If you know someone is already in a relationship and don't personally know their significant other ... do you have any obligation to respect that relationship and not "carry on" with them? Or do you think it's completely on them and you're free to do whatever they allow?

Especially considering ... you've made no vows to anyone?

Destee..

no..I don't think you are obligated to respect someone else's relationship..if he/she is what you want and they make themselves available, then you can take whats on offer, if you're inclined to do so..it's he/she, who's out there prowling that needs to respect the relationship..

on the other hand, you have to sleep at night, knowing what you've done, taking part in his/her deception/betrayal and knowing you took part in maybe ruining a relationship/marraige and maybe even helped split a family unit apart....and it's you who has to live with the consequences of your actions...

we only do what we wanna do!!

K

i'm wit Kem 100% on dis here

although I 'd like to say it all boils down to respect...thats an emotion that so many people today do not place any importance upon..

I never said not respecting anyone else's relationship was the right thing to do, but in answer to the question, I have to say that it is the responsibility of the committed person to ultimately respect their spouse enough not to cheat and to honour their relationship...we are by nature, predators, it's a basic instinct..so some of us prey on others, and some of us do not stop to think if it is right or wrong...

then again, if you are in a relationship, and another woman/man, not your spouse, decided they wanted you, all you have to do is say NO....then there is no problem, no cheating..in other words you have repected your relationship to the point where you could walk away and not let yourself be tempted...

I never said, "do unto others before they do unto you"..the question was whether you have a responsibility to respect anothers relationship, not whether you think it is morally right or wrong to have sexual relations with a person who has a spouse already...

and Kem, while my statements may sound selfish, they are certainly not narsissistic, I was not only thinking of myself, I was merely placing the responsibility where it should be placed, in the hands of the one who is committed...if we each look after our own..no problem!!!

K

yes K ya right every one should track their own ground
and do da right thing!..............sistah ya on point

Thanks Yall for responding ... Kitana ... I know that the person(s) involved in the relationship has an obligation and if they honored it there would be no need for this question.

But if they don't honor it, do you feel any obligation to do so? Personally?

The reason that I asked the question is because it seems that so many don't feel that any respect or consideration should be given to the person who holds the position of lover, spouse, significant other ... in the lives of those we want to "carry on" with. I think that there would be less cheating if we as human bengs gave the consideration that is due to our Sisters and Brothers, regardless of if we know them ... simply because they are human beings that are due this basic consideration.

I guess my point is, I don't have to know my Sister, to know that she is my Sister and if he is still with her ... then I should not be. Period. I really do feel as though I owe her that consideration, and it makes no difference if she's not willing to give me the same, because it's not all about her ... but me as well ... like you said ... I'm the one who has to live with the decisions I make. And like you said too Kitana, folk do exactly what they wanna do ... this just happens to be me doing me. :)

Again, thanks for responding yall.

from a personal point of view and not speaking in general..if a man who was in a committed relationship wanted to take our aquaintence a little further, I would tell him to go home to his wife/girlfriend whatever, and talk it over with her because I'm not interested...

speaking as a wife, I know how it would make me feel if some other woman was involved with my husband, but I would blame him before her, because he is the one who made promises to me, not her...thats not to say I wouldn't envision doing all sorts of things to her to make her pay, but he would be at the receiving end of my initial anger and all the feelings that would come with it..

I would like to think it possible for everyone to have enough respect for others to act accordingly, but it just doesn't happen that way, so the best we can do is take care of our own business and hope for the best...

K

Yes Kitana, I agree with you 100%. I think it's a shame that there will probably never be a time where the majority respects what belongs to another. We often talk about men cheating, the pain it causes the women they love, etc., but a man could not cheat if a woman did not let him lay with her. A woman that oftentime knows the pain her actions will cause. I am not understanding why more of us can't simply respect each other enough to choose not to cause our Sisters pain ... irregardless of what her man may want to do. Yes, I'd like to think it possible but it does not seem likely. As time moves on, people seem to care even less.

Thanks Sis for sharing your thoughts on this one.

Destee

in response to Destee I was talking from a personal point of view..in answer to the initial question I was talking from a general point of view..and I still stand by my first response..we cannot rely on someone we don't know to safeguard our relationship, but we should be able to rely on our partner to do it..

if keeping our relationships intact is solely reliant on the hope that the other woman/man, will have enough respect for the unseen spouse, to stay away from our partner, then more often then not our relationship is doomed to fail....because some people just do not have the respect to do that...but I should be able to rely on the man I lay beside every night, and who has professed to love and care for me, to say no and walk away...

and Kem..the days of "not coveting anything that belongs to thy neighbours", is well and truly over for most people..and even though there may be "a reason that certain rules do exist", they are not abided by or adhered to, for the most part...and as for "each person is not allowed to travel on a journey that wreaks havoc on those they come in contact with"...tell that to the millions of people committing crimes of every kind, every second of every day....like it or not, we live in a dog eat dog world..where respect, morals, compassion and empathy for our fellow man are fast becoming traits that the minority of the population know the meaning of...

and in this world of sexual freedom, that even the threat of AIDS hasn't put a stop to, women and men are finding sex partners readily available wherever they turn...most of them most probably don't even remember the name of the person they had sex with, and they most probably don't even give a thought to the spouse waiting at home, it's become as routine as shopping at the grocery store for some of them...

So..is she obligated to respect my relationship?..NO..Is he obligated to respect our relationship?..**** straight he is...

K

believe it or not you just made my day...

"that is a very jaded and cynical point of view for one so young"..sorry Kem..but I'm not so young...and I do respect other peoples relationships...I was bought up to respect other people and to know the difference between right and wrong, and to have good moral values..that's why I said on a personal level, I would never touch a committed man..and I've been married to the same man since I was 17..we survived because we took care of our relationship..

and the breakdown happens because we are not staying at home looking after our own..relationships and families need love and care and time to work..we can only insure that by taking care of them ourselves..it all starts in the home...

K

Kitana,

Your 6:20pm post was entirely on point. One would be foolish to expect someone--who does not even know them--to respect their "relationship". We know that not only is the ratio of men:women something like 1:4, but a significant # of so-called relationships are only temporary (and superficial) friendships, therefore, there really should not even be an OBLIGATION for a woman to consider another woman's guy off-limits PER SE, unless of course we are speaking of a MARRIED man.

This is not a clearcut question. If you simply have two people seeing one another, but not married, well, if the male in that relationship is not serious enough to COMMIT to the female in that relationship, then the next female would be correct to conclude that he is SINGLE! And SINGLE=AVAILABLE. This is not to say that I believe the "vulture females" are acting on correctness (those who purposefully go after other women's men to try and appease their own raggedy lack of self-esteem). But single women who are pursued by unmarried men who happen to have another female friend are not OBLIGATED to turn him down. Conversely, I feel that we women ARE obligated to refrain from GOING AFTER men whom we know are "involved".

I personally will not accept the advances of a married man, no matter who he is or what he is like. I will not accept the advances of a man who is shacking with his significant other. In the married man example, it is because I respect both the wife (as having the status of WIFE as well as MY "Sister") and myself. You cannot allow a married man to have his wife at home, and you as his toy on the side, and think that you have any self-respect. The shacking man is disqualified by virtue of being shacked (what a turnoff). Moreover, sleeping with someone who is either married or shacked is asking to get maimed or killed, plain and simple.

With respect to obligation, although philosophically I wholeheartedly feel that the world has a responsibility to care for and look out for its constituents, and the whole village is responsible for its children, and I should be my Sister's Keeper, and males should be their Brothers' Keepers, that's a Utopian pipedream if you try and apply it to the society collective. But especially when speaking in terms of sexual relationships.

We can make better use of our time and energies if we try and instill this moral (fidelity/respect/protection) in our mates, and hold THEM accountable, rather than try and force OUTSIDERS to watch our backs (or debate whether they should).

This is a very, very hot topic, and one I am glad to see being raised. Destee, I appreciate your words, especially regarding what most people, especially our brothas, scoff at these days "The Sistahood". Because of the attitudes of "if he's creeping, it's not my fault, she needs to handle her bidness", it has made it much easier for "sistas" to get into relationships going nowhere, with unavailable men. Unavailable = married, live-in, engaged, committed-long-term-exclusively dating. There are some women who only aim their sites at the "unavailable" men...for various reasons, ranging from ego-tripping, to not wanting the "headache" on a constant. Having a part-time lover, in many cases, keeps the excitement "new" and "fresh". At the end of the day, however, there is still that emptiness...not having him for the holidays, etc.

If there was more of a "sistahood", Destee, there would be no one to creep with...brothas might then be forced to work out their "issues" at home...or buy a ho if they need release.

Glad you brought this up. And yes, this may be a struggle for many women (caring about a stranger's feelings)... but it's nothing but right. Whether we know the wife/lover or not...she is our Sister. We don't recognize it fully until we've been in 'her' shoes.

Oh, and one more thing...you've said it Destee "as time goes on, people care even less"...this, sis, is a sign of the times we live in.

All of you have indeed provoked important thoughts here.

Thanking you very much...

a

if they will accept any old kind of relationship...if they have no understanding of the importance of having standards...if they require nothing but saggin and baggin from their boyfriends... that's exactly what they will get.

I also have a son, who is getting the same message. It's a learned behavior that begins before any dating takes place. I maintain that women, from the moment we give birth to a manchild, have EVERYthing to do with shaping his opinion and his treatment of future women. And if he's been taught by both the women and men in his family, to respect himself and women, he won't be so inclined to deal on certain levels, himself.

Got to get em with this info while they're young...it's truly hard to unlearn bad habits. I'm a witness.

Yes, Kem, I agree with you. (did I say that????) :)


a

Originally posted by kemetstry
:cool:

Nia M
You just a dawg! :eeek: If you wont respect a committed dating situation ( and there are such things ), you wont respect a marriage!


:rolleyes: This is a simple matter of your misreading me, Kemetstry. I said nothing about not respecting a "committed dating situation". If the Brother is in love, then I'm not about to enter that picture. But if he's just "seeing" her, and nothing is definite, then why should I rule him out? Now if it is a long-term situation where they've been together for quite some time and are actually building something together, I respect such a relationship, and my Sister who is on the other side.

I am very offended by the fact that you suggest I would not respect a marriage, as religious as I am about respecting marriage. Just understand where I am coming from; I do not regard a relationship where the two parties refer to one another as "my friend" in the same way that I do a relationship where the parties refer to one another as "my wife" and "my husband". Some folk treat these fly-by-night "friendships" like they are marriages, when they are nothing but casual relationships that don't even have potential.

Allow me to illustrate what I am getting at, using an example from my own life. The brother I dated most recently, I suppose we dated for about four months. I never considered him my significant other really, although I considered him a candidate for becoming the #1 man in my life. I NEVER laid any claim to him, and felt he had no claim to me. I just liked him and was getting to know him by hanging out with him regularly. He began talking the "exclusivity" talk, and I wasn't feeling that. I wasn't digging him THAT deeply. It would've been different if I was really digging him like that. He wouldn't have been wrong to have had other friends, either. We weren't sleeping together or serious in any kind of way. Turned out we were not two of a kind. We're still friends.

If I know someone's relationship is deep, I wouldn't dare set myself up to become an infiltrator. But if it's just a shallow, uncommitted friendship, not even worth mentioning, then no one is "disrespecting" anyone. Let me just be very clear; I don't want someone else's guy. But folk need to stop trying to lay claim to other folk who consider THEMSELVES single and available.

My main thing is against trying to put a leash on someone whom you've only been seeing/knowing for a short time. I'm not speaking of those long-term, serious relationships. Parties involved in long-term, serious relationships should be treated as off-limits.

How would I know to draw a distinction? Are you asking how I would know that I should draw a distinction, or how I would know HOW to draw a distinction? I'll answer using the former. Well, if I know that a person could either be in love or not, I would go for the one who is NOT in love, seeing that such status would make them unattached emotionally. If they are emotionally attached, it would be wrong to interfere. But if there is no emotional attachment, what would be the point of ruling them out? True, I am not in love and have not been, and I also know that there are others out there who are in the same position as me. They are unattached emotionally at present. They are available for getting to know me, and me them. This is not giving in to the Id. You do not "give in" to the Id. You have no control over the Id. And I don't attempt to self-gratify, so I'm really not clear on what you are talking about.

In my opinion, if he were in love, he would not be trying to find out what he and I could be about together. If he mentions another woman and refers to her as his wife, fiancee, live-in woman, I wouldn't be inclined to accept a date.

How many people do you really believe there are out there, at any given time, who are TOTALLY unattached, with NO "steady"? Most folk have SOMEONE they are dating even if on irregular occasion, yet it is nothing serious. If it is serious, they are not checking out anyone else. If they are married and still checking others out, they are playing games of deception and betrayal.

I may be an oddball, but until I am at the very least mutually in love and engaged to be married, I don't expect the man I am dating to consider me exclusively as a prospective Lifemate. I think it better for him to rule out any other prospects before arriving at a final decision, rather than make a snap judgement with me. I won't be making a snap judgement with him, so.....

This is a most interesting conversation. Everyone has valid points that come from their own particular experiences and how they think things should be, not only for themselves, but for folks in general. Forgive my lack of knowledge, but what is "ld"? That has come up a few times in the convo and it appears to be significant but I don't know what that is. I do know that people do what other people allow them to do. I also know that people present pictures that do not give an accurate account of their situation which leads to confusion and making a wrong move...one you would not normally make because of your beliefs. This I see often when someone may be in a relationship but become attracted to someone else so they downplay the extent of their relationship so the new person won't be turned off...This usually leads to messiness which leads to negativity on and on and on and on. Life is a melodrama isn't it. Please fill me in on the ld thing.

you are correct, Kemetstry....

as we psych majors used to say back in the day...."put a lid on that id"......

word to the wise....
:D

a

I mistakenly read it as "ld" instead of "id" or mabe I need to get the perscription in my eyeglasses adjusted. At any rate, I do know what the id is. Thanks Kem. Alyce I've been trying to put a lid on my id for some time now. A work in progress for sure.

BE

BE....feel ya.

a

hmmm, i come in for a visit and fall right into an interesting topic. This is a very sensitive topic, but a much needed discussion. I shall post my views and not dwell on others opinions...

Now i feel that any relationship, whether good or bad, committed or non committed, should be respected. The key to this is simple: If one person is in a relationship, the other person should respect the relationship and walk away, IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THAT PERSON APPROACHED YOU OR NOT. We must look at it as if we were the other person in that relationship and wonder how we would feel if we discovered our mate cheating.

If we decide to be involved with someone, it is best to end the first realtionship before venturing onto another one. The reality today is that we get involved with someone else in order to ease the pain of ending a bad relationship, but that doesn't end the cycle of problems from the first relationship. Doors are left opened and feelings are still involved. Too many people become the proverbial "rebound" unknowingly.

Bottom line...respect a relationship. If that person is involved with another then avoid getting intimate with them. Being friends, knowing you have feelings for them will still cause problems.

Think about this: Do you want to be the thrid chair on Jerry springer or in the isolation booth on Ricki Lake?

Food for thought...

Dnommo ... i do so agree with you ... :) @ the third chair on Jerry ... thanks for adding on to this one.

Heartbeat ... you said a lot here ... "Everyone has valid points that come from their own particular experiences and how they think things should be, not only for themselves, but for folks in general." ... I try so hard not to do this.

As we just re-visited the copyright issue here in the forum, my mind thought on this topic and the fact that both are really based on the same thing. Respect for one's self. So much so, that you'd not take/want anything that doesn't belong to you ... be it a man, woman or poem.

Thanks Everyone.

Destee

unfortunately, people are re-defining what "commitment" means. Some are committed to their spouses/lovers/children in terms of finances ~ and physical presence in the home for the sake of continuity and family stability. And love is mixed in there, as well. However, there is a growing, common mindset that has veered away from what has been traditionally held. Folks dealing on this level assert that they "belong" to no one. (not what the marriage vows say, mind you) But they have taken on responsibilities of a family and will/do proudly maintain and uphold them.

So, in cases like this, where men and women are choosing to maintain the control over their "hearts", who go about living perhaps double and triple lives (loving on "different levels", another popular concept coming out in the open), it no longer is exactly like plagiarizing or stealing a piece of work. Especially in those rare, but real cases, where "everybody in the circle/triangle" is aware of all who are involved. But we're not talking about polygamous relationships...I know.

I agree with you Destee, in the strictest sense of taking what doesn't belong to you, it goes across the board. Except...what of those individuals who are parceling out pieces of themselves to multiple significant others? And are doing it well? (cases of folks who have had long-term "extra" relationships that last decades and have out-lasted and/or survived some marriages)....

A person always has a choice to be involved with such a thing, or not. AND, along with the choices a person is subject to what ultimately happens as the end result of his/her decision(s). But I believe the bottom line answer to the bottom line question "Is it right to steal and cheat?" is "no".

But those gray areas are getting wider based on what's really going on in this society. And it's into this ever-widening gray area, that some women (and men) are falling because 1) they want a relationship 2) the marketing/packaging/approach seems reasonable and do-able 3)they want a relationship. (yes, I did repeat 1 & 3 intentionally) :)

Just some thoughts....GREAT topic, Destee. Letting it marinate in my own head this morning.

thank you

a

If I might pose a sub-question...

Do you folk think it is "wrong" to "see" two people at the same time, neither of whom have any intimate contact with you?

Please answer the question considering each possibility: gentleman seeing two women non-intimately, woman seeing two gentlemen non-intimately.

This is probably the best example of old-fashioned dating....

It's good to "see" a variety of folks. Non-intimately. This is how we get to know all kinds of people on a social basis, enjoy each other's company, exchange ideas...and make informed decisions on the kind of wo/man that suits us best.

When we bring intimacy into it... well, whether we like the person or not, we've locked ourselves into a habit that's VERY hard to break...even though we know being together is a mistake.

Good sub-question.
thanks
a

For a while there, I thought y'all were trying to indict me for my dating principles. I'm all about a person being free to mingle platonically until they receive a spontaneous realization from among prospects. Besides, I think it easier to rule out the least appropriate matches when you are mingling among several prospects.

In my opinion he is not a dog, providing he is not mingling among several women for entertainment purposes. If he has many women friends with the purpose of getting to know them all non-physically, how could he be identified as a dog? If he is unmarried, but is marriage-minded, the wisest option would be for him to weigh his options non-physically before making such a major decision.

Great topic!

YES! One should respect the fact that someone is in a 'relationship' or 'involved' with someone. And, among the brotherhood WE KNOW when folk are 'otherwise engaged'.

Sadly there are some 'dogettes' out on the prowl who won't be honest. (That's right, I said it!--not out of meanness, but out of truth!)

Plus, I've seen an interesting new vocabulary develop on the street and in the office....

Adultery--Now called 'an affair' or 'office romance'.

My Baby's Daddy--Meaning, he was good enough to lay down with, but not good enough to marry!

Fiance--USED to mean when two people were engaged to be married. NOW being used when folk are living together, and don't know what else to call it.

My Man--USED to mean 'we ARE serious'. NOW means whoever I claim to be mine for whatever length of time I decide.

My Woman--SEE My Man.

Any other words I'm missing? Cmon fam, add your own!

Mike Ramey

:lol:!!!!!

I am crackin' UP at the definition of "My Man/My Woman"! As always, true indeed.

Shamefulness!

I like to use the term 'selective amnesia':eek: Where people USED to do, or HAVE done a thing, forget they did it, and 'pile on' to someone who is doing it now!

Ya on the money tonight, Kem!

Mike Ramey

what goes around comes around. don't do it and then get pissed if your life doesn't smell like roses.

true body of light

First, its good to be back. Been a while since I've been here. "Seeing" Destee earlier inspired me to come back. Now, to the subject at hand. I think it is a matter of integrity of a personal type. If YOU know the person is involved in a relationship, your own integrity should tell you this is somewhere you don't need to go - EVEN if the other party is willing to go there. There is responsibility, but it is personal responsibility - not left to someone else. We will all have to account for our own actions. I'm sure this viewpoint has already been stated. I just haven't read all of the posts yet......:cool: