GF is a size queen

[vanir23]

If she cheats on you it is probably because of your lack of confidence/insecurity, or your lack of trust.

Just saying, a man is more than a dick...

Nice, if she cheats on you it's your fault. This is a painfully ignorant load since you don't know any more than he's told you.

Bottom line, if you know you've fucked something up to cause her to grow distant and cheat (yes, cheat) on you over naughty messenger then fix it. If you haven't then you need to ditch her fast cause she WILL hurt you. Only you know which it is. Don't be afraid to make the hard choice but make sure it's the one that makes you keep your self esteem intact. Don't go out on a limb for someone who's going to saw it off.

 

[AlteredEgo]

I'm really quite surprised by the number of people condemning this guy for checking his GF's yahoo.

I know so many people that have sneakily checked on their lovers, and ever single one of my girlfriends, has, at some point, snooped through my stuff, whether facebook, emails or phone. I can think of two females - just off the top of my head - who found out their partners had cheated by doing this.

I find it an entirely understandable behaviour, and not one I would condemn anyone for. I don't think it's highly admirable, admitedly, but I'd put it on a par with the negative emotions of being jealous, nervous or worried, for example.

OP - do you have a transcript of what was said between your GF and this other person? Sharing it might shed more light on the situation and help you get better advice.

I always condemn the sneaky for being sneaky. It's disgusting to me. If she's being sneaky, I condemn her for that too. If you have to snoop, you should just leave. It's over when the trust is gone. Snooping just makes you as guilty as you think the other party is.

 

[D_Ginger_Vitas]

Nice, if she cheats on you it's your fault. This is a painfully ignorant load since you don't know any more than he's told you.

Bottom line, if you know you've fucked something up to cause her to grow distant and cheat (yes, cheat) on you over naughty messenger then fix it. If you haven't then you need to ditch her fast cause she WILL hurt you. Only you know which it is. Don't be afraid to make the hard choice but make sure it's the one that makes you keep your self esteem intact. Don't go out on a limb for someone who's going to saw it off.

Dude, he doesn't trust her...and that will destroy any relationship. And secondly, he said that he thinks she will. You don't see something wrong with that. If it happens just tell her to fuck off, but don't go worrying about possibilities--all it does is cause problems. I've been cheated on before, I know how it is. All I'm saying is to act properly so you aren't complicit in her fucked up choice.

 

[B_derbytom1976]

All these people harping on about trust. I'm really quite amazed. I don't know of any relationship where both partners have absolute 100% trust, all the time. It's just not humanly possible.

Nearly every long term couple I know of has had some cheating happen at some point in their relationship. It happens.

It's worth remembering that some scientific studies say that as high as 1 in 10 children are the result of adulterous relationships, where the wife has cheated without the husband's knowledge, and yet the husband still unwittingly helps raise the child.

You can only trust one person in life 100%, and that is yourself. And I'm not even 100% sure about that, actually...

 

[ManlyBanisters]

All these people harping on about trust. I'm really quite amazed. I don't know of any relationship where both partners have absolute 100% trust, all the time. It's just not humanly possible.

Nearly every long term couple I know of has had some cheating happen at some point in their relationship. It happens.

It's worth remembering that some scientific studies say that as high as 1 in 10 children are the result of adulterous relationships, where the wife has cheated without the husband's knowledge, and yet the husband still unwittingly helps raise the child.

You can only trust one person in life 100%, and that is yourself. And I'm not even 100% sure about that, actually...

Sad and cynical.

You got a citation for that 1 in 10 claim?

 

[B_derbytom1976]

Sad and cynical.

You got a citation for that 1 in 10 claim?

It is a little sad , I admit, though my attitude is not cynical, it is just realistic.

Yes, I do have a citation for the 1 in 10 claim, and I should also point out that some studies have shown the figure of husbands unwittingly raising other men's children due to the wife's cheating to be as high as 30%.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...11/who-s-your-daddy-global-nonpaternity-rