimes sees this among animals, but to nothing like the extent we see in humans...as innumerable adoptive fathers, foster fathers and step-fathers can attest.

I really don't think there is much about human relationships and sexual behavior that can be explained on genetic grounds. If there were, there would be far more uniformity among men...they'd be (by your reasoning) uniformly promiscous when in fact they are not, there's a lot of variation among men. They'd lose desire for a woman upon finsing out she's not fertile -- but in fact, they don't. And they wouldn't be hurt by a wife's cheating as long as their was no pregnancy at issue -- but in most cases they are. Women who have no children and don't intend to have would be less concerned about infidelity... but they aren't.

Not to mention all the other aspects of our behavior that would be different if genetically based. We'd physically attack people who angered or threatened us (of course, some people do..but they are a minority. Most of us accept thre value of compromise and lawful means). We'd do and not do a great many things differently... to the detriment of civilization.

I act against my genetically based instincts every single day, countless times a day. So does everyone over the age of about 5 years, with the possible exception of some hardcore prison inmates.

The same men who argue that they can't help being promiscous somehow manage to restrain themselves from acting on other instincts (e.g. aggression, fear) most of the time. As humans we have a large volume of learned behavior and information and the ability to chose to override our instinctive urges and select alternative courses of action.

While somewomen on this thread have expressed that they feel no desire to cheat, most women will -- if a relationship lasts long enough and they are honest with themselves -- experience sexual attraction to other men. Some will act on it, more will not. The only difference I see with men is that proportionately more -- but by no means all -- chose to act on their instinctive urges.

Just before writing this post I was on a work-related field trip with a group of male colleagues/counterparts. One of them I found very attractive. I was perfectly aware of the attraction, enjoyed being around him, but took care not to let it show and at no time considered acting upon it. (He's married, for one; and even were he not, I can see that we'd probably not really work as a couple anyhow for a whole variety of reasons). Now, I am nearing the end of my child-bearing years and have no children. If genetic programming prevailed, I should have been all over the place trying to lure him. But I wasn't. The impulse was there, but the higher brain easily overrode it.

Although some of them act in ways that may sometimes led us women to doubt it, men have higher brains and the ability to use them too!

I think that if most men would honestly reflect upon how they felt or would feel when cheated upon, they will find a whole range of hurts that have nothing to do with paternity. Feelings of personal inadequacy/rejection; feelings of having been deceived, etc etc.

For those of you who really can't get the idea that there is a valid emotional relationship issue here, the answer is simple: don't go into monogamous relationships. Be upfront about what you want and intend, and be prepared to let it go both ways. (Don't blame us if, especially as you age, you don't find too takers....)

when do you think is the appropriate time for a man to clarify to a woman that he is going to have more than one woman?  The first time they meet?  The moment before sex?  Or after the first sex?  Do women ask first before the relationship ever starts? 

I totally agree that lying is wrong.  But the present societal environment and expectations of women make most men think the best way to do is to lie.

I would say, at the point that the relationship seems to be turning serious. What defines that varies with the culture and the times.

In my culture it is normal to have a discussion about exclusivity at some point along the line. Sometimes it is simply assumed to be equated with the decision to move in togethe4r and certainly to get married..although in both cases I think it would be desirable to still have an upfront chat to clarify things.

But men, be sure you know your own feelings....I had a long-term relationshiop with a man once who made it clear we were non-exclusive. He wasn't wildly scr*wing around but did occaisonally date, and sleep with, other women, This was the deal from the start and I accepted it. Imagine my astonishment then when he got deeply hurt when I started seeing (and sleeping with..actually this was back in the early 70's when the two were synonymous!) someone else....he got really, deeply hurt and I was stunned because I honestly thought this was what he wanted...for us to each see other people...

that was a great post (2 up from me) sheryl... i have always been skeptical of the genetic/instinctual argument as well but never heard anyone put it into words so eloquently.

Hi Meemaithai,

your post is exactly why I don't put much stock in the "it's in a mans nature" argument, as, if the reason men cheat is becuase they are genetically programmed to do so because of nature, then it stands to reason that all men WILL cheat. Which we know to not be true

It's like "why do some dance better than others?""why do some ski better than others?"

Different people different demands, different capabilities, different beliefs, different .... so on.

