Is rp sex cheating?

[Krimson]

Is an ad hominem attack really necessary when I merely wanted to contribute to the discussion?

pls no. There is no ad hominem in any of Quin's posts thus far. As someone who is a fan of rhetoric (albeit I'm not very good with it), let's not dilute it's meaning.

Crash Course on Ad Hominems

[If Quin were to say something like "Your avatar is stupid, therefore you are wrong", she would be using an ad hominem. However, merely saying "Your avatar is stupid, also you are wrong" is simply insulting someone.]

Your point was largely semantic and while it did have some value (semantic points are often underrated imo), it didn't really shake up the conversation or have much significance.

Let's lighten this thread a bit. I'm not wearing pants.

I like how I didn't choose to respond to the additional response, trying to end the conflict before it escalated, only for someone else to jump in in defense of ad hominem attacks.

Allow me to give you a crash course on ad hominem attack then.

Ad hominem - Latin for "to the man," meaning to attack a person's character or personal attribute rather than their argument, a common fallacy employed in debate at any level.

"Very cute"
"went over your head"
"Please don't quibble over literal details"

The implication of this argument is:

A) that I'm intentionally "trolling" to some extent, that I chose to interpret "If you can't/wouldn't do it with the s/o sitting next to you, it's cheating" literally, when it unequivocally intended to mean something else.

B) that I'm too stupid to understand her point. Once again, rather than directly addressing my point, the attack is upon my intelligence, rather than the soundness of my logic.

The comment in question:

...If you can't/wouldn't do it with the s/o sitting next to you, it's cheating.

This simple, declarative statement is supposed to be unequivocally non-literal? In arguendo, I will assume for a moment that the above statement is immediately obvious to everyone else as non-literal, and I am actually completely ignorant to have made this mistake as reading a simple declarative statement as indeed that, I moved on to attempt to clarify my point with a non-literal interpretation.

Even on the point of s/o, there is a difference between "disapprove" and "consider it cheating." Some girls (or guys) might dislike it if their s/o watched porn, but they don't consider it cheating. The same distinction can be drawn about erotic roleplay.

The above is a clarification of my point, that just because something bothers your s/o, doesn't automatically make it amount to "cheating." Whether"if you can't/wouldn't do it with the s/o sitting next to you, it's cheating" literally or figuratively, my assertion runs directly contrary to that. And again, I emphasis, my assertion. Because ya know, this is a forum where we are allowed to voice our opinions and discuss those options without inviting condescension in the form of "very cute" and "went over your head."

Moving on from the initial ad hominem attack, Quin proceeds to set up a strawman.

If they wouldn't care or you're not committed then the question is moot.

My point is that they might care, but their caring does not automatically make it cheating. Suppose person A is dating an extremely possessive girlfriend, who interpret A talking to another girl as cheating, does that make that behavior cheating? There is some objective basis for what constitute cheating beyond what your s/o care to define it as. Of course, in any functional relationships, a couple has to agree on what that definition is, but that does not alter my point that your s/o's opinion of something doesn't make that something cheating.

Once again, instead of simply confining herself to simply responding to my argument, she just couldn't resist throwing in a few personal attacks directly not at my assertion, but my intelligence.

"because you're being very painfully obtuse"
Again, you're taking it literal, so excuse me if I react badly to having to spell this out like I'm teaching you the English language."

In addition to the ad hominem, the same strawman is utilized once more. My last statement was: "Some girls (or guys) might dislike it if their s/o watched porn, but they don't consider it cheating. The same distinction can be drawn about erotic roleplay." As I have elaborated above, this is fairly an assertion of "something can bother someone, but that doesn't make it cheating." This is a literal interpretation of his/her's first assertion how?? Rather than taking the time to even comprehend my point, Quin responded derogatorily and set up a strawman as my opinion. So please, take a moment to actually read what I wrote before dismissing it as either A) trolling, B) completely inane.

Tl;dr: I'm allowed to disagree with someone's opinion, and at no point have I made any assertions such as "if you believe x, you must be dumb." The same cannot be said for Quin, and an attack on either character or intelligence is ad hominem.

 

[Rudolph Quin]

Tl;dr: I'm allowed to disagree with someone's opinion, and at no point have I made any assertions such as "if you believe x, you must be dumb." The same cannot be said for Quin, and an attack on either character or intelligence is ad hominem.

I didn't say that either. :huh: Not once have I attacked your beliefs but have shown very heavy, under the lid distaste for you completely ignoring anything I've said to try to clarify, and your continued preference on focusing on sentence structure and yes, literal interpretations of what I said.

I think it is pretty self-evident, in my opinion, that if you are in any toxic sort of relationship that involves an overly reactive and stifling and possessive partner, then it is not cheating or anything resembling a relationship. It's bordering abuse. We're not talking about "situations that involve emotional slavery". We're talking about partnership, companionship and the moral guidelines of how to determine how to best treat a partner, who we'll assume has done nothing to you but be faithful. ????????????????? I mean, is that... am I going crazy? Is anybody else in this discussion under the impression that when we ask about "cheating" that we're in any way talking about extreme situations and abusive relationships? Or is that just the justification to stay? Like, "well, there ARE some situations where it's okay to not consider your s/o's approval or feelings". No. No, there's not. Because if they're forcing you to do anything emotionally harmful and dehumanizing to you or taking control of your life, then they're not your s/o anymore because you GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE SOCIOPATH NARCISSIST'S HOUSE??? Maybe? I dunno. Maybe I'm the only one who makes that connection between healthy relationships and the word cheating. You know, the implication that there is nothing to be unfaithful to when you're with somebody totally toxic and overbearing.

Personal wellbeing and health trumps all. Have I covered all my bases on the very simplistic and yet, what I assumed to be, to the heart guideline to have in figuring out "should I carry through with this borderline intimate activity with someone other than the person I am in a committed intimate relationship with"? Please do find something else to ignore about my explanations and clarifications.

I've explained it several different ways, using several different words. Not sure how I could be more clear.

 

[Krimson]

Is anybody else in this discussion under the impression that when we ask about "cheating" that we're in any way talking about extreme situations and abusive relationships?

I never fail to be amazed with the sheer amount of strawman'ing going on in this conversation.

Suppose person A is dating an extremely possessive girlfriend, who interpret A talking to another girl as cheating, does that make that behavior cheating?

How do I make it clearer to you that this is a hypothetical meant to illustrate the following sentence? Which is:

There is some objective basis for what constitute cheating beyond what your s/o care to define it as. Of course, in any functional relationships, a couple has to agree on what that definition is, but that does not alter my point that your s/o's opinion of something doesn't make that something cheating.

But you know, obviously actually addressing my point is hard, so go on and keep strawman'ing my illustration as if that's my point then? Kudos for getting to the heart of the argument. To quote your complete lack of "attacks", obviously my point "went over your head."

My point is that they might care, but their caring does not automatically make it cheating.

I even prefaced it for you with "my point"! And still you can't seem to read, it's kind of like "I'm teaching you the English language"! I am utterly and completely baffled. But I'll take it from your sudden injection of all caps and an obscene amount of question marks that the small font might be a bit hard to read.

 

[Karameida]

I will be temporarily locking this thread.

 

[Karameida]

As it has been sorted this thread is now opened back up for discussion should anyone want to. However, please keep it peaceful.

 

[MisterKing]

Everyone is wrong except me.

(Is this peaceful enough, or should I tone it down?)

 

[Pazzo]

Here is a definitive answer for that question that cannot be anything but correct... Now before you say "Shut up Pazzo" just hear me out:

Everyone is wrong, and everyone is right, and here is the logic behind the statement: There is no right or wrong answer that satisfies everyone's definition of "Cheating"

The question itself is a paradox, similar to "This statement is false", and as such you have a heuristic loop that will drive you crazy if you think about it too long...

No two relationships are exactly alike. Some people enjoy an open relationship where sharing one another with others is accepted and even encouraged, while others like to be monogamous, wither the sharing is in the real world or the written literary fantasy world.

The bottom line: It depends on the people involved, and no one else.

Now, before you attempt to say I am wrong, I would ask that you have definitive proof of a universally accepted law or concept that has been codified and validated, and can counter the logic of the above. Have fun with that =D

That being said, can we all eat cakes and pies and hundreds of pounds of bacon and cheese, and drink gallons of beer and grow fat?

 

[Ignis Gehenallis]

Personally, I think that if an individual finds something like RP sex to feel wrong or to feel like cheating, than that says more about said individual and their current relationship than it says bout RP sex. If your writing something with someone on the internet, with full awareness that it's an exercise in playing a role, and yet that is in anyway intimate enough that it even remotely compares to the intimacy that you have with your current partner, well then I'm sorry, but it doesn't sound to me like you and your partner have a very close relationship at all.