Social Question

Unofficial_Member's avatar

Literally, aren't people who got cheated on always have half the fault?

Asked by Unofficial_Member (5107points) November 19th, 2018

Don’t get me wrong, I always give my sympathy whenever my friends tell me a story that their partner cheat on them, however, as I ponder the situation in neutral ground and as much as I would like to blame the perpetrator a part of me think that they partially brought this upon themselves, in a sense, they’re half at fault, they just didn’t realize it. Here’s my thought: They got in to the relationship by their own choice fully aware of the possible consequences in the future, it’s not like a gun pointed at their heads when they made the decision. It’s not fair to fully declare yourself the victim when you know you could possibly ended up become the victim and still go for it. If you trust someone and that person ended doing bad things then both of you are, literally, at fault. You, for deciding to trust them, and the cheaters, for lying to you. You won’t get cheated on if you didn’t trust the person in the first place. A simple cause and effect situation.

Some of them completely blame themselves for not being a good partner, others completely blame the cheaters. Me think both parties are half at fault, literally, of course. I don’t think it’s wrong to fully trust someone, it’s just that one thing should be made clear and acceptable by all participants in the drama. That thing is, you should be fair and accept that you initiated this issue and know that you share half the fault as the instigator. What do you think, folks? Do you agree with what I just said?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

43 Answers

canidmajor's avatar

So black and white! No, it’s not that simple in the real world. There is a spectrum of “fault” as you call it, it’s never so easy to define.

Dutchess_III's avatar

No. I had no reason on earth to think my ex was going to become a serial cheater 7 years into our marriage. The only clue was a big, fat, idiotic ego that needed to be fed.

ragingloli's avatar

Just like any victim of a crime.

mazingerz88's avatar

Always have half the fault? Now that’s extreme and flat-out wrong.

But yes, I’m willing to concede some cheating happens and the aggrieved side knew it was coming. I have my two high-school friends as example. She married her knowing he was a womanizer. And he of course cheated during their marriage.

Dutchess_III's avatar

In my case, the death of his mother tipped something over in him. I don’t know why or how…he was a grown ass, 30 something year old man when it happened (we were married) but it changed him and not in a good way.

Soubresaut's avatar

But there’s a level of risk everywhere. If the only requirement of assuming half the blame is that you step into a situation that has some chance of risk, that would be just about everything, wouldn’t it?

If I cross the street in front of a car, I am trusting that car not to drive me over. There’s always the risk that they might—and there are pedestrian deaths to prove it—but the fault isn’t suddenly half mine if the person hits me. This is especially true if I’m crossing at a crosswalk, with a reasonable expectation that the car has seen me and is following the rules of the road. In that case, it’s not my fault hat they violate good driving practices and in doing so injure/kill me. I’m certainly affected—I’m the victim—but it wasn’t my fault. Nor is it reasonable of me to say “I will never cross a street again, because there’s a chance that when I cross a street, someone might hit me.”

And even if there were indications that the driver wasn’t following good driving practices—maybe they were driving erratically on their way up to the crosswalk—I’m not sure I feel comfortable saying it’s half my fault they hit me. Certainly there were context cues I could have used to avoided that particular situation, and it probably wasn’t as reasonable to assume they’d stop or even see me, but the lion’s share of irresponsible behaviors would still be theirs, wouldn’t it?

Dutchess_III's avatar

You know, they say liars accuse you of lying.
Cheaters accuse you of cheating.
Well, trust worthy people tend to trust others.

BackinBlack's avatar

In my opinion, if someone cheats, there was an issue with the relationship to begin with. It’s not always because the “victim” was doing something wrong though. I don’t think it’s a “black and white” answer. Totally depends on the situation.

Some people cheat because they are flawed. Some people cheat because there are flaws in the relationship.

However, cheating is NEVER the answer regardless off the problems the couple had. There is a right way to handle issues.

I’ve been “microcheated” on and I know there were issues with both of us, I don’t blame myself entirely but there are things I should have been better about. I don’t blame him for his feelings but I do blame him for his actions.

