Two couples I know well are roiled over apparent infidelity on the part of the husbands, in one case a passionate affair with another woman, in the other meetings with providers.  Despite the differences in the two situations (e. g. do wives consider a full affair or "hobbying" the more serious offense?) their reactions are similar:  outrage and contempt.  Both couples have tried counseling with various therapists, who generally have helped in lowering the temperature but refuse to make moral judgments, further disappoionting the wives.  But in both cases the husbands say the wives seem to care much more about the loss of control and the money spent, than in unrequited love.  They interpret this reaction as evidence the wives were indifferent about the relationships in the first place, but cared mostly about losing assets.  
Is this plausible? Is there a typical feminine reaction to the discovery of cheating?  Do men react differently if they catch their wives cheating?  I read recently that wives initiate affairs as often as husbands, and actually take the lead in initiating divorces.

When my (now ex) caught me, her reaction was visceral.   I don't think the idea of loss of assets was a factor (at first), as I was making a lot of money and she never wanted for anything.

I don't think it was anything to do with jealousy either as she was pretty much done with sex at that point (at least with me).

I think it was the whole fidelity thing, that fact that she felt lied to.  This was a recurring issue in her life, by the way.

This is only one case, and I would bet that each woman will have an individual response based on her psychology, so it is probably useless to conjecture and extrapolate to women in general.

Later on, after we had made an oral agreement about divsion of assets, she got to babbling with some buddies of her and decided to get a lawyer and do me in the bad way.  But that's a whole different issue.

Dear LookingforSincerity,

I suppose it depends on who you ask. I'm a sexologist with an affinity toward evolutionary psychology, so I'm going to tell you the following:

Yes, it's entirely plausible and entirely normative. In the case of "infidelity," the primate female is much more concerned about resources than the actual physical aspect of the "affair." Why? Because primate females are always concerned with resources for their offspring. They are the primary caregivers, hence they really get very aggressive if the nuts and berries (not to mention the precious carcass) are being divested to OTHER females by their mate.

Meanwhile, when the male is "cuckolded," he gets violently enraged at the female, mainly because HE has no control over the possibility of her birthing offspring that is not his. And paternity toward "bastard" offspring is a waste of resources, hence his anger.

This has to do with what the two primates "bring to the table:" For men, it's resources that will maintain the offspring that the woman produces.

As to why men and women stray, it usually goes like this: Men stray for sexual reasons, women for emotional. This also has its roots in evolutionary adaptations, if you adhere to these theories. Men stray because they want to generate as many descendants as possible. Women stray because the mate they have has become less beneficial to them in some way - he's not giving them enough money, not enough attention, not caring enough about the offspring, etc. Hence, the female leaves the male for another partner, while the male is perfectly content with having lots of "ancillary" sex partners and not necessarily desirous of divorce or breakup.

Go look at our simian cousins, and you'll see it right there in front of you
The Love Goddess

Here is one study of gorillas that relates to the fidelity/sexual activity issue.

I noticed particularly the fact that one pregnant female successfully drove off the other competing females and then, " ... ceased offering herself to the silverback."

Typical  

If I were an animal, I think I would resent the implication that there were, "Humans back in my family tree."  'Dems fightin' words!!

Happy and contented from my family tree of Kings and Kongs..eom

To understand the outrage you must first understand the source of male and female power.  Male power is the direct result of wealth or control of resources.  Female power is based on sexuality (beauty, and the possibility of sex etc.).  

There’s only one thing wrong with this picture- one is an appreciating asset, while the other is a depreciating asset.  In other words, what Mother Nature so generously gives her daughters, Father Time just as greedily takes away from them.  

So women do what anyone possessing a depreciating asset does, such as athletes, actors or pop stars- they negotiate for long-term contracts (as in marriage) and seek residuals (as in alimony).  Society grants them this privilege in order to maintain social order and equilibrium and as a counter to men’s increasing power concurrent with a woman’s declining power.  Few societies have granted women more in this area than America, perhaps it’s because few place a higher value on beauty than we do- but that’s just my speculation.

Now, lets get back to the question at hand regarding outrage.  Female power isn’t just based upon sex; it’s based upon creating an artificial scarcity of an otherwise abundant commodity.   Yes, I’m speaking of pussy, and yes, it’s everywhere you look.  But over the millennia, women have learned that you have to be very careful how you dole it out, so as not to flood the market and lower it’s value for other women.  And it’s not about getting pregnant- modern birth control hasn’t changed this behavior one bit.  It’s about not buying the cow when you can get the milk free- an expression I first heard from the old women on both sides of my family.

So like OPEC and De Beers, the pussy cartel has learned that to create artificial scarcity you must either limit availability or control price.  Wives and girlfriends control availability (as in limit), whereas commercial sex workers offer increased availability, but at a high price.  And unlike what you might think, they’re both playing the exact same game and are really just two sides of the same coin.  The phrase “everyone must pay” comes to mind, and the disdain one group may have for the other is comical, to say the least, and tantamount to the pot calling the kettle black.

Although the term is used loosely (no pun intended) it is the so-called “slut” that upsets the natural order of female power more than the prostitute.  Because by giving sex away easily, and at no cost, she de-values the resource by which other women derive their power and influence.  This is why other women revile sluts, just as much as men embrace them.  The crime of being a slut is made even more unacceptable because all women know that unless they acquire wealth (frequently male wealth) at some point, they’re (literally) sitting on a depreciating asset.  After all, Botox can only do so much.

In a relationship, men and women maintain a somewhat uneasy equilibrium position as long as the male is denied other sources of sex- and as long as the woman remains desirable and gives the appearance of being available.  The denial of outside sex is accomplished through the marriage contract.  The man buys a ring, as a symbol and display of his male power (i.e. wealth), and the woman promises (or pretends) she’ll always have sex with him, holding up the female side of the bargain.

When you scrape away all the emotions, the outrage a female expresses when the male seeks sex outside the relationship has nothing to do with fear of STD’s,betrayal etc..  At its core, it’s based upon her sudden realization that she’s been neutered and rendered powerless in the relationship.  It’s an unviable position for any female and is the real unforgivable sin of a male caught cheating.

And when that happens, the female usually responds in an entirely predictable manner- by directly attacking the male’s assets, frequently in divorce court.  It’s literally a case of you undermine my position of power and I’ll undermine yours.  Upon divorcing, the male is literally made to pay for the percentage of a finite asset he has consumed during the course of the marriage.  And whether married or in a relationship, the mindset is the same.  So don't expect a GF to dismiss a man's cheating as just a case of boys being boys.

Now, this is a simplification of a complex subject, and you can quibble over details.  But the fact remains, the basics haven’t changed in millennia and it’s unlikely they will.  That’s why the three women I’ve known intimately that possessed Ph.D.’s were just as obsessed with their attractiveness as any women I’ve ever dated- even though they had independent options for wealth accumulation available to them.   We’re all the products of a long line of evolutionary adaptations, and a century of women’s progress represents about ten seconds on the human evolutionary timeline.




-- Modified on 9/8/2009 1:54:02 AM