Some men don't like sex too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi boo my again and today I feel like discuss this with you...

when you say things like "genetically programmed" it sounds like you are giving orders a computer and nothing is flexible...

Well genes and other factors don´t work like that...

One on the main target as specie is the survival of such species...within the species, individuals want to make sure that their genetic information is passed on...

Evolution has lead to two different sexes within homo sapiens specie Male and Female.

Female gametes (reproduction cells which bear half of genetic information)

are expensive to produce therefore females are very careful when chosing a partner...

On the other hand male gametes are very cheap to be produced so they don´t care as much about the partner...

Because they cannot be 100% sure about their women fidelity they may want to mate with someone else´s so that they make sure that their genes are passed on. HOwever other males will carefully chose the female they mate with...thay are looking for a good mother...

This is a very reduced biological/ecological explanation about reproduction...

Through evolution this tactic is the one who has allowed the survival of individuals thus the specie. That´s why is keep it nowadays...however this may change...

For instance in old days spanish queen and kings mate only among them...future generations has shown that the intramating has reduced the genetic variation producing less strong individuals...that´s why the royal family is not so fussy about mating with individuals outside royalty...

In the situation of "men nature" ,always bear in mind that this is not true for all the individuals and for all animal species.

This is not the explantion about why men cheat...is a possible ecological theory for female and male sexual behaviour, which can be the grounds for more complex theories about why men cheat, etc...

But we are talking about why men & women cheat & why some people practice fidelity, not about women choosing who to fertalise their eggs with or continuing a royal blood line, the two have little to do with each other IMO, I think Sheryl's very eloquant post conveys my thoughts on it best.

Human sexuality is biologically different from that of other mammals (all as far as I know?) in that the sexual urge exists separate from the reproductive urge...women are sexually responsive irrespective of ovulation, and men's sexual attraction to women is not dependent ipon their fertility. Even our closest genetic cousins, the chimpanzees, differ from us in this respect.

Well sexul behaviour is different among species.

Green: in not only fertility and ovulation...is not that basic... other species more factors are involved...

How much of male human sexual behavior is reproductive in intent? Very little. For that matter, human males exhibit a great capacity for loving and tending to young they know are not their biological offspring, often going to great lengths to adopt children etc. True, one sometimes sees this among animals, but to nothing like the extent we see in humans...as innumerable adoptive fathers, foster fathers and step-fathers can attest.

How much is reproductive intent...look we are 6 billion people on planet earth...one of the most proliferate species...

You can´t compare figures because human population is higher in number...

Not to mention all the other aspects of our behavior that would be different if genetically based. We'd physically attack people who angered or threatened us (of course, some people do..but they are a minority. Most of us accept thre value of compromise and lawful means). We'd do and not do a great many things differently... to the detriment of civilization

Animals have their own hierarchy so that they don´t kill each other everytime they disagree about something....

an animal species (except some individual)...will not do things for the detriment of their population...

I act against my genetically based instincts every single day, countless times a day. So does everyone over the age of about 5 years, with the possible exception of some hardcore prison inmates.

Do you think that genes only code for instinct?

Do you thing that animals don´t go under certain circumstances against some instinct?

The same men who argue that they can't help being promiscous somehow manage to restrain themselves from acting on other instincts (e.g. aggression, fear) most of the time. As humans we have a large volume of learned behavior and information and the ability to chose to override our instinctive urges and select alternative courses of action

so do animals, in less extend though!

The impulse was there, but the higher brain easily overrode it.

what do you think controls the brain orders? what do you think is in charge in produce hormones, proteins...to make the brain fuction?

GENES.

I am afraid that genes are involved in our behaviour...and that can be denied.

Also we belong to mammals you may think that human behaviour is exclusive but in many cases is not...

I might add - whats the first thing said if a pregnancy occurs for a cheating person - oh christ we better get an abortion. This certainly doesnt sit so well with the spread the seed rationale.

I might add - whats the first thing said if a pregnancy occurs for a cheating person - oh christ we better get an abortion. This certainly doesnt sit so well with the spread the seed rationale.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well britmaveric...

The seed rationale though is not static and general for all the cases...on the contrary is flexible and evolve with time...

some human behaviour differs from that on animals but not all our behaviours are exclusive...

I might add - whats the first thing said if a pregnancy occurs for a cheating person - oh christ we better get an abortion. This certainly doesnt sit so well with the spread the seed rationale.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If we had no interest in 'spreading our seed' we would have no sex drive at all, and our species would never have evolved in the first place without this basic drive.

The reasons for people choosing abortion are usually to do with other major negative impacts on their life, for example financial, or the potential response of those around them.

Sheryl's points about us having the capacity to think through our decisions, is of course correct, but you cannot deny the instinctual motivations behind our behaviour which stems from our biological makeup.

People can choose to be monogamous for a variety of reasons, but as a species we are not biologically programmed to be such. If you want to understand why men often would like to sleep with more than one woman, then you need to understand that. Saying that it has nothing to do with genetic factors is just wrong. All our behavioural traits are influenced in such a way.

Edited December 23, 200520 yr by Scaramanga

I might add - whats the first thing said if a pregnancy occurs for a cheating person - oh christ we better get an abortion. This certainly doesnt sit so well with the spread the seed rationale.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If we had no interest in 'spreading our seed' we would have no sex drive at all, and our species would never have evolved in the first place.

The reasons for people choosing abortion are usually to do with other major negative impacts on their life, for example financial, or the potential response of those around them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not exactly - hide the fact they were cheating in the first place and well now there is evidence of the dirty deed.

But we are talking about why men & women cheat & why some people practice fidelity, not about women choosing who to fertalise their eggs with or continuing a royal blood line, the two have little to do with each other IMO, I think Sheryl's very eloquant post conveys my thoughts on it best

I don´t know how to make myself understand...

the text below is ground knowledge for understanding animal sexula behaviour:

female: Well if you expent a lot energy producing your eggs...Do you think it will be important to choose a correct male (one who will be willing to care your offspring)?

male: well if you are not sure if your genetic material will be passing on to the next generation do you think they will be willing to cheat?

when I used the royal family as an example I wanted to show that genes and genetic information is important for the survival of individuals...

The strongest individual are the ones who survive...when a genetic drift occurs in a population there is higher risk for that population to decline and dissapear...

I wanted to shw you that gene related behaviour can change in the benefit of a population....

Hi boo my again and today I feel like discuss this with you... 

when you say things like "genetically programmed" it sounds like you are giving orders a computer and nothing is flexible...

Well genes and other factors don´t work like that...

One on the main target as specie is the survival of such species...within the species, individuals want to make sure that their genetic information is passed on...

Evolution has lead to two different sexes within homo sapiens specie Male and Female.

Female gametes (reproduction cells which bear half of genetic information)

are expensive to produce therefore females are very careful when chosing a partner...

On the other hand male gametes are very cheap to be produced so they don´t care as much about the partner...

Because they cannot be 100% sure about their women fidelity they may want to mate with someone else´s so that they make sure that their genes are passed on. HOwever other males will carefully chose the female they mate with...thay are looking for a good mother...

This is a very reduced biological/ecological explanation about reproduction...

Through evolution this tactic is the one who has allowed the survival of individuals thus the specie. That´s why is keep it nowadays...however this may change...

For instance in old days spanish queen and kings mate only among them...future generations has shown that the intramating has reduced the genetic variation producing less strong individuals...that´s why the royal family is not so fussy about mating with individuals outside royalty...

In the situation of "men nature" ,always bear in mind that this is not true for all the individuals and for all animal species.

This is not the explantion about why men cheat...is a possible ecological theory for female and male sexual behaviour, which can be the grounds for more complex theories about why men cheat, etc...

I might add - whats the first thing said if a pregnancy occurs for a cheating person - oh christ we better get an abortion. This certainly doesnt sit so well with the spread the seed rationale.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If we had no interest in 'spreading our seed' we would have no sex drive at all, and our species would never have evolved in the first place.

The reasons for people choosing abortion are usually to do with other major negative impacts on their life, for example financial, or the potential response of those around them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not exactly - hide the fact they were cheating in the first place and well now there is evidence of the dirty deed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would come under 'potential response of others around them'

If we had no interest in 'spreading our seed' we would have no sex drive at all, and our species would never have evolved in the first place.

If by this argument, women would only want to have sex during the release of their egg right, or is it only men who act on their animal instinct?