Legitimate pleasure

[otseng]

When is pleasure for self bad? When is it good? How can one tell the difference?

[Lux]

The scenario you presented though was devoid of the main factors that lead to cheating. Many of those factors result from not having a good relationship and poor sex life. So yes, there is winning. Have more, good sex and it decreases your odds of being cheated on significantly. Doesn't eliminate it entirely, but if they have a personality more prone to cheating anyways that should have been at least somewhat forseeable and probably shouldn't have married them in the first place.

Nobody thinks their spouse will cheat on them. Unfortunately, 30% of people are wrong, and maybe a good sex life decreases the chances of being cheated on, but it doesn't eliminate them. For that effect, condoms significantly reduce the risk of STDs and unwanted pregnancies when it comes to sex outside of marriage.

[ChaosBorders]

The scenario you presented though was devoid of the main factors that lead to cheating. Many of those factors result from not having a good relationship and poor sex life. So yes, there is winning. Have more, good sex and it decreases your odds of being cheated on significantly. Doesn't eliminate it entirely, but if they have a personality more prone to cheating anyways that should have been at least somewhat forseeable and probably shouldn't have married them in the first place.

Nobody thinks their spouse will cheat on them. Unfortunately, 30% of people are wrong, and maybe a good sex life decreases the chances of being cheated on, but it doesn't eliminate them. For that effect, condoms significantly reduce the risk of STDs and unwanted pregnancies when it comes to sex outside of marriage.

But they do nothing regarding the potentially damaging relational or psychological effects of sex outside of marriage. And I wouldn't go so far as to say nobody. That's a bit too much of a generalization. For one thing, cheaters are prone to assuming their partner will also cheat on them. What is more, the risks are reduced to such a degree that not having frequent sex inside of marriage becomes the more risky option because it promotes the negative behavior. Furthermore, the only reason there are risks at all regarding the STD's is that one of the partners is having sex outside of the marriage in the first place.

[Lux]

But they do nothing regarding the potentially damaging relational or psychological effects of sex outside of marriage. And I wouldn't go so far as to say nobody. That's a bit too much of a generalization. For one thing, cheaters are prone to assuming their partner will also cheat on them. What is more, the risks are reduced to such a degree that not having frequent sex inside of marriage becomes the more risky option because it promotes the negative behavior. Furthermore, the only reason there are risks at all regarding the STD's is that one of the partners is having sex outside of the marriage in the first place.

Yes, "nobody" is a generalization, always.
The fact remains that sex inside of marriage has risks too when not taking precautions. It does seem appropriate to drop precautions such as birth control or STD protection (especially the latter one) when married, but that is a risk, just like sex outside of marriage is a risk too. One is very probably of higher risk than the other, but they both have forceable possible bad consequences to them, it just makes sense to take risks at times.

No, cheating is not the ONLY way one of the spouses could get an STD.

And if we're going to speak psychological, the risk of emotional attachment with sex outside of marriage is also an issue if you're having sex with your spouse and he/she cheats.

[Skyangel]

When is pleasure for self bad? When is it good? How can one tell the difference?

When it's bad you would not be pleased with yourself.

[ChaosBorders]

One is very probably of higher risk than the other, but they both have forceable possible bad consequences to them, it just makes sense to take risks at times.

But one has far more of them and doesn't really have many counter positive effects that could not be gained through other means. The good of sex inside of marriage far outweighs the bad. If you would like to try and show this is also the case of sex outside of marriage please do so.

No, cheating is not the ONLY way one of the spouses could get an STD.

Fair enough. But pretty sure it's by far the main way.

And if we're going to speak psychological, the risk of emotional attachment with sex outside of marriage is also an issue if you're having sex with your spouse and he/she cheats.

But in this case it's not nearly as bad. Before the marriage (or outside if there is adultery going on) the attachment causes significantly increased risk of ending up with someone you shouldn't be. Inside of marriage though, the attachment can help overcome problems like infidelity and end up saving the marriage. What is more, most infidelity occurs because the relationship isn't going well in the first place, and much of that can be traced back to them being incompatible and marrying anyways, and ending up together can often be traced back to...can you guess it? So most of the "risk" of having sex inside of marriage exists because of sex outside of marriage. Seems mean to denigrate sex inside of marriage for reasons that would be far lower if people weren't screwing around outside of it.

[ChaosBorders]

When is pleasure for self bad? When is it good? How can one tell the difference?

When it's bad you would not be pleased with yourself.

O.o Guess Psycopaths are great people then.

[Lux]

But one has far more of them and doesn't really have many counter positive effects that could not be gained through other means. The good of sex inside of marriage far outweighs the bad.

Probably, in many cases. But in a lot of them it probably doesn't. I think you're idealizing marriage and/or sex inside of it, honestly. I mean, the way it should be is you marry someone who doesn't have any STDs and is faithful (and doesn't get any STDs) and have a good sex life. Unfortunately, that's not how it goes for everyone, and not having a good married sex life is very common, leading to the problems you already know about.

About the effects of sex, it depends. Both the positive and the negative depend on the personality of both involved and the situation, even if they are married.

If you would like to try and show this is also the case of sex outside of marriage please do so.

I only know of one way to do that, and clearly that's not an option

But in this case it's not nearly as bad. Before the marriage (or outside if there is adultery going on) the attachment causes significantly increased risk of ending up with someone you shouldn't be.

Sure, if you're not very bright. In which case they already had high risk of ending up married with a mismatch.

Inside of marriage though, the attachment can help overcome problems like infidelity and end up saving the marriage. What is more, most infidelity occurs because the relationship isn't going well in the first place, and much of that can be traced back to them being incompatible and marrying anyways,

No one is denying sex inside of marriage is good, I'm saying that sex outside of marriage is good too, and when it comes to risks, they both have them.

and ending up together can often be traced back to...can you guess it?

It's either very good sex or too lazy to find someone they have better sex with.

So most of the "risk" of having sex inside of marriage exists because of sex outside of marriage. Seems mean to denigrate sex inside of marriage for reasons that would be far lower if people weren't screwing around outside of it.

I think you're the one denigrating sex (outside of marriage) which can indeed be awesome too. It has risks, sometimes the risks are very high, but it's not always a "bad" thing. And sex inside or marriage is not always "good".

[ChaosBorders]

Probably, in many cases. But in a lot of them it probably doesn't.

The vast majority of the top reasons for adultery have some element of it.

I think you're idealizing marriage and/or sex inside of it, honestly.

Not really. Many marriages suck, but I think a very large amount of that can be traced to chemical attachments formed between incompatible people resulting from pre-marital sex that led them to getting married when they shouldn't have.

And even when compatible people get married, often they used sex as a crutch during a period in their lives that they should have been developing skill sets that ultimately would have benefited their relationship more.

I mean, the way it should be is you marry someone who doesn't have any STDs and is faithful (and doesn't get any STDs) and have a good sex life. Unfortunately, that's not how it goes for everyone, and not having a good married sex life is very common, leading to the problems you already know about.

And I think a lot of those problems can be traced to the reasons stated above.

Sure, if you're not very bright. In which case they already had high risk of ending up married with a mismatch.

A) Most people aren't very bright.
B) Sex life accounts for about 20% of what makes up a good relationship. What people don't take into account is that it will almost always inevitably decrease over time regardless of whether you start before or after you are married. They might have a passing relationship and decide to get married if they're screwing around, only for their sex life to decrease and find themselves not nearly compatible enough. If they'd waited, they would have more likely realized this. It stands to reason that if a couple is compatible enough to get married without sex their odds of success once beginning a decent sex life are even higher.

No one is denying sex inside of marriage is good, I'm saying that sex outside of marriage is good too, and when it comes to risks, they both have them.

And I'm saying most of the risks inside of marriage can be traced back to sex outside of marriage, contributing to it being an inherently riskier thing to do because it has a continued effect. Certainly there are sometimes benefits to sex outside of marriage, but most of those can be gained through other constructive means that are substantially less risky and will ultimately benefit the person more in the long-term.

I think you're the one denigrating sex (outside of marriage) which can indeed be awesome too. It has risks, sometimes the risks are very high, but it's not always a "bad" thing. And sex inside or marriage is not always "good".

I'm not saying that sex outside of marriage never works out well, or that sex inside of marriage never ends poorly, but if you're just going off of foreseeable consequences one is significantly superior to the other. An analogy would be that sex outside of marriage is gambling and sex inside of it is investing. You could win big on the first one but you're more likely to lose, and you could lose it all on the second but you'll probably come out ahead.

[Lux]

Not really. Many marriages suck, but I think a very large amount of that can be traced to chemical attachments formed between incompatible people resulting from pre-marital sex that led them to getting married when they shouldn't have.

How do you know that? The sex spell doesn't last for years, usually, so if they took their time before getting married they could figure out whether they are actually compatible even if they have sex.

And even when compatible people get married, often they used sex as a crutch during a period in their lives that they should have been developing skill sets that ultimately would have benefited their relationship more.

Why does having sex impede developing those skill sets?

And I think a lot of those problems can be traced to the reasons stated above.

And I don't see how you come to that conclusion.

A) Most people aren't very bright.

True enough. There's nothing much we can do about that...

B) Sex life accounts for about 20% of what makes up a good relationship. What people don't take into account is that it will almost always inevitably decrease over time regardless of whether you start before or after you are married. They might have a passing relationship and decide to get married if they're screwing around, only for their sex life to decrease and find themselves not nearly compatible enough. If they'd waited, they would have more likely realized this. It stands to reason that if a couple is compatible enough to get married without sex their odds of success once beginning a decent sex life are even higher.

Like I said before, if they waited long enough before running down the aisle, they could have figured out whether or not they were compatible beforehand.

And I'm saying most of the risks inside of marriage can be traced back to sex outside of marriage, contributing to it being an inherently riskier thing to do because it has a continued effect. Certainly there are sometimes benefits to sex outside of marriage, but most of those can be gained through other constructive means that are substantially less risky and will ultimately benefit the person more in the long-term.

For instance?

I'm not saying that sex outside of marriage never works out well, or that sex inside of marriage never ends poorly, but if you're just going off of foreseeable consequences one is significantly superior to the other. An analogy would be that sex outside of marriage is gambling and sex inside of it is investing. You could win big on the first one but you're more likely to lose, and you could lose it all on the second but you'll probably come out ahead.

That's a very unfair analogy in my opinion. Gambling seldom results in anything good.

Sex outside of marriage is not necessarily screwing around. I don't see how having sex with a serious partner that you trust and love is bad, assuming both are psychologically prepared for sex and take the necessary precautions. In fact, I don't think it has any higher possibilities of trouble than sex inside marriage.

In the case of screwing around, let me tell you - it works for some people. Yes, they take a risk, even if they use condoms or pills or both. But the psychological effects seem to rank from low to non-existent most of the times, at least in the cases I have personally seen.

[ChaosBorders]

Not really. Many marriages suck, but I think a very large amount of that can be traced to chemical attachments formed between incompatible people resulting from pre-marital sex that led them to getting married when they shouldn't have.

How do you know that? The sex spell doesn't last for years, usually, so if they took their time before getting married they could figure out whether they are actually compatible even if they have sex.

Could, but then if they aren't they've wasted a lot of time. It can last about three years. If you aren't having it, you should know within at MOST two whether you are compatible enough or not and if you don't have a good idea within six months you really should be dumping them and moving on. The alt-text of this XKCD comic references the issue with the approach you're recommending: http://xkcd.com/761/

Why does having sex impede developing those skill sets?

In fairness it really shouldn't have to, but in practice that is very often the result.

And I don't see how you come to that conclusion.

Because they're marrying people while still in the time frame of being most affected by the chemicals released through sex, which once they decrease causes them to realize 'oh, we weren't really right for each other' and that leads to the majority of relationship problems, cheating, and divorces.

Like I said before, if they waited long enough before running down the aisle, they could have figured out whether or not they were compatible beforehand.

And if they waited that long and were wrong about it, they've wasted years of their life they could have been looking for a more suitable partner.

For instance?

It's definitely good exercise...but you could just go do exercise. You can also get many of the psychological benefits with a fair amount less risk through foreplay and what not (while simultaneously developing a useful skill that would benefit your sex life later in life). There's still some risk of the relational issues attached to that one, but it's not nearly as pronounced.

Sex outside of marriage is not necessarily screwing around. I don't see how having sex with a serious partner that you trust and love is bad, assuming both are psychologically prepared for sex and take the necessary precautions. In fact, I don't think it has any higher possibilities of trouble than sex inside marriage.

IF you take all necessary precautions AND don't mind risking a couple years extra of life on someone who might not be compatible after all in the long-term when you could be looking for someone more suitable it CAN end up just fine.

But most people aren't doing that. The number of people who have sex outside of marriage who take all of the intelligent precautions to minimize the risk is fairly low. The number who have bad things happening as a result of doing it is quite high.

In the case of screwing around, let me tell you - it works for some people. Yes, they take a risk, even if they use condoms or pills or both. But the psychological effects seem to rank from low to non-existent most of the times, at least in the cases I have personally seen.

There are some personality types that do better with screwing around than others. Often times though they have a much harder time adjusting to a stable family life. This may never personally affect them due to their personalities, but I feel sorry for their children.