Cheating is the Violation of Exclusivity, Physical and Emotional that Binds Those in a Committed Relationship There is some controversy as to that which constitutes "cheating" in a marriage or other committed relationship.
The context with which I am most familiar involves adultery as a ground for divorce. But the concept of "cheating" applies to all kinds of committed relationships, married or unmarried, heterosexual or gay.
In more modern times, the concept of adultery has gone through some modification. It illustrates the difficulty in defining even terms as "cheating".The traditional definition of "adultery" is sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse. Technically, when President Clinton denied having "sex" with "that woman", he was correct, if you assume that unfaithfulness requires a completed sexual act, intercourse with some penetration. This is, in fact, the traditional common law definition. Another issue is whether a homosexual act with a person of the same sex would constitute "adultery" in connection with the injured spouse's divorce petition.
Courts are not united on this issue. In many instances, the issue is resolved by specific statutes on the subject. In New Jersey, for example, in 1967, the Chancery Division of the Superior court held,
"Even actual proof of sexual conduct with a third person other than intercourse is not tantamount to adultery."
Similarly, the Supreme Court of Alabama held in a 1968 case, that testimony of a female witness in an action for divorce that she had "sexual relations" with the husband but that she had not had actual sexual intercourse was not sufficient to prove adultery on part of husband.
Years ago, as an attorney practicing marital law in New York, I represented a man whose wife had had a lesbian affair; under the law at that time, adultery was the sole ground for divorce. Adultery was, conventionally, defined as a sexual act which would not have included lesbian activity. I argued to the appellate courts that adultery, or cheating, was any act that undermined the very essence of a committed relationship. I argued then, and would argue now, that the relationship existed whether the parties were heterosexual or homosexual; the only condition precedent would be if the parties considered it a truly committed relationship or if it were a marriage.
The courts were not swayed by my brilliance and eloquence. Not for the first time, I must admit. In any event, the New York divorce statute was changed effective 2003 to specifically define "adultery" as including homosexual acts.
The essence of a committed relationship (I am of an age where this means "marriage") is exclusivity, physical, emotional and any other kind. Anything that impinges on that exclusivity is harmful and "cheating".
Recent court decisions have come to agree with my argument framed in the early 1970's.
A New Jersey court summed up the rationale for including homosexual and other affairs as "cheating". The court was called on to consider whether the wife's extramarital lesbian relationship constituted adultery. Stating that an extramarital relationship is just as devastating to the wronged spouse regardless of the specific sexual act performed by the promiscuous spouse or the sex of the new paramour, the court concluded, "It is not the intent of this court to either condone or condemn homosexuality; that is a social issue best left to a more appropriate forum. What is important is to define, in human terms, those acts which constitute adultery so as to give rise to a termination of the marriage. Accordingly this court finds that adultery exists when one spouse rejects the other by entering into a personal intimate sexual relationship with any other person, irrespective of the specific sexual acts performed, the marital status, or the gender of the third party. It is the rejection of the spouse coupled with out-of-marriage intimacy that constitutes adultery." [Emphasis supplied]
"Cheating" does not have to involve actual sexual conduct with a person other than a spouse (or other than the partner in a civil or same-sex relationship). One cheats when one shares intimacy with the non-partner and violates the quality of exclusivity.
Short of actual physical sexual content, what is "cheating"? A husband's having lunch with another woman may not be cheating, but spending much time with the "other woman" and sharing intimate experiences and memories may very well be. It depends.
So, does having a sexual relationship outside of the marriage constitute "cheating"? That's easy; it does.
The hard part is when the outside relationship is of a non-physical intimacy. Is that "cheating"? It may very well be.
|
