Emotional Unfaithfulness

[Gabby]

A few days ago I was listening to the Christian radio station and there was a blurb on an upcoming show about emotional unfaithfulness to your spouse. The idea that I got from it was that a person doesn't necessarily need to be physically unfaithful or even lustful after another but that their emotional connection with another can be considered as unfaithfulness.

What do you all think, can a person be emotionally unfaithful?

[Piebald]

I'm interested in hearing more details. I'm wary of the emphasis that westeners place on emotions and sentiment though.

[themuzicman]

A few days ago I was listening to the Christian radio station and there was a blurb on an upcoming show about emotional unfaithfulness to your spouse. The idea that I got from it was that a person doesn't necessarily need to be physically unfaithful or even lustful after another but that their emotional connection with another can be considered as unfaithfulness.

What do you all think, can a person be emotionally unfaithful?
:ahem:

I think any married person would admit that there are times when you don't feel like you want to be married to your spouse. The emotional connection just isn't there, because there's friction or disagreement, or whatever.

That's hardly being unfaithful.

Now, if you develop a relationship with someone of the opposite sex that is closer than your relationship to your spouse, even though it's not physical, then we can talk.

Michael

[Gabby]

:ahem:


Now, if you develop a relationship with someone of the opposite sex that is closer than your relationship to your spouse, even though it's not physical, then we can talk.

Michael

That's what I what I was trying to get at. I agree with you, that there are times when the emotional connection with your spouse just isn't there for what ever reason. When there are times like that a person that you already have a strong emotional connection may become even stronger. There need not necessarily have to be any kind of physical attraction there.

[Xmansmommy]

Although I've never been married, I have been in long term relationships. And I would say yes, a person can be emotionally unfaithful.

[Gabby]

I should have put this in the OP but didn't. I think we need to kind of define what emotional unfaithfulness would be.

Jesus said that if a person was to lust in their heart after someone that is to be considered adultry. So, what constitutes emotional unfaithfulness?

[Xmansmommy]

For me personally, I wasn't referring to lust. When I've been emotionally unfaithful, the only way I know how to describe it is like this. I had and have emotional needs. I have sought out people....not always male but usually male. Someone to care when I'm hurting, someone to sympathize with my fears, doubts, pains. Someone to share excitement and joy with. Just someone who understands basic human emotions and isn't afraid to experience/discuss them. Someone to connect with on a purely nonphysical but emotional level where my own real life relationships have been lacking.

I still do it. I just happen to not be in a relationship now so I'm not being unfaithful. I may always do it until I find a real life relationship that meets my emotional needs.

[Xmansmommy]

I should have put this in the OP but didn't. I think we need to kind of define what emotional unfaithfulness would be.

Jesus said that if a person was to lust in their heart after someone that is to be considered adultry. So, what constitutes emotional unfaithfulness?

Going outside of the relationship to have one's emotional needs met. Although they can turn to lustful, mental and perhaps even physical unfaithfulness they don't necessarily have to.

[Rubia Warren]

I agree with Momz. Even though the relationship may be non sexual, nor does it stir any desires in that area, it can happen and it's real inappropriate. Also, it is often easily justified and brushed away by a hand wave simply because the sexual/lust element is not present.

[!Fluffy!]

Going outside of the relationship to have one's emotional needs met. Although they can turn to lustful, mental and perhaps even physical unfaithfulness they don't necessarily have to.


I agree.

I know of a couple right now working through this. The husband is an outgoing, emotional, demonstrative, very active person. Very talkative (if it's in his brain, it comes out of his mouth), but very pleasant. The wife is reserved, withdrawn, and very hard to get to know. They have been married over 20 years. Through their church they met a lady working in the same mission field as they and decided to form an association with her and another couple and move to another state. This lady is much like the husband, very outgoing and warm. Now because she was hurting financially she moved in with them, at the husband's suggestion. Even though she agreed to the arrangement, the wife felt threatened and the problems started almost immediately.

There was never a question of sexual infidelity. When the fights started the husband frankly admitted he had more fun with this other person around, and wished he could combine the steadiness and reliability of his wife with the bubbly warmth of their new friend - that then he would have the 'perfect companion'. (If I heard something like that come out of my husband's mouth it would kill me).

Eventually it all blew up in their faces and everything came out anyway, but the healing has begun and hopefully they will end up with a stronger bond than before.

My opinion at the outset was this was a matter of emotional infidelity, in some relationships (especially where the two partners are emotional opposites) more damaging than sexual infidelity. My feeling was the wife should have adamantly opposed such a living arrangement and confronted the situation head-on, of course that went against her quiet nature.

[Piebald]

I agree.

I know of a couple right now working through this. The husband is an outgoing, emotional, demonstrative, very active person. Very talkative (if it's in his brain, it comes out of his mouth), but very pleasant. The wife is reserved, withdrawn, and very hard to get to know. They have been married over 20 years. Through their church they met a lady working in the same mission field as they and decided to form an association with her and another couple and move to another state. This lady is much like the husband, very outgoing and warm. Now because she was hurting financially she moved in with them, at the husband's suggestion. Even though she agreed to the arrangement, the wife felt threatened and the problems started almost immediately.

There was never a question of sexual infidelity. When the fights started the husband frankly admitted he had more fun with this other person around, and wished he could combine the steadiness and reliability of his wife with the bubbly warmth of their new friend - that then he would have the 'perfect companion'. (If I heard something like that come out of my husband's mouth it would kill me).

Eventually it all blew up in their faces and everything came out anyway, but the healing has begun and hopefully they will end up with a stronger bond than before.

My opinion at the outset was this was a matter of emotional infidelity, in some relationships (especially where the two partners are emotional opposites) more damaging than sexual infidelity. My feeling was the wife should have adamantly opposed such a living arrangement and confronted the situation head-on, of course that went against her quiet nature.
Well, I'm still skeptical about the emphasis on emotions rather than behaviors, but that is a very interesting scenario. It sounds like they were very unequally yolked. I don't know if I feel comfortable calling it "unfaithfulness" though. Was she being "unfaithful" to him by not opening herself up and conforming to his emotional patterns? Or vice-versa? In my view faithfulness is 60% behavior, 30% feelings, and 10% mystery.

What was he getting from this woman that he should have gotten from his wife? If this woman had been his sister would that still constitute "cheating"?

What are "emotional needs"? Obviously there has to be a level of unique intimacy between a man and his wife. Is it that they should be able to, in their private chambers, pour their hearts out to one another, and discuss things in a frank nature? Is it that, if one spouse is feeling sad, the other is obligated to feel sad as well?

[Gabby]

For me personally, I wasn't referring to lust. When I've been emotionally unfaithful, the only way I know how to describe it is like this. I had and have emotional needs. I have sought out people....not always male but usually male. Someone to care when I'm hurting, someone to sympathize with my fears, doubts, pains. Someone to share excitement and joy with. Just someone who understands basic human emotions and isn't afraid to experience/discuss them. Someone to connect with on a purely nonphysical but emotional level where my own real life relationships have been lacking.

I still do it. I just happen to not be in a relationship now so I'm not being unfaithful. I may always do it until I find a real life relationship that meets my emotional needs.

I agree with you XMM, I don't think of it as lust either. I was just trying to compare.

I think we all seek out people to meet our emotional needs whether we are married or not.



Going outside of the relationship to have one's emotional needs met. Although they can turn to lustful, mental and perhaps even physical unfaithfulness they don't necessarily have to.
If our partner is not fulfilling our emotional needs would that be similar to them not fulfilling our physical/sexual needs?

chris

[Gabby]

I agree with Momz. Even though the relationship may be non sexual, nor does it stir any desires in that area, it can happen and it's real inappropriate. Also, it is often easily justified and brushed away by a hand wave simply because the sexual/lust element is not present.

Can a person be emotionally unfaithful with someone of the same sex?

[Gabby]

I agree.

I know of a couple right now working through this. The husband is an outgoing, emotional, demonstrative, very active person. Very talkative (if it's in his brain, it comes out of his mouth), but very pleasant. The wife is reserved, withdrawn, and very hard to get to know. They have been married over 20 years. Through their church they met a lady working in the same mission field as they and decided to form an association with her and another couple and move to another state. This lady is much like the husband, very outgoing and warm. Now because she was hurting financially she moved in with them, at the husband's suggestion. Even though she agreed to the arrangement, the wife felt threatened and the problems started almost immediately.

There was never a question of sexual infidelity. When the fights started the husband frankly admitted he had more fun with this other person around, and wished he could combine the steadiness and reliability of his wife with the bubbly warmth of their new friend - that then he would have the 'perfect companion'. (If I heard something like that come out of my husband's mouth it would kill me).

Eventually it all blew up in their faces and everything came out anyway, but the healing has begun and hopefully they will end up with a stronger bond than before.

My opinion at the outset was this was a matter of emotional infidelity, in some relationships (especially where the two partners are emotional opposites) more damaging than sexual infidelity. My feeling was the wife should have adamantly opposed such a living arrangement and confronted the situation head-on, of course that went against her quiet nature.


I know a couple with a very similar situation. The wife is very adventureous and very people oriented. The hubby is a homebody and not inclined to getting out and about. The lady has a very good girlfriend that she does everything together with. Family vacations are with her and the girlfriend and the kids. If she's having trouble or a problem she goes to her. If there is any joy to celebrate they celebrate it together. The girlfriend has become like a second mom to the children. She does everything with them. People have actually commented on their relationship with each other.

Would this be considered infidelity?

[!Fluffy!]

Well, I'm still skeptical about the emphasis on emotions rather than behaviors, but that is a very interesting scenario. It sounds like they were very unequally yolked. I don't know if I feel comfortable calling it "unfaithfulness" though. Was she being "unfaithful" to him by not opening herself up and conforming to his emotional patterns? Or vice-versa? In my view faithfulness is 60% behavior, 30% feelings, and 10% mystery.

What was he getting from this woman that he should have gotten from his wife? If this woman had been his sister would that still constitute "cheating"?

Good point. But maybe it has more to do with him than with whoever the other person is. You can be unfaithful in so many ways. What if I play computer games all night instead of going to bed with my husband? Is that not cheating?

If he has, after 20 years, given up, or abandoned his marriage at some level inside himself, and has come up with a clever plan to remain outwardly 'faithful' to his wife while having his emotional needs met elsewhere, that would be a problem, it would most certainly cause his wife anxiety and stress.


What are "emotional needs"? Obviously there has to be a level of unique intimacy between a man and his wife. Is it that they should be able to, in their private chambers, pour their hearts out to one another, and discuss things in a frank nature? Is it that, if one spouse is feeling sad, the other is obligated to feel sad as well?

My first response when I read the question was, only a guy would ask that. But on further reflection, you are right to ask it. Did you see that movie with Robin Williams where he went into hell to be with his wife who committed suicide? Heretical yes, but for some reason that scene flashed into my mind when I read your post.

If God sees us as one person, we had better be able to at least discuss things with each other in all frankness (while always seeking to inflict no harm on the relationship -- and knowing that some things are better left unsaid). As for feeling sad, it depends on why. Some people seem to enjoy feeling sad and are prone to commit emotional blackmail, which is a whole nother issue and would call for intervention.

[Gabby]

Well, I'm still skeptical about the emphasis on emotions rather than behaviors, but that is a very interesting scenario. It sounds like they were very unequally yolked. I don't know if I feel comfortable calling it "unfaithfulness" though. Was she being "unfaithful" to him by not opening herself up and conforming to his emotional patterns? Or vice-versa? In my view faithfulness is 60% behavior, 30% feelings, and 10% mystery.

What was he getting from this woman that he should have gotten from his wife? If this woman had been his sister would that still constitute "cheating"?

What are "emotional needs"? Obviously there has to be a level of unique intimacy between a man and his wife. Is it that they should be able to, in their private chambers, pour their hearts out to one another, and discuss things in a frank nature? Is it that, if one spouse is feeling sad, the other is obligated to feel sad as well?


I think we all have emotional needs that need to be met. We need someone to share our happiness and sorrows with. I don't think that that means our partner must mirror our emotions, just be there to empathize with them. To be understanding of our emotions and to be there for use when our emotions are getting the better of us.

[Xmansmommy]

I agree with you XMM, I don't think of it as lust either. I was just trying to compare.

I think we all seek out people to meet our emotional needs whether we are married or not.

And I would probably agree with that. I think what constituted emotional unfaithfulness on my part was the fact that although my parter was aware that he didn't meet my emotional needs, he was not aware that I sought to have them met elsewhere.


If our partner is not fulfilling our emotional needs would that be similar to them not fulfilling our physical/sexual needs?

chris

Similar in that the partners needs aren't being met, sure. But certainly that's a different issue.

[!Fluffy!]

I know a couple with a very similar situation. The wife is very adventureous and very people oriented. The hubby is a homebody and not inclined to getting out and about. The lady has a very good girlfriend that she does everything together with. Family vacations are with her and the girlfriend and the kids. If she's having trouble or a problem she goes to her. If there is any joy to celebrate they celebrate it together. The girlfriend has become like a second mom to the children. She does everything with them. People have actually commented on their relationship with each other.

Would this be considered infidelity?

Would you say that it has harmed the marriage? You'd have to ask the husband. If it makes him in any way feel less of a man or husband, or if he feels threatened by the girlfriend I'd say it's a huge problem. He may enjoy having her around too. Sounds to me like the friendship might have actually saved their marriage, you know?

In other words, I think the criteria would be the state of the marriage. If another relationship threatens it, that's bad. But if a friendship like the one you are describing enhances it, or keeps the wife happy and the husband glad he has someone to take the pressure off of him to talk, go shopping, go out, and do all the stuff that makes him uncomfortable etc., sounds like a happy compromise to me.

As for other people's comments, how small of them.

[Xmansmommy]

Can a person be emotionally unfaithful with someone of the same sex?

I believe so, yes. But do they usually seek someone of the same sex or the opposite sex? I didn't seek the closeness of another female although at times it had to suffice. At times an entire chat room fulfilled my emotional needs without even knowing it. I'm being very candid and I'm trying, to the best of my ability, to answer your questions. Not an easy thing for me to explain.

[Gabby]

Would you say that it has harmed the marriage? You'd have to ask the husband. If it makes him in any way feel less of a man or husband, or if he feels threatened by the girlfriend I'd say it's a huge problem. He may enjoy having her around too. Sounds to me like the friendship might have actually saved their marriage, you know?

In other words, I think the criteria would be the state of the marriage. If another relationship threatens it, that's bad. But if a friendship like the one you are describing enhances it, or keeps the wife happy and the husband glad he has someone to take the pressure off of him to talk, go shopping, go out, and do all the stuff that makes him uncomfortable etc., sounds like a happy compromise to me.

As for other people's comments, how small of them.

Maybe. I means some couples get right into swinging and the relationship is fine, others know their partners have a "on the side" thing going and are fine as it takes the pressure off them.

She is having her needs met elsewhere.

I only mentioned the comments because it is that noticable.

chris

[Xmansmommy]

Several things I think should be asked when considering whether or not someone is being emotionally unfaithful.

1. Is your spouse aware they aren't meeting your needs?
2. Are they aware that you are seeking to have them met outside the marriage/relationship?
3. Why does your spouse not meet your emotional needs?
4. Do you attempt to have them met inside your relationship?
5. Are they ok with your needs being met outside the relationship if they are?
6. How often do you seek to have your emotional needs met outside the relationship?
7. Do you seek to have them met by someone of the opposite sex? If so, why?
8. Would you rather desire to have them met by your spouse or have you given up on that as a viable option?
9. Is the person/persons who is meeting your emotional needs aware that they are?
10. Does the person/persons you are having meet your needs know of your dissatisfaction with your spouse?
11. What are their intentions in meeting your emotional needs?

There are probably many more but those come to my mind as I consider my behaviors and the questions I've often asked myself.

[Gabby]

I believe so, yes. But do they usually seek someone of the same sex or the opposite sex? I didn't seek the closeness of another female although at times it had to suffice. At times an entire chat room fulfilled my emotional needs without even knowing it. I'm being very candid and I'm trying, to the best of my ability, to answer your questions. Not an easy thing for me to explain.

The reason I ask is because I heard a quote somewheres that said that many lesbians are not truely lesbian. They are in the relationship that they are in because alot of times women can sympathise, understand, and in general meet emotional needs better than men.

chris

[Xmansmommy]

I think if everyone is satisfied with the emotional needs of a wife/husband being met outside the relationship then it isn't considered emotional unfaithfulness.

[Xmansmommy]

The reason I ask is because I heard a quote somewheres that said that many lesbians are not truely lesbian. They are in the relationship that they are in because alot of times women can sympathise, understand, and in general meet emotional needs better than men.

chris

That may very well be true, I dunno.

[Rubia Warren]

Can a person be emotionally unfaithful with someone of the same sex?
I think someone can.

[Rahab]

A few days ago I was listening to the Christian radio station and there was a blurb on an upcoming show about emotional unfaithfulness to your spouse. The idea that I got from it was that a person doesn't necessarily need to be physically unfaithful or even lustful after another but that their emotional connection with another can be considered as unfaithfulness.

What do you all think, can a person be emotionally unfaithful? Bonjour Gabbailey,

Thank you for bringing up such a topic as IMO many couples live in emotional disharmony and are susceptible to seek fulfillment of their needs outside of their marital relationship.

When we speak of "emotions", we may need to identify their source to comprehend which physical phenomenon takes place when we experience joy, fear, anger, grief, etc..... They can be both defined psychologicaly and physiologicaly. Brain regions and chemical interactions. It appears that the mental disposition of any person is the root of all emotions.

Emotions are also our language to communicate our brain response to various circumstances and stimulus. That communication is vital between two people if we want to consider "emotional faithfulness". There is a matter of natural mental compatibility for human beings to be able to relate to one another and be fulfilled in any given relationship.

Can a spouse be emotionaly unfaithful? I believe so. But not in the sense you presented it in your OP. I understand emotional faithfulness to be a conscious commitment to address the needs of our chosen mate. Neglicting to assume that mutual role in a couple is what I would define as unfaithfulness. The other party will undoubtly sense a gap in that precious communication and either attempt to get some attention or withdraw. That is when the red flag comes up.

I can relate strongly to what Xmansmommy so openly shared. She has such an intimate knowlege of her emotional profile that she knows to avoid to commit to a mate who would not address her needs. Idealy, we ought to all introspect and examine and recognize our humanity to spare ourselves and others from hurtful failures in our relationships.

To address specificaly "emotional unfaithfulness" as described in your OP: emotional connection with the opposite gender is bound to trigger a thought process leading to a potential for seeking further intimacy. The language of emotions becomes something that both want to experience with further means. Such means varying from physical comforting gestures to physical validation.

There is a specific reason why a male counselor will avoid physical comforting gestures towards his female counselee. Married pastors who offer counseling will often have their wife be the comforter during a session with a female. Those protective measures are there to acknowlege that once we present ourselves as a nurturer and validator of the opposite gender's emotional needs, we are opening the door to their relying on us to fulfill them.

Of course, counselors and trained ministers are not emotionaly unfaithful to their spouse. They are merely tools to help the counselees sort out the emotional impact of any given circumstances and redirect them towards a method of recovery.

But in day to day life, we are all susceptible to experience a natural mental attraction to the opposite sex. It needs not to be physical. It can be purely a matter of personality compatibility, intellectual relation or emotional relation. I think the unfaithfulness occurs the moment we disregard the prior commitment we made to our original chosen mate to share mutual nurturing and validation of our respective needs. When we fly to the rescue of our opposite sex best friend but neglict to apply the same intention and devotion to our chosen mate.

My first marriage was a failure due to total emotional and partial intellectual incompatibility. I did seek outside of our pseudo marital relationship to be validated by other males. I also sought to be a nurturer to them. Somehow, I had to communicate my emotions and know they were safe with someone else. Somehow, I had to know I was useful and helpful to someone else. It lasted almost 20 years.

In appearance, we were the "ideal couple". In reality, we were both miserable and unable to relate to one another. Was I emotionaly unfaithful? Certainly. Were there natural handicaps between my ex spouse and me, certainly. Had we married if we had learned more about one another, introspected more, acknowleged how vastly different we were and not equipped to relate to one another? No, we would not have married. And I must tell you that the day of my wedding, I knew we were not "soul mates" but I lacked the courage to be a "run away bride".

Relating to the whys and hows the chosen mate feels one emotion or the other, responds one way or the other to any given circumstances, being moved or touched by the same things and people as the chosen mate is, experiencing each other's emotion communication, agreeing on a common method to help one another, working on common goals, helping one another grow without placing demands or unreasonable expectations, those are qualities which cannot be experienced in a marriage when two people are not equipped and motivated to live them. To simply live them.

[Rahab]

The reason I ask is because I heard a quote somewheres that said that many lesbians are not truely lesbian. They are in the relationship that they are in because alot of times women can sympathise, understand, and in general meet emotional needs better than men.

chris I heard the same thing as you did. I suppose it would be helpful to ask that question to a lesbian. I have met many lesbians who are bi sexual and very few (two I can remember of who were bi) homosexual males. It was very common in my home town to have several friends who were gay. I had two male friends who related to me that they dated a lesbian and both were the nurturing to females' emotions type. They were both the unique male sexual relation both lesbians had experienced. Definitly driven by my friends' ability and willingness to meet their emotional needs. (none of my friends were per say the physicaly attractive type at all!).

My 18 year old daughter's best friend is a gay male who shares with her an extraordinary intellectual compatibility. They both share a passion for creative writing and poetry in their education. But they also feel both safe with one another. They both know that they can hug , comfort one another, confide into one another without the fear of being sensualy attracted to one another. It is an asexual relationship. It is quite interesting to observe. Naturaly, he presents no threat to her and she does not identify her friend as a typical member of the opposite sex.

[Alien]

A question I would like you all to consider is this: Is it reasonable to expect someone to supply all of another person's needs? My wife loves to ski (yes it's an emotional need, I believe) and I don't enjoy it. She has various friends that she goes with, and I fully approve. She has a very close female friend, and I have close male friend. My friend and I have supported each other at times when our married relationships have not been going totally smoothly, and I know my wife has done the same with her friend. My wife's friend has been supportive to me at times, for what it's worth. I don't think I exaggerate when I say that our marriage has benefited from this "informal counselling".

I see a lot of the discomfort with such relationships as stemming from good old fashioned jealousy. And jealousy comes from insecurity. And that is not something to be encouraged, imo at least.

Where I see the problem with this kind of relationship (and this has been pointed out, I know) is when the husband [1] is getting so well "fed" elsewhere that he finds it easier to ignore the problems within the marriage. That is not infidelity, imo, but a lack of dedication to his wife.

What, though, if the wife [1] is simply incapable of supplying the need? What if the husband [1] has tried and failed to make a change? Well, not all couples are fully compatible and that is not something to get too worked up about. Should he just suffer and make the other feel guilty when he can satisfy his need elsewhere?

There is obvious danger in getting too attached to someone of the opposite sex, but that was specifically excluded in the OP. Equally, if almost none of a person's needs are being met within the marriage, that should be a red flag to both partners.

[1] Obviously the husband/wife words can be reversed here.

[Xmansmommy]

A question I would like you all to consider is this: Is it reasonable to expect someone to supply all of another person's needs?

Hey Tony. :smile: I would say that it's not reasonable to expect someone to supply all of another's personal needs. But it's not unreasonable to expect that they supply some of another's personal needs. In my situation there were many needs not being met...emotional only being one of them.


My wife loves to ski (yes it's an emotional need, I believe) and I don't enjoy it. She has various friends that she goes with, and I fully approve. She has a very close female friend, and I have close male friend. My friend and I have supported each other at times when our married relationships have not been going totally smoothly, and I know my wife has done the same with her friend. My wife's friend has been supportive to me at times, for what it's worth. I don't think I exaggerate when I say that our marriage has benefited from this "informal counselling".

That's the difference though Tony...you have a normal balance. Many relationships don't. And I believe that is what causes the breakdown and emotional/physical/spiritual unfaithfulness in some relationships.


I see a lot of the discomfort with such relationships as stemming from good old fashioned jealousy. And jealousy comes from insecurity. And that is not something to be encouraged, imo at least.

Having your needs go unmet can lead to jealousy, no doubt. And that can lead a person to go outside the marriage for acceptance.


Where I see the problem with this kind of relationship (and this has been pointed out, I know) is when the husband [1] is getting so well "fed" elsewhere that he finds it easier to ignore the problems within the marriage. That is not infidelity, imo, but a lack of dedication to his wife.

What, though, if the wife [1] is simply incapable of supplying the need?

Why would they be incapable?


What if the husband [1] has tried and failed to make a change? Well, not all couples are fully compatible and that is not something to get too worked up about. Should he just suffer and make the other feel guilty when he can satisfy his need elsewhere?

I guess it depends on the level of the needs and to what extent they're being met or not.


There is obvious danger in getting too attached to someone of the opposite sex, but that was specifically excluded in the OP. Equally, if almost none of a person's needs are being met within the marriage, that should be a red flag to both partners.

Indeed.


[1] Obviously the husband/wife words can be reversed here.

[Gabby]

Would you say that it has harmed the marriage? You'd have to ask the husband. If it makes him in any way feel less of a man or husband, or if he feels threatened by the girlfriend I'd say it's a huge problem. He may enjoy having her around too. Sounds to me like the friendship might have actually saved their marriage, you know?

In other words, I think the criteria would be the state of the marriage. If another relationship threatens it, that's bad. But if a friendship like the one you are describing enhances it, or keeps the wife happy and the husband glad he has someone to take the pressure off of him to talk, go shopping, go out, and do all the stuff that makes him uncomfortable etc., sounds like a happy compromise to me.

As for other people's comments, how small of them.

Well, I guess what I would ask is, What is a marriage? From another thread I have come to realise that marriage can mean different things to different people. Is a marriage a marriage because of the marriage license? or.........? To me if a couple only sees each other when they are passing through the doors then it's not much of a marriage.

