[><0300><]

Originally Posted by Dream_Trawler ↗

It shocks me how sympathetic people can be for the husband (or the person getting cheated on in the situation).

1. you don't own another human so they are free to do what they want, even if they took a vow

2. it's the significant other who is doing the cheating, the affair partner just happens to be there.

I see it as weakness to get so worked up over it that you're willing to kill out of anger.

Females

[Kaotic]

Originally Posted by Dream_Trawler ↗

It shocks me how sympathetic people can be for the husband (or the person getting cheated on in the situation).

1. you don't own another human so they are free to do what they want, even if they took a vow

2. it's the significant other who is doing the cheating, the affair partner just happens to be there.

I see it as weakness to get so worked up over it that you're willing to kill out of anger.

Call it whatever you want, I know I'm not any better than this guy. When I fly off the handle anybody could get it. We don't even know the circumstances really, what if the guy was his friend/family?

[Spiffyfable]

Now that's how to Spice Up a marriage

[scorpion9]

Originally Posted by Anal Dough ↗

I'll take things a beta cuck trying to pretend he's a toughguy would say for 11, Alex.

Your take is peak keyboard philosophy from someone who has clearly never had his world actually collapse.

The idea that a guy should calmly shake the other dude’s hand and buy him a beer for “exposing a whore” is pure Reddit-brain nonsense. That’s not how human psychology works. That’s how someone imagines they’d react while safely watching a video on a gore site with zero skin in the game.

When a man finds out his wife cheated, his brain doesn’t run a cost-benefit analysis about alimony and future kids. It goes straight to humiliation, territorial violation, and status threat. You didn’t just lose a relationship. You got replaced. Publicly, sexually, and in the most primal way possible. The other guy isn’t seen as a helpful whistleblower. He’s the intruder who proved you were beatable in a contest you didn’t even know you were in.

The wife isn’t an easy target psychologically. She’s years of emotional investment, shared identity, finances, memories, maybe kids, and worst of all your own judgment. Going after her means admitting you trusted the wrong person and maybe misread your entire life. That’s way harder than dumping all that rage onto a faceless rival you can dehumanize in five seconds.

And the “whore” talk is just emotional cowardice dressed up as toughness. It’s a way to shrink someone you loved down to a slur so you don’t have to feel grief, rejection, or loss. If she’s just trash, then you weren’t vulnerable. You weren’t replaced. You weren’t hurt. Except you were.

Worst of all, you really knew how to pick 'em didn't ya? Nah, brosef: You done been cucked. You may as well tell all your buddies you have a small dick and suck so bad in bed your old lady had to look for satisfaction elsewhere. And you don't get the sheer animalistic desire to one up this motherfucker by taking his ass out?

None of this excuses setting someone on fire. That’s not passion or masculinity or justice. That’s a broken person with no brakes left. But pretending jealousy is a rational thought experiment and not a volatile mix of ego injury and panic is dumb as hell.

People don’t go after the other man because they’re stupid. They do it because it’s easier to attack an invader than to sit with the reality that your self-image just got shattered. Anyone who thinks they’d react like a Zen monk with a six-pack clearly hasn’t been tested.

Don't be a toxic piece of shit, if you don't know how to make arguments then don't reply. Its almost as if you have been cucked yourself so much that you took it personally.

I literally started off my comment by saying "Yup, its one of those things ive never really understood."

So...right from the start, you should have figured out that "people are different", "react differently" and "see things differently". Is just like some guys simply walk away, others attack the guy who cheated, others go after the woman later on, some go and blow their own brains out, some go to the nearest night club and find a new wife. People are different.

I...personally, do not understand the idea of attacking the guy who she cheated with, over attacking her...if attack anyone at all.

Most of what you said is just "your take" on someone else's possible take on things, so i wont address that.
But this point...is wrong again:

"And the “whore” talk is just emotional cowardice dressed up as toughness. It’s a way to shrink someone you loved down to a slur so you don’t have to feel grief, rejection, or loss."

No. The whore talk is being "accurate" and putting the accountability and blame in the right place. If a wife sleeps around( worse when she has a family ) then she...and only she is to blame. She is literally a whore. That's what fucking around means.

"If she’s just trash, then you weren’t vulnerable."

No, if a woman cheated me, then she would instantly become worthless to me. Literally. I'm not saying that you must have the same reaction, but for me, and quite a few men i've discussed this with, that's the case. Cheating for me, is like murder. If you murder someone...you will forever be a murderer...even if you swear never to murder anyone again...that label(showing what you are/were capable of) sticks around forever. I also lose 100% all interest in women if i find out that they have cheated their husbands/boyfriends in the past. I.e women have tried to hit on me and gloat that "they had a boring husband and they had to cheat to have some fun"...expecting that to "impress me" in some way. Nope. Instant and permanent turn off.

Anyone who thinks they’d react like a Zen monk with a six-pack clearly hasn’t been tested.

Or...they have, and they reacted reasonably under difficult circumstances...like people who don't panic during a car crash or some other emergency. Your use of the word "Anyone" is revealing that you can't even imagine other points of view.

[Analcuck]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

Don't be a toxic piece of shit, if you don't know how to make arguments then don't reply. Its almost as if you have been cucked yourself so much that you took it personally.

I literally started off my comment by saying "Yup, its one of those things ive never really understood."

So...right from the start, you should have figured out that "people are different", "react differently" and "see things differently". Is just like some guys simply walk away, others attack the guy who cheated, others go after the woman later on, some go and blow their own brains out, some go to the nearest night club and find a new wife. People are different.

I...personally, do not understand the idea of attacking the guy who she cheated with, over attacking her...if attack anyone at all.

Most of what you said is just "your take" on someone else's possible take on things, so i wont address that.
But this point...is wrong again:



No. The whore talk is being "accurate" and putting the accountability and blame in the right place. If a wife sleeps around( worse when she has a family ) then she...and only she is to blame. She is literally a whore. That's what fucking around means.

"If she’s just trash, then you weren’t vulnerable."

No, if a woman cheated me, then she would instantly become worthless to me. Literally. I'm not saying that you must have the same reaction, but for me, and quite a few men i've discussed this with, that's the case. Cheating for me, is like murder. If you murder someone...you will forever be a murderer...even if you swear never to murder anyone again...that label(showing what you are/were capable of) sticks around forever. I also lose 100% all interest in women if i find out that they have cheated their husbands/boyfriends in the past. I.e women have tried to hit on me and gloat that "they had a boring husband and they had to cheat to have some fun"...expecting that to "impress me" in some way. Nope. Instant and permanent turn off.


Or...they have, and they reacted reasonably under difficult circumstances...like people who don't panic during a car crash or some other emergency. Your use of the word "Anyone" is revealing that you can't even imagine other points of view.

Dial it back. Calling something “toxic” isn’t an argument, and trying to psychoanalyze me because you didn’t like the tone is just Reddit-flavored deflection.

You’re right about one thing up front: people react differently. No disagreement there. Where you go off the rails is mistaking your preferred reaction for the rational baseline and treating everyone else as defective for not sharing it.

Saying “I don’t understand why someone would attack the other guy” is fine. Saying “therefore that reaction is stupid or illegitimate” is where the armchair psychology creeps in. Human beings are not Excel spreadsheets. When betrayal hits, people don’t calmly sort blame like a librarian shelving books. They react through ego injury, shock, and panic. That doesn’t make every reaction admirable, but it makes them intelligible.

Your “accurate labeling” argument about calling her a whore is doing a lot of emotional labor for you. Slapping a label on someone and declaring them “worthless” isn’t moral clarity; it’s emotional triage. It’s a way to cauterize pain quickly. That may work for you, and fine, but don’t pretend it’s some stoic truth-telling exercise rather than a coping mechanism with a leather jacket on.

The murder analogy is also overwrought. Murder permanently ends another human life. Cheating permanently ends a relationship. Those are not the same category unless you’re trying very hard to sound severe. You can say “cheating is a dealbreaker” without turning it into a capital crime.

As for the Zen monk comment, yes, some people really do stay calm under pressure. They also tend to be outliers, trained, or dissociative as hell. Pointing to them doesn’t invalidate the reality that most people, when emotionally blindsided, are not operating at their best. If your argument is “some people handle crises well,” congratulations, you have rediscovered the concept of personality variance.

The issue I was pushing back on wasn’t that one reaction is mandatory. It’s that pretending jealousy and rage are purely intellectual choices, rather than evolved, messy, sometimes ugly human responses, is fantasy-land stuff. Easy to say behind a keyboard. Much harder when your life just detonated.

You don’t have to agree with how people react. You just don’t get to act baffled that they don’t behave like a TED Talk version of themselves when the floor drops out.

And yes, I "know how to argue", you silly person. It's half of what I do for a living. Cheers.

[scorpion9]

Originally Posted by Anal Dough ↗

You’re right about one thing up front: people react differently. No disagreement there. Where you go off the rails is mistaking your preferred reaction for the rational baseline and treating everyone else as defective for not sharing it.

Saying “I don’t understand why someone would attack the other guy” is fine. Saying “therefore that reaction is stupid or illegitimate” is where the armchair psychology creeps in. Human beings are not Excel spreadsheets. When betrayal hits, people don’t calmly sort blame like a librarian shelving books. They react through ego injury, shock, and panic. That doesn’t make every reaction admirable, but it makes them intelligible.

Your “accurate labeling” argument about calling her a whore is doing a lot of emotional labor for you. Slapping a label on someone and declaring them “worthless” isn’t moral clarity; it’s emotional triage. It’s a way to cauterize pain quickly. That may work for you, and fine, but don’t pretend it’s some stoic truth-telling exercise rather than a coping mechanism with a leather jacket on.

The murder analogy is also overwrought. Murder permanently ends another human life. Cheating permanently ends a relationship. Those are not the same category unless you’re trying very hard to sound severe. You can say “cheating is a dealbreaker” without turning it into a capital crime.

As for the Zen monk comment, yes, some people really do stay calm under pressure. They also tend to be outliers, trained, or dissociative as hell. Pointing to them doesn’t invalidate the reality that most people, when emotionally blindsided, are not operating at their best. If your argument is “some people handle crises well,” congratulations, you have rediscovered the concept of personality variance.

The issue I was pushing back on wasn’t that one reaction is mandatory. It’s that pretending jealousy and rage are purely intellectual choices, rather than evolved, messy, sometimes ugly human responses, is fantasy-land stuff. Easy to say behind a keyboard. Much harder when your life just detonated.

You don’t have to agree with how people react. You just don’t get to act baffled that they don’t behave like a TED Talk version of themselves when the floor drops out.

And yes, I "know how to argue", you silly person. It's half of what I do for a living. Cheers.

Dial it back. Calling something “toxic” isn’t an argument, and trying to psychoanalyze me because you didn’t like the tone is just Reddit-flavored deflection.

Me calling you toxic as based on this...which was toxic and non-argumentative.

I'll take things a beta cuck trying to pretend he's a toughguy would say for 11, Alex.
Your take is peak keyboard philosophy from someone who has clearly never had his world actually collapse.

Where you go off the rails is mistaking your preferred reaction for the rational baseline and treating everyone else as defective for not sharing it

Here you go again with your generalization. When did i apply my reaction to everyone? You keep instantly jumping from "me/my understanding" to "Anyone" and "Everyone".
At no point did i say that everyone feels that way. I clearly said that this is my view, and i don't understand why others don't see things the same way. Im clearly fully away aware that most men dont see things my way( hence my initial post...saying that i dont understand that ).

Slapping a label on someone and declaring them “worthless” isn’t moral clarity;
...but don’t pretend it’s some stoic truth-telling exercise rather than a coping mechanism with a leather jacket on...

No, quite the opposite. It is moral clarity. Here, i'm right and you are wrong. This is not up for debate. When a woman cheats a man, she...and only she is to blame. If one side is lying and deceiving, and the other side is being lied to and deceived...which of the sides carries the blame? Which side is wrong? When i say that "she becomes worthless for me"...then that's a fact. For me...she does.
Its not a copying mechanism, its a healthy reaction...a recognition of your mistake in choosing a partner, and instant correction of that mistake. The value of her as a partner was founded on loyalty and trust. If that foundation blows up, the so does all the "value" that was built on top of that foundation. Thust...she becomes worthless to me( as a wife candidate ). Even worse...her position becomes lower than that of a stranger on the street. Strangers nave "neutral" trust/loyalty factor. They haven't proven themselves to be good or bad yet, but a cheating wife has proven themselves to be untrustworthy and shown that they can and will betray you.
In general, you are the one who is applying cope mechanisms. Putting blame in places where it does not belong, finding excuses for her etc.

Cheating permanently ends a relationship. Those are not the same category unless you’re trying very hard to sound severe.

Again, you missed my point. You got fixated about the "severity" or category of the "crime" versus what i was pointing out.
Murder shows someone's capability to do something. If someone has murder another human, then you know that they are capable for that...forever. It is part of who they are and what they can do. Same applies to cheating. Once you cheat or have cheated in the past, it becomes part of your toolset....something you can do if you don't get what you want. Its a permanent stain on your trustworthiness.

It’s that pretending jealousy and rage are purely intellectual choices, rather than evolved, messy, sometimes ugly human responses, is fantasy-land stuff.

And again, ive never pretended that. Not even hinted at that. All i said is that i don't understand that reaction. Why would anyone even want to fight for a disloyal cheating woman, who has already proven that she cant be trusted. You should fight for good things...i wouldn't want to be in the same house with a cheating wife even if i could snap my fingers and make the other guy vanish, without killing them.
There are 2 evolutionary strategies at play here. One is the generic territorial fight between men, and the other is the classical problem of men never knowing if their children are actually theirs. Evolution weeds out patterns that are too trusting towards women, because men in the past who stayed with women who cheated, ended up raising other men's children. Over time, the pattern of "trusting a disloyal woman" vanished. This is where jealousy arouse from. This is why in almost all religions cheating women were killed.
My reaction is fundamentally an evolutionary strategy, where i disconnect from a cheating women and focus on searching for actual loyalty.

[jawknee21]

Originally Posted by Dream_Trawler ↗

It shocks me how sympathetic people can be for the husband (or the person getting cheated on in the situation).

1. you don't own another human so they are free to do what they want, even if they took a vow

2. it's the significant other who is doing the cheating, the affair partner just happens to be there.

I see it as weakness to get so worked up over it that you're willing to kill out of anger.

so you're saying he should've done it to her too?
I agree..

[Analcuck]

Originally Posted by scorpion9 ↗

Me calling you toxic as based on this...which was toxic and non-argumentative.




Here you go again with your generalization. When did i apply my reaction to everyone? You keep instantly jumping from "me/my understanding" to "Anyone" and "Everyone".
At no point did i say that everyone feels that way. I clearly said that this is my view, and i don't understand why others don't see things the same way. Im clearly fully away aware that most men dont see things my way( hence my initial post...saying that i dont understand that ).



No, quite the opposite. It is moral clarity. Here, i'm right and you are wrong. This is not up for debate. When a woman cheats a man, she...and only she is to blame. If one side is lying and deceiving, and the other side is being lied to and deceived...which of the sides carries the blame? Which side is wrong? When i say that "she becomes worthless for me"...then that's a fact. For me...she does.
Its not a copying mechanism, its a healthy reaction...a recognition of your mistake in choosing a partner, and instant correction of that mistake. The value of her as a partner was founded on loyalty and trust. If that foundation blows up, the so does all the "value" that was built on top of that foundation. Thust...she becomes worthless to me( as a wife candidate ). Even worse...her position becomes lower than that of a stranger on the street. Strangers nave "neutral" trust/loyalty factor. They haven't proven themselves to be good or bad yet, but a cheating wife has proven themselves to be untrustworthy and shown that they can and will betray you.
In general, you are the one who is applying cope mechanisms. Putting blame in places where it does not belong, finding excuses for her etc.

Again, you missed my point. You got fixated about the "severity" or category of the "crime" versus what i was pointing out.
Murder shows someone's capability to do something. If someone has murder another human, then you know that they are capable for that...forever. It is part of who they are and what they can do. Same applies to cheating. Once you cheat or have cheated in the past, it becomes part of your toolset....something you can do if you don't get what you want. Its a permanent stain on your trustworthiness.


And again, ive never pretended that. Not even hinted at that. All i said is that i don't understand that reaction. Why would anyone even want to fight for a disloyal cheating woman, who has already proven that she cant be trusted. You should fight for good things...i wouldn't want to be in the same house with a cheating wife even if i could snap my fingers and make the other guy vanish, without killing them.
There are 2 evolutionary strategies at play here. One is the generic territorial fight between men, and the other is the classical problem of men never knowing if their children are actually theirs. Evolution weeds out patterns that are too trusting towards women, because men in the past who stayed with women who cheated, ended up raising other men's children. Over time, the pattern of "trusting a disloyal woman" vanished. This is where jealousy arouse from. This is why in almost all religions cheating women were killed.
My reaction is fundamentally an evolutionary strategy, where i disconnect from a cheating women and focus on searching for actual loyalty.

The main problem with your reply is not that you disagree with me, but that you repeatedly restate your position as self-evident truth rather than engaging the actual claims I’m making.

I do not deny that people react differently. I explicitly acknowledge that. What I’m challenging is the move from “this is how I react” to “this reaction is morally clearer, healthier, or more correct than others.” Saying “this is my view” does not shield that view from criticism, especially when it is presented as superior clarity rather than personal preference.

On the “worthless” point, you are asserting moral clarity where there is really a subjective boundary decision. Saying “she is worthless to me” is descriptively true of your feelings, but that does not transform the language into objective moral diagnosis. My point is not that you are lying about your reaction, but that labeling someone as “worthless” functions psychologically as emotional compression. It simplifies a complex loss into a single moral verdict. That may be effective for you, but effectiveness is not the same thing as moral accuracy.

Your murder analogy continues to miss the distinction I’m drawing. I am not denying that past actions inform future trust. I am pointing out that collapsing all moral failure into permanent character essence is an overextension. “Capacity to cheat” is not the same kind of ontological marker as “capacity to murder,” and arguing otherwise requires more than analogy. It requires evidence that human moral behavior is fixed rather than context-dependent, which is a much stronger claim than you acknowledge.

The evolutionary argument at the end is also overstated. Evolutionary explanations can describe why certain emotional responses exist, but they do not automatically justify them normatively. Saying “this reaction may have been adaptive” does not mean “this reaction is therefore the clearest or healthiest response in modern contexts.” I am not denying evolutionary jealousy; I am resisting the idea that its presence settles the moral question.

In short, you often treat personal coherence as objective correctness. I am asking whether the reaction you describe is understandable without being elevated to moral clarity. That distinction matters, and your reply does not really address it.

[hansenlp913]

In his wife's defense, the dude was smoking hot...

[Ubister]

Love how the officer shakes the cigarette out of his hand