Infidelity and Investment

Share
Posted: 24 days ago

I think there has been enough debate about what should count or not count as Infidelity.

The meaning of the word Infidelity is the action or state of being unfaithful to a spouse or other sexual partner.

 I am quoting here a reference from a book which I had once read during my curriculum known as Sex at Dawn by Christopher Ryan.


Marriage," "mating," and "love" are socially constructed phenomena that have little or no transferable meaning outside any given culture. The examples we've noted of rampant ritualized group sex, mate-swapping, unrestrained casual affairs, and socially sanctioned sequential sex were all reported in cultures that anthropologists insist are monogamous simply because they've determined that something they call "marriage" takes place there. No wonder so many insists that marriage, monogamy, and the nuclear family are human universals. With such all-encompassing interpretations of the concepts, even the prairie vole, who "sleeps with anyone," would qualify.”

― Christopher Ryan


“Intimacy with someone besides our partner that’s emotional, not physical.”

It happens to many people, and in a world of hyper-communication and connectivity, it’s becoming an increasingly big topic. So, what do we do?

My topic of discussion shall revolve around these two basic principles which has been sparked by one crucial dialogue from today's episode.

Jealous Prerna:

Mujhe itni Jalan kyun ho rahi hai, Anurag ko kisi aur k saath dekhkar. Durga Ma, do something so that nothing happens between them.

My question here is simple and connection of dots through human psychology. Do you think physical infidelity is the only form of infidelity?

What qualifies as emotional infidelity? If emotional infidelity is to be taken into account, both Anurag and Prerna have been infidels to each other too during Mishka, Komolika and Prerna's ex-husband scenario.

Also, the book by Christopher Ryan does give a preview of what infidelity means to men and women.

For men, sexual infidelity is a HIGHER CRIME in their eyes!

For women, EMOTIONAL INFIDELITY a matter of problem as compared to Sexual Intimacy. That's why probably Prerna was okay to get Anurag back even after his SUHAAGRAAT. For women, subconsciously EMOTIONAL MALE PATERNAL INVESTMENT is more important than sexual loyalty.

Another interesting topic for discussion could be: Are we, slowly as a society moving ahead to a concept that shuns monogamy?

Leaving the topic open for discussions. 

Note: Please comply with the forum rules before you want to get this thread locked. Rooting and looking forward to some interesting possible discussions.

Posted: 24 days ago

Are we, slowly as a society moving ahead to a concept that shuns monogamy?

Answer is, No, never, but only to feed fantasies online even offline , people only for their favourites are. But when it comes to others whom they don't like, or abhor or don't even know, people are quick to judge and hold lengthy discussions wronging / moral policing the entire thing. 

To sum up,  others kare toh wrong hum kare toh sahi. smiley36 rather hum kare toh bahut aala baki kare toh ch------pa smiley36

Edited by WaqtZaya - 24 days ago
Posted: 24 days ago

I will tell you another example, if one's Favourite celeb couple breaks up, we as humans are always ready with our guns to jump down to conclusions and hold the less favoured person at fault and label that person with colourful words. But when known acquaintance go through the same break up, people shower with self love and self respect and etc justifications saying why stay in an abusive relationship etc. Similar situation here.

But as a society on whole keeping this favourism aside, no, we are too regressive for shunning monogamy. 

Edited by WaqtZaya - 24 days ago
Posted: 24 days ago

Interesting topic. In fact, through the various discussions here ..I have been thinking. Concepts like  marriage, loyalty, are they slowly losing importance?  On Sunday, there was an article on work husband, that best friend of yours at work. At what point does this constitute infidelity?? 

In some Scandinavian countries, marriage is not needed for loyalty and lifelong togetherness. There is a commitment made to have kids etc. Yet, there is no formal agreement of marriage. People enter a relationship with full maturity and integrity. Yet, if they separate, the law protects the children. 

I am still old school and I suppose a prude smiley36.  But society is changing. It's very evident even here. 

Posted: 24 days ago

Originally posted by WaqtZaya


Are we, slowly as a society moving ahead to a concept that shuns monogamy?

Answer is, No, never, but only to feed fantasies online even offline , people only for their favourites are. But when it comes to others whom they don't like, or abhor or don't even know, people are quick to judge and hold lengthy discussions wronging / moral policing the entire thing. 

To sum up,  others kare toh wrong hum kare toh sahi. smiley36 rather hum kare toh bahut aala baki kare toh ch------pa smiley36

Ankie, I have to agree and disagree to bits and portions. Agreed totally to to the online fantasy bit. 

I have some shocking facts. There was an online dating site recently opened in Bangalore for married people and you’d be shocked to see the number of enrolments within a day! Women and men alike. We are a society of structural monogamy but what about the infidelity and polyamory existing in the society. It’s a strange wave of change that is uprising everywhere. 



Posted: 24 days ago

Originally posted by manzilmukul


Ankie, I have to agree and disagree to bits and portions. Agreed totally to to the online fantasy bit. 

I have some shocking facts. There was an online dating site recently opened in Bangalore for married people and you’d be shocked to see the number of enrolments within a day! Women and men alike. We are a society of structural monogamy but what about the infidelity and polyamory existing in the society. It’s a strange wave of change that is uprising everywhere. 

i didnt say polygamy didn't exist. During  my clinical psychology orientation class, hod was the first one to drop that men and women now alike are polygamous. Yet we are too regressive to shun monogamy.. at least to show so. But it all sums down to, hum kare toh bahut aala and baki kare toh ch------pa smiley36 

Edited by WaqtZaya - 24 days ago
Posted: 24 days ago

Originally posted by WaqtZaya


I will tell you another example, if one's Favourite celeb couple breaks up, we as humans are always ready with our guns to jump down to conclusions and hold the less favoured person at fault and label that person with colourful words. But when known acquaintance go through the same break up, people shower with self love and self respect and etc justifications saying why stay in an abusive relationship etc. Similar situation here.

Very truly explained. It’s absolutely easy to speculate and comment on people’s lives in public domain. Bash them and jump to conclusions. 

But as a society on whole keeping this favourism aside, no, we are too regressive for shunning monogamy. 

We aren’t probably regressive but slowly there is a shift in the kind of stories we are telling. We were never a monogamous society to begin with. 

Posted: 24 days ago

Originally posted by WaqtZaya


i didnt say polygamy didn't exist. During  my clinical psychology orientation class, hod was the first one to drop that men and women now alike are polygamous. Yet we are too regressive to shun monogamy.. at least to show so. But it all sums down to, hum kare toh bahut aala and baki kare toh ch------pa smiley36 

True. Another depressing fact is that on the behest of structural monogamy, I see so many men being infidels and same goes for women. It’s saddening to see, on one hand they have structural conventional families and on the other hand they have parallel love lives. 

Related Topics

No Related topics found

Topic Info

  • 16 Replies
  • 2137Views

Topic started by manzilmukul

Last replied by manzilmukul

FORUM QUICK JUMP

TOP