Why are some spouses faithful and decent, while others cheat and lie?

Answer 1

I believe it is a personal moral compass. Some people (women too) believe that no matter what, they are entitled to personal happiness and if their partner is not providing them with what they feel they deserve, they feel that they have every right to go elsewhere. For others, they would never even entertain the idea. For them a commitment is a commitment and they would never stray. They may divorce, but they can't cheat as their own mental health depends on their self-perception as a moral person. There are those too who place all of their self-worth and self-perception into their primary love relationship. In other words, they love so much and with everything that they have and can't imagine cheating on their lover ( I'm one of these).

Answer 2

First off, using qualifiers that modify the rest of your sentence in so judgmental a way will get you judgmental answers- and emotions have a tendency to cloud facts. (For instance, not every faithful spouse is "decent" [not sure what you mean by this word- Honorable? Virtuous? Respectable? They all mean different things], and not everyone who cheats and lies is- um- "in"decent.)

For example, if we're speaking here of a person who demands his or her spouse to be faithful and then refuses to sleep with said spouse, thereby violating the marriage oath, then I'm on the side of the spouse who was in this case the first to be lied and cheated to. Guess which one I mean? ;-)

On the other hand, if you are talking about someone (like- oh, let's say, my own ex-husband, for example) who fervently promises undying loyalty and devotion, behaves with insane jealously even to the spouse's associates at work and his or her family members, and then has the nerve to run out and sleep with an old girlfriend or boyfriend at the first opportunity, I say that person is a rat's patootie, as my Mother would so eloquently put it!

But the original question was "Why?" My own guess- old-fashioned as some may find it (and assuming all other things in the marriage are equal) is simply weak character and moral instability. That goes for women as well as men. If you don't know how to keep a promise- no matter what!- you're not ready to be married.

Answer 3

that query is somewhat complicated and probably won't be able to be responded right here. in case you have suffered out of your significant different's infidelity, you have my properly suited sympathy. you ought to learn each element of your relationship and see what the subject concerns are. a marriage counselor can help. additionally, there are some large loose internet web content obtainable with suggestion approximately infidelity which you will discover very useful. in actuality, spouses cheat because of the fact somebody else is assembly their "desires". those desires comprise affection, appreciation, communique, admiration, shared interestes/entertainment activities, intercourse, and so on. whilst an significant different starts getting a choose crammed by using yet another, the particular interest starts to overcome the significant different and that could quickly carry approximately an affair -- fantastically if there's a void interior the marriage. The voids are often brought about by using not having as lots inner maximum time for one greater anymore (with the aid of careers, little ones, and so on. or different stresses in life). Voids are actually not excuses to have an affair (there is not any excuse for an affair), yet they're some motives for the dynamics in the back of affairs. i'm very sorry which you ought to ask this question. you have assorted artwork forward and assorted healing to do. solid luck! hugs

Answer 4

That is a very good question. I often thought it was the way they were brought up. Not so maybe their value systems are messed up. No easy answer it's like why are some people murders or thiefs or just down right nasty. I guess it is something we will be asking for a long time.

Answer 5

Because in order to be a spouse you have to be human. Some humans are assholes and some are nice. some are stupid and some smart. Spouses are like all people. Winners and Losers.

Answer 6

Because some PEOPLE are faithful and decent while others are cheaters and liars.

Answer 7

becouse guys or girls may have everything they want but the get tired of the same everday life and want more than one, its not there fault (the wife or victim) its the person whos doing it , its there fault

Answer 8

Coming at this question from the perspective of evolutionary psychology, humans may just be hardwired to do this. If you look at it that way then perhaps those (male) spouses "faithful and decent" though they may be, serve an entirely different evolutionary purpose than other males? Perhaps the mating 'goals' of human males and females are RADICALLY different:

“ a man's reproductive success generally increases with his number of sexual partners (in the absence of contraception), whereas a woman reaches her reproductive limit rather quickly as her number of sexual partners increases. This is because males can opt out of parental investment in a way that women cannot — nature can't enforce child support laws any better than modern governments. Of course, women under ancestral conditions probably used abortion and infanticide to avoid maternal investment during difficult times (see Hausfater & Hrdy, 1984), but they could not induce another woman to bear a child for them. Maternal investment was obligatory in hominids; paternal investment was not.

Mating among our ancestors probably occurred in the context of small, mobile hunter-gatherer tribes. As with most primates, social life was probably centered on matrilines (female kin groups and their offspring), with the males largely fending for themselves, hovering around the periphery, and trying to insinuate themselves into the powerful female bands (see Dunbar, 1988). Under these conditions, the central mating problem for males was inseminating mature, attractive, viable, fertile females (Buss & Schmidt, 1993). The central mating problem for females was obtaining good sperm and good genes from high-quality males, and perhaps some provisioning and protection from a few males whose presence was not more trouble than it was worth.

Without marriage, mortgages, or money, why stick with just one lover during a lifetime? Given this social complexity and fluidity, each sex probably evolved a multitude of flexible strategies for pursuing their mating goals (Buss & Schmidt, 1993; Simpson & Gangestad, 1992). An individual's current strategy might depend on their personal attributes(e.g. age, health, attractiveness, parenting skill, social skills, and seduction skills), the state of their kin network and social network(e.g. number of dependable child-care helpers), and various ecological conditions(e.g. reliability and patchiness of resources, foraging costs and dangers) and demographic conditions (e.g. operational sex ratio).


The helplessness and expense of human infants increases both the nongenetic and genetic benefits from mating: choosing males for their provisioning and protection ability eases the energetic burden of motherhood, but choosing males for their indicators of genetic quality and their aesthetic displays reduces the risk of producing sickly, unattractive offspring that may never reproduce.

Many people assume that the opportunities for mate choice would have been severely limited under ancestral conditions, due to the supposed prevalence of arranged marriages, the exchange of women as chattel between families and tribes, the influence of cultural rules concerning incest, outbreeding, marriage, monogamy, and adultery, and the generally low status of women under patriarchy. But there is good archaeological and ethnographic evidence that many of these factors arose within the last 10, 000 years, where they arose at all (see H. Fisher, 1992). The economic and geographic demands of agriculture distorted human mate choice patterns, because agriculture requires long-term investment in preparing and maintaining a plot of land, and thereby reduces the physical and social mobility that underlay the free choice of sexual mates in hunter-gatherer tribes. Modern mating behavior may not accurately reflect ancestral patterns of sexual selection.

Just when we thought we were comfortable with the idea of blind natural selection shaping human nature, the eerie, half-sentient process of sexual selection came back from the dead, more powerful and ubiquitous than ever. A full recognition of the role of mate choice and sexual competition in human affairs and human evolution may shake not only our psychology, but our psyches. It remains to be seen whether we have the intellectual creativity, the sexual self-confidence, and the existential courage to pursue these inquiries to their completion.

Answer 9

id say some are more "doggy" think with their weiner than others..womanizers vs..nonwomanizers..source of their confidence..which theyll regret when older and laying in their bed they made..

Answer 10

THIS IS A QUESTION THAT HAS BEEN ASKED SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME..............WHO KNOWS?