Travis Tackles Relationships III

Last week we got into how you might feel if your significant other had to make out with someone because of their job. You know, like if they were an actor or an actress or an accountant or something. Regardless of how you felt about it, you have to admit, in that scenario, at least you knew about it and sort of had a say in it. Even if they chose the job over you, you still had a say in it.

But what if you didn't? That's right, could you forgive a cheater?

Randy was watching Extract the other day, and thought that the ending implied that (spoiler alert) the couple stayed together in the end. That got him thinking about the aforementioned question at hand. And when Randy starts thinking, guess who the poor bastard is that has to listen to it? Well, now you all get to share in my pain.

As per my usual disclaimer, in which I fully admit to having no real grounds to be giving an opinion on any of this, I should mention that I have never been in love. And I can't honestly claim to know how that sticky little emotion might change my perspective on any of this. I can only guess based on how I think I would feel. So, again, take this all with a grain of salt.

First and foremost is the popular mantra 'once a cheater, always a cheater'. Which I fully endorse. It takes a certain moral ambiguity to cheat on someone that you claim to care about, and I don't think that sort of inherent character flaw is the type of thing that just goes away simply because you got caught once. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't say whether it can even be corrected with time and counselling or not. But for the most part, I think it's is a very good rule of thumb. If they cheat on you once, no matter how sorry they seem, there's a pretty good chance they'll cheat on you again, eventually. It's like waking up after a night of drinking, with an awful hangover, and promising yourself that you'll never drink again as long as you live. In that moment you honestly mean it (just as I'm sure an apologetic cheater does). In your mind, you absolutely won't drink ever again. But how many people honestly stick to that promise in the end?

And it's all tied in with that same little character flaw that let's them cheat in the first place: selfishness. To me, the sort of person that cheats is the sort of person that thinks about themselves first and foremost. If they were thinking about your feelings, they could never have done it in the first place, right? If they cared about you at all, they wouldn't be able to do it, knowing how much pain it would cause you. The fact that they don't - even for that one little instant when they give in to temptation - tells me everything I need to know about them. It's a very revealing moment. You learn more about that person in an instant, than a thousand dates could ever reveal.

Sure, they're all tears once they're discovered. And they should be. They aren't complete monsters (or you wouldn't have cared about them in the first place). But it's the difference between someone that honestly cares about you, and someone that only cares whether or not you know about it. Yes, it makes them sad to know that they hurt you, but the mere fact that they're only sad after the fact, speaks volumes. They may not be selfish all the time, but in that moment of truth, they chose themselves over you. Which, to me, is what would bother me more than anything. The thoughts of her in the throws of passion with another man - while it would be tough - I honestly believe I could get past. It's the knowledge of how easily she could cast my feelings aside for her own enjoyment that would be impossible to get over.

It's sort of like that term 'emotional cheating'. Where people get mad at their significant other for having a relationship with someone in a chat room or something. And the argument is that if there's no sex, then it's not cheating. And when you first hear about it, your initial reaction is that getting upset over some harmless emotional cheating is stupid. That it really can't be cheating without sex. But at the end of the day, I kind of agree with the person that's upset. An emotional connection goes much deeper than a physical one, in my mind. And to not understand why trying to have that same connection with multiple people might upset your partner, well, that's just missing the point entirely. It's not about a text book definition of cheating, where everything is black and white, and sex is cheating and everything else isn't. That's not the way it works. It's all grey area. And it's all different for each person. Some people think simply looking at another person - checking them out, or what not - is wrong. Other people could care less, so long as the person looks but doesn't touch. Some wives don't mind if their husbands go to strip clubs, whereas others won't even let their husband look at the Sunshine Girl.

My point is, you should know your partner. If you really care about them, you know what they consider to be ok and you know what will hurt them. And by still doing that which hurts them, when you know that it does. Well, that's the worst thing you can do. Playing dumb, or trying to stick to some rigid definition of right and wrong, where these things are always right and only these things are wrong, well that's just bullshit. If you know it hurts her, then it's wrong. Simple as that.

So whether it's 'just' kissing, or 'just' having sex, you know when you've cheated on your partner, and while the ability to forgive that transgression will vary based on the person and the severity of the act, at the end of the day, you know if it was cheating or not, and if you chose to still do it anyways, then you just didn't care about that person as much as you'd like to think that you did.

Which brings us to whether or not I would take someone back if they had cheated on me. No, I don't think I would. Not because I think adultery is unforgivable - which some people do, and have every right to - but because I think that their true character has been revealed, and honestly, that is not the sort of person I want to be around. It's kind of like the type of person that would torture and kill a puppy. I almost think they should be punished worst than the guy that accidentally ran over an old lady in a cross walk. Not because I value the life of a dog more than the life of a human, but because I think it speaks to a much deeper sickness. If you can look a cute puppy in it's adorable face and without regret, hit it or burn it or cut it or beat it, then there is just something wrong with you. You are broken and probably cannot be fixed. On a strictly psychological level, that guy is a bigger threat to society than the accountant that wasn't paying attention when Nana needed to cross 32nd and Vine.

I'm not trying to compare animal cruelty and manslaughter to cheating, at least not in terms of the severity of the transgressions, but I am comparing them on a strictly psychological level. I'd be willing to forgive the guy that accidentally ran over grandma, but I don't think I could do the same for the guy that could look something so cute in the face and only wish it harm. Just like I don't think I could ever believe a person that looked me in the eye and told me that they cared about me, but then proved that they really didn't by cheating on me. The end result isn't the point, otherwise having a dead person would of course be far worse than having a injured dog. The point is why they did it in the first place.

But, maybe that's just me. I can't factor in what it would be like to have a wife of 20 years cheat, especially if you had kids. I mean, at that point, what do you do? You may not ever forgive them, but you might need to move past it and stay together for the kids. And like I said, it's different for everyone. Maybe you have forgiven a cheater. Maybe that makes a you a better person than me. Although, I doubt it. Really, it just proves that each person has a different set of standards, and no one person's are right, and no one person's are wrong.

Except for Hitler. I'm pretty sure his were wrong.