Anyways I would say that it has harmed the marriage. I know the wife would rather be spending their family holidays with the father present. But I would also say the he is not at all threatened by the girlfriend. Who knows how much more improved their relationship would be if some emotional needs were met for both him and her.

[Pilgrim]

A deep emotional connection can lead to a deep physical connection. It's a simple truth. Most infidelity starts with "emotional" needs getting met by someone other than the spouse.

Take the issue of transferance in counseling as a prime example of this.

[Gabby]

This is emotional adultery—an intimacy with the opposite sex outside of marriage. Emotional adultery is unfaithfulness of the heart. When two people begin talking of intimate struggles, doubts or feelings, they may be sharing their souls in a way that God intended exclusively for the marriage relationship. Emotional adultery is friendship with the opposite sex that has progressed too far.

I found this quote (http://www.familylife.com/articles/article_detail.asp?id=444&DCMP=EMC-TFR+February+2006&ATT=f4article1) today doing a search on the internet.

What do you all think? This is what I think of when I think of Emotional Unfaithfulness.

chris

[Pilgrim]

I think to a certain extent it is right on. Baring your souls to each other leads almost naturally to physical expressions of love and affection. You have to be very careful. The best route is to avoid it all together. True integrity is not placing yourself in a situation in which you must resist temptation, true integrity is avoiding the situation to begin with.

[Xmansmommy]

Amen to that Pilgrim!

[Gabby]

I think to a certain extent it is right on. Baring your souls to each other leads almost naturally to physical expressions of love and affection. You have to be very careful. The best route is to avoid it all together. True integrity is not placing yourself in a situation in which you must resist temptation, true integrity is avoiding the situation to begin with.

But does the unfaithfulness come then or when there is physical expression? Also is emotional unfaithfulness considered by God adultry or is it just a hedge?

chris

[Gabby]

Something else interesting that I read yesterday doing a search on emotional unfaithfulness was this:


Men give Love to recieve sex
Womens give sex to recieve Love.

If a womans love needs are being met why would they go there, sex?

chris

Ps, I'm just trying to play a bit of devils advocate because when I first heard of the subject I was quite intrigued by it.

[Alien]

Hey Tony. :smile:


Hi Linda.



I would say that it's not reasonable to expect someone to supply all of another's personal needs. But it's not unreasonable to expect that they supply some of another's personal needs. In my situation there were many needs not being met...emotional only being one of them.


OK. I'd like to go back to the OP, though, and note that the question specifically excluded any sexual attraction between the spouse and the "other person" and did not specify that the marriage was in danger or that the married partners were not supplying many of each others' needs.

What many people have jumped to here is what seems to be common with Christians. It's basically the same as the "avoid premarital sex" thing. Don't kiss. Don't hold hands. Don't even look at each other for too long. You know these things can lead to ..... LUST!!!! And the next thing you know, you're in multi-person ORGIES, and you've caught HIV, and then you're HELLBOUND, without doubt!!! :grin: Just because someone has a good friend that they confide in doesn't mean their marriage is about to go down the tube. I was just trying to introduce some balance, that's all.



That's the difference though Tony...you have a normal balance. Many relationships don't. And I believe that is what causes the breakdown and emotional/physical/spiritual unfaithfulness in some relationships.

It hasn't always been that way. And the balance has been achieved, not by closing the door to all "outside influences", but by turning back to each other and honestly sharing our feelings and needs. In fact, as I noted, we have both received a lot of help from other people.

I do agree with many of the warnings though. My first marriage was ruined by exactly what some of you have been describing. What I'm saying is, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because something has some danger doesn't mean it can't have benefits.



Having your needs go unmet can lead to jealousy, no doubt. And that can lead a person to go outside the marriage for acceptance.

I was referring to the jealousy of the partner that isn't meeting the needs. It's like "I won't do what you want, and by heck no one else is going to do it for you either"!



Why would they be incapable?

It could be physical or a matter of personality. Let's say an extrovert that enjoys social gatherings is married to an introvert that feels uncomfortable in those situations. Some effort can be made, obviously, but in the end the extrovert is still going to be bored sitting at home and the introvert is unlikely to enjoy parties very much. We have to recognise that we all have limitations.



I guess it depends on the level of the needs and to what extent they're being met or not.

Yup. Compromise is the thing, and nothing I have said should be taken to suggest that married partners shouldn't work hard to improve their relationship. Just remember ... perfect compatibility is a myth, and people don't own each other. That's all. :smile:

[Xmansmommy]

Hi Linda.

:smile:


OK. I'd like to go back to the OP, though, and note that the question specifically excluded any sexual attraction between the spouse and the "other person" and did not specify that the marriage was in danger or that the married partners were not supplying many of each others' needs.

Agreed. I guess I assumed that for others it was like it was for me. :blush:


What many people have jumped to here is what seems to be common with Christians. It's basically the same as the "avoid premarital sex" thing. Don't kiss. Don't hold hands. Don't even look at each other for too long. You know these things can lead to ..... LUST!!!! And the next thing you know, you're in multi-person ORGIES, and you've caught HIV, and then you're HELLBOUND, without doubt!!! :grin:

:hehe:


Just because someone has a good friend that they confide in doesn't mean their marriage is about to go down the tube. I was just trying to introduce some balance, that's all.

And I certainly agree.


It hasn't always been that way. And the balance has been achieved, not by closing the door to all "outside influences", but by turning back to each other and honestly sharing our feelings and needs. In fact, as I noted, we have both received a lot of help from other people.

Amen to that!


I do agree with many of the warnings though. My first marriage was ruined by exactly what some of you have been describing. What I'm saying is, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because something has some danger doesn't mean it can't have benefits.

I'm not. And I have friends that I can confide in and did during that time of my life but it was nothing more than genuine friendship. There was no danger of anything like emotional unfaithfulness with those friends.


I was referring to the jealousy of the partner that isn't meeting the needs. It's like "I won't do what you want, and by heck no one else is going to do it for you either"!

Oh, I see.


It could be physical or a matter of personality. Let's say an extrovert that enjoys social gatherings is married to an introvert that feels uncomfortable in those situations. Some effort can be made, obviously, but in the end the extrovert is still going to be bored sitting at home and the introvert is unlikely to enjoy parties very much. We have to recognise that we all have limitations.

Of course we all have limitations and no one person is going to meet every need we have. But if there is no balance the relationship is in serious danger. And when one or both of the persons are going outside the relationship as described in one of gabby's last quotes (sharing with another the intimate things that should only be shared between a husband/wife) the relationship runs terrible risk of not being salvagable. Especially if one or both partners decide it's not worth it for whatever reason.


Yup. Compromise is the thing, and nothing I have said should be taken to suggest that married partners shouldn't work hard to improve their relationship. Just remember ... perfect compatibility is a myth, and people don't own each other. That's all. :smile:

Excellent advice! :thumb:

[Ishmael]

Woman: If you feel like you are cheating, you are.

Men: If you are having sex with another woman, you are cheating.

That is all.

Love,

Ishmael

[Xmansmommy]

Oh, so it's different rules for men/women eh Ish?

[Ishmael]

Oh, so it's different rules for men/women eh Ish?
Yep... men won't cultivate an emotional relationship with a women (besides relatives hopefully) unless that relationship reliably leads to sex... even if they do end up being friends with her, it wasn't the inital plan. The exception might be a work relationship-- but again, if it is "cheating," the man's plan is sex.


I am right.

[Xmansmommy]

Yep... men won't cultivate an emotional relationship with a women (besides relatives hopefully) unless that relationship reliably leads to sex... even if they do end up being friends with her, it wasn't the inital plan. The exception might be a work relationship-- but again, if it is "cheating," the man's plan is sex.


I am right.

Oh I certainly agree that a man who cultivates an emotional relationship with a woman other than his wife has ulterior motives. But that don't mean he hasn't been emotionally unfaithful just because the physical hasn't been fulfilled yet. It can also be true that if a woman is cultivating an emotional relationship with a man who is not her husband, she surely runs the risk of it turning physical at some point.

[Ishmael]

Oh I certainly agree that a man who cultivates an emotional relationship with a woman other than his wife has ulterior motives. But that don't mean he hasn't been emotionally unfaithful just because the physical hasn't been fulfilled yet. It can also be true that if a woman is cultivating an emotional relationship with a man who is not her husband, she surely runs the risk of it turning physical at some point.
Her motivation is not the same AND the Bible makes it clear that if you look at a woman with lust in your heart, you have commited adultery already.

For men, sex is unfaithfulness.

For woman, emotional connectedness is unfaithfulness.

My opinion, of course.... but I am always right.

[Xmansmommy]

Her motivation is not the same AND the Bible makes it clear that if you look at a woman with lust in your heart, you have commited adultery already.

And I think you may underestimate women. I believe a woman's motivations can be the same as a man's on this issue. :shifty: I also believe that lust is not something that happens out of the blue. It is cultivated by continuously looking upon a woman/man with desire that's more than simply admiring their beauty/handsomeness. The sins of lust and adultery are conceived in the heart, grows and matures until it's born into reality if it's not nipped in the bud. And sometimes that's a continuous work.


For men, sex is unfaithfulness.

For anyone, sex is unfaithfulness.


For woman, emotional connectedness is unfaithfulness.

For anyone, emotional unfaithfulness is unfaithfulness.


My opinion, of course.... but I am always right.

Of course you are. :doh:

[Dee Dee Warren]

I find myself agreeing with Ish.

[Michelle]

I find myself agreeing with Ish.

Good! Then you, or he, can explain to me when he says:


For men, sex is unfaithfulness.

For woman, emotional connectedness is unfaithfulness.


Does it mean that a man has to have sex for him to be considered unfaithful and a woman has to be emotionally connected (or whatever) for her to be considered unfaithful, OR does it mean that men consider sex to be the unfaithful act and it is women who consider emotional connectedness to be the unfaithfulness.
:huh:
Man! I think I'm even more confused after trying to ask then I was before.

See... I'm a little worried that discussing emotional unfaithfulness or emotional adultry may be giving some people the idea that unbiblical grounds for divorce may be justifyable as long as you slap on the right term.

[Augusta]

I thought of a few signs of emotional unfaithfulness. . . maybe you can think of more:

* You imagine yourself living / being with the other person instead of your spouse

* You notice that a physical attraction is developing with the other person

* You prefer the other person's company (consistently) to the company of your spouse

* You get angry with your spouse often and wish he/she were more like the other person

* You feel lonely when you are with your spouse and not lonely when you are with the other person

* You start to not care very much about your spouse and start to neglect him/her

[Xmansmommy]

Exactly Augusta!

[Gabby]

I'm still not so sure that emotional unfaithfulness has to lead to a physical expression or to even a physical type lust. :shrug: But I'm also not sure that emotional unfaithfulness should be considered adultry.

[Xmansmommy]

I'm still not so sure that emotional unfaithfulness has to lead to a physical expression or to even a physical type lust. :shrug:

I'm not sure anyone here suggested it had to lead to a physical expression or to a physical lust. I think it's been suggested that it can and often does though.


But I'm also not sure that emotional unfaithfulness should be considered adultry.

I am not convinced it is unless it does lead to lusting or an actual physical affair.

[Pilgrim]

Well the very fact that you call it "unfaithfulness" says something about it. Bottom line is that I think most people know instinctively when they are moving beyond the bounderies of friendship and into something more dangerous.

Maybe a good question to ask is this, "Would I tell my spouse not only about the relationship with this other person of the opposite sex but would I tell my spouse about the emotional depth of the relationship?" If your answer is no, then you are probably in dangerous waters.

In my experience as a pastor doing pastoral counseling with couples involved in extramarital affairs, the affair almost always started with one or the other spouse becoming deeply, and emotionally involved with someone other than the spouse.

Of course this is different than friendship, but from what has been discussed here, I don't think we are talking about mere friendship.

[Xmansmommy]

Well the very fact that you call it "unfaithfulness" says something about it.

Fantastic point!


Bottom line is that I think most people know instinctively when they are moving beyond the bounderies of friendship and into something more dangerous.

Absolutely.


Maybe a good question to ask is this, "Would I tell my spouse not only about the relationship with this other person of the opposite sex but would I tell my spouse about the emotional depth of the relationship?" If your answer is no, then you are probably in dangerous waters.

Excellent advice.


In my experience as a pastor doing pastoral counseling with couples involved in extramarital affairs, the affair almost always started with one or the other spouse becoming deeply, and emotionally involved with someone other than the spouse.

No doubt in my mind.


Of course this is different than friendship, but from what has been discussed here, I don't think we are talking about mere friendship.

I totally agree. If a person has never experienced it, then I think it's difficult to understand. But having experienced it myself, I know the warning signs and temptations. I think you completely understand the idea Pilgrim because of your experience as a pastor, which gives another perspective. And I thank you for acknowleging that it is a real issue that people, even Christians, face.

[Gabby]

Thanks for the excellent discussion guys! :smile:

[Dee Dee Warren]

My husband once said:

Women promise sex to get love (emotional connectedness)
Men promise love to get sex

A generalization for sure, but one that is very often true

[Pilgrim]

My husband once said:

Women promise sex to get love (emotional connectedness)
Men promise love to get sex

A generalization for sure, but one that is very often true
Indeed.

[themuzicman]

My husband once said:

Women promise sex to get love (emotional connectedness)
Men promise love to get sex

A generalization for sure, but one that is very often true
This might explain why a lot of guys wouldn't understand "emotional unfaithfulness".

(Pilgrim is obviously more enlightened than many of us.)

Michael

[Dee Dee Warren]

MM I might be missing something from this thread, but I think that the "emotional unfaithfulness" is something that the woman usually commits because it is the emotions that is the be-all for the woman. Again generalizing, the man ultimately wants sex, the emotions are a means to that end. That is where I think Ishmael was going with his comments.

But in the male perspective, I could see how he could be confused if a woman thought he was emotionally unfaithful. In my own life, God forbid I ever have to face this, but I think I could easily forgive a "fling" but a long-term relationship would be a different pill to swallow.

[Pilgrim]

MM I might be missing something from this thread, but I think that the "emotional unfaithfulness" is something that the woman usually commits because it is the emotions that is the be-all for the woman. Again generalizing, the man ultimately wants sex, the emotions are a means to that end. That is where I think Ishmael was going with his comments.

But in the male perspective, I could see how he could be confused if a woman thought he was emotionally unfaithful. In my own life, God forbid I ever have to face this, but I think I could easily forgive a "fling" but a long-term relationship would be a different pill to swallow.
I hear that Dee Dee. And that is why I think some guys have it right on some level when they say for a woman to cheat is a worse thing than for a man to cheat. That is, because for a woman it's almost never a casual thing, a momentary lapse, but rather a deeper betrayal that involves a lot more depth.

Now that's just a knee jerk reaction though. I don't know how it plays out all the time but it seems to make sense to me.

[Dee Dee Warren]

It makes sense to me. I long since shed the feminist propaganda of identicalness in gender, and woke up to the astonishing news that men and women are very different. Go figure.

[Pilgrim]

:cheers: viva la differance!

[themuzicman]

MM I might be missing something from this thread, but I think that the "emotional unfaithfulness" is something that the woman usually commits because it is the emotions that is the be-all for the woman. Again generalizing, the man ultimately wants sex, the emotions are a means to that end. That is where I think Ishmael was going with his comments.

But in the male perspective, I could see how he could be confused if a woman thought he was emotionally unfaithful. In my own life, God forbid I ever have to face this, but I think I could easily forgive a "fling" but a long-term relationship would be a different pill to swallow.
*highlight* *right click* *copy*

*open Email*

Dear Mr. DDW,

...

:egad:

Michael