Soubresaut's avatar

Follow-up: I guess what I was trying to say is that there’s a difference between being vulnerable and being “at fault” or “to blame.” They’re not the same thing.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

So I will just go buy stock and if the company declared bankrupt and all my investments gone then it’s not my fault, it the company’s fault, despite I know the possibilities and still go for it. The same principle also works in relationship, right? I will just sleep with with whoever and instigate a relationship with them, when they did bad things then I’ll just completely blame them. I’m the victim, I’m innocent, right? I did this on my own willingness and I still expect myself to be innocent. Please, excuse my sarcasm. Really, despite the good intention you have you couldn’t avoid the fact that you started this issue. We all know relationship isn’t 100% successful, you willingly started this risky situation despite knowing the possibilities, so be fair and accept half the fault, is what I want to say. You won’t get cheated on if you didn’t start one. If you do start one then please accept the possibility that may come and if thing didn’t go the way you envisioned it then please accept the fact that it’s half your fault for instigating the relationship with this particular person. Remember, you weren’t forced in the relationship, you chose to get in to it despite knowing the risk it may entail.

Soubresaut's avatar

Relationships aren’t 100% successful, but there are things someone can do to make their relationship more likely to be successful. My car-and-pedestrian analogy is probably a bit sloppy, but the point is: as a pedestrian, I am always vulnerable—my body is no match for a car—and there is always some amount of risk that I might get hit at some point. But that doesn’t mean I should either throw all caution to the wind and just start crossing wherever and whenever I feel like it (analogous to “I will just sleep with with whoever and instigate a relationship with them, when they did bad things then I’ll just completely blame them”) or completely avoid crossing any street, always, no matter what, because something bad might happen. Nothing about this is all-or-nothing. There are degrees.

If I cross a highway with traffic, it’s probably my fault I get hit. The cars are going too fast to react appropriately, even if the drivers try their best not to hit me.

If I cross in a residential area, and a car whips around the corner too fast and hits me, it’s the driver’s fault. Could I in theory have avoided the situation by hearing the car in advance and not crossing? Sure, and it would have been the better outcome for me, but it’s not my fault that I didn’t hear it. Just like, in theory, the cars on the highway could have successfully swerved (and would probably try to), but it’s not their fault if they’re unsuccessful.

Do what you can to avoid putting yourself in a situation of unreasonable risk, because it’s prudent to do so. Not because it’s your fault if something bad happens anyway. (And it’s just as unreasonable to try and avoid all risk no matter the level of the risk.)

BackinBlack's avatar

Maybe I missed your point before though. You’re just saying you can’t be mad if you get cheated on because you should have known it was a risk even though you trusted them not to do it? I don’t think that has to do with blame or responsibility.

I don’t think starting a relationship with someone means it’s half your fault if something goes wrong. Like starting a relationship doesn’t equal starting an issue… does that make sense?

If you except that risk and you do get cheated on then you break up and move on. But as far as blame and fault…. depends on the situation.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

Alright, then. What you all said make sense. I wanted to find the solution from neutral ground and for fairness’ sake, judging from “there’s no smoke without fire” principle. To be fair I wanted a standard ruling of the situatuon but it appears that many people insist that it’s a “depends on situation” kind of thing. In the end, without a definite ruling, we will just investigate left and right, trying to judge whose fault it was. A standard blanket ruling of ‘half at fault as the instigator’ is more neutral and much easier solution, in my opinion, but, oh well…

canidmajor's avatar

Maybe “fault” and “solution” as you present them are inappropriate descriptors for this situation.

rebbel's avatar

How’s that work for a toddler who puts his (natural inhibited) trust in his parents, who then go on and beat the child?
Toddler at fault (too)?

chyna's avatar

No some assholes are just cheaters no matter how good they have it.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

@rebbel toddlers have no choice. Adults have options, they can make a choice after weighing up all the possible consequences.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Yes. But sometimes there is just no way to predict that someone is going to cheat.

longgone's avatar

^ And any cheater has to cheat for the first time at some point.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

@Dutchess_III There’s no need to predict. It will never be 100% flawless. All we need is to acknowledge the risk and accept the consequences when it comes to it.

Dutchess_III's avatar

If it comes to it. I never cheated.

janbb's avatar

Might as well not get out of bed in the morning seems to me.

ucme's avatar

There’s some argument to say that anyone having an affair, by definition, has a troubled marriage.
I would suggest though that they are the fucking problem in that marriage.

KNOWITALL's avatar

No, it’s not always both of their fault. To me, cheating is lying to your spouse, putting them in an unsafe position physically, emotionally and mentally.

You have options, like an open marriage, seperation, divorce, swapping, etc… So imo, cheating is ignorant and cowardly. Be a big kid and face your partner and tell them the truth, then find a way to deal with it.

@ucme I see your point, but maybe just one person is troubled and that is usually the cheater!

josie's avatar

Often yes.
Sometimes no.

Kardamom's avatar

No. Even if the person who was cheated on was an asshole, the cheater should have left/separated from/divorced that person first, before they hooked up with someone else.

No one is “driven” to cheat. Cheaters choose to cheat.

kritiper's avatar

No, not always.

rojo's avatar

I have not taken the time to read the previous responses so I apologize in advance if I am repeating.

No, it is not necessarily the case that the one cheated on is half at fault. Some people are just broken and it doesn’t matter what the other does, they are going to do what they want, when they want and how they want without regard for the consequences or the impact and effect on others.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

Cheating is almost never black and white and while it usually is the fault of the cheater sometimes it’s not. It completely depends on the situation.

tinyfaery's avatar

I’d say that rarely is there a case where a spouse/SO has not contributed to a situation where someone feels the need to cheat, but that doesn’t mean it’s their fault at all. Fault lies on the cheater only.

seawulf575's avatar

I guess it would have to be a case-by-case decision. I have seen some cases where the one being cheated on really did bring it on, and I have seen cases where the cheater is just an asshole who wanted more.

augustlan's avatar

I think we can all acknowledge that getting your heart broken is a known risk of loving someone. That doesn’t mean it’s half our fault if it happens, though. Accepting a certain amount of risk isn’t the same as causing it to happen, even in part.

Getting hit by a drunk driver is a known risk of driving, even if you’re following all traffic laws. Your logic just doesn’t hold.

raum's avatar

People who get cheated on bear partial responsibility for creating an unhealthy dynamic.

But people who choose to cheat should bear all responsibility for cheating.

There is this mind-blowing third option of breaking up with someone before sleeping with other people.

The only situation where I think both parties should bear responsibility is if the relationship started of with cheating on a previous partner.

raum's avatar

I get that people are human.
And love can be messy.

But this idea that someone who cheats (for whatever reason), can’t own up to their own actions is some pretty weak shit.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@raum I think that, for some people, the overall dynamics in a relaltionship can be completely healthy, but something in them leads them to fuck it all up.

raum's avatar

I’m not sure if it’s possible to have a healthy dynamic with am unhealthy partner? Maybe I’m wrong though.

Dutchess_III's avatar

We had a healthy relationship until my ex started going down in flames. We had a good marriage and he just fucked it all up. I guess I’ll never know why.
He regrets it now.

raum's avatar

I would like to amend my answer and make an exception for dopeguru.

Definitely responsible for more than half the fault in that catastrophe.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Oh wow! I wondered what you were talking about @raum, because dopeguru wasn’t on this thread…but I just saw her latest. I agree with you!

answerbag's avatar

Yes. In this clear point of view, it is accurate.

But half-half, I disbelieve it.
The percent should be for the crime.
30–70 of fault.
The crime of the person who has been cheated on is about have trusted, but trust is expected on the contract, to cheat is not in it.
If another cheat on; but cheat on is not in the contract, then they perpetrated a crime that was unexpected in the contract. And if it was unplanned him/her assume more responsibility and deserves a more significant punishment.
At that point the fault is superior.

Response moderated (Spam)
Response moderated (Spam)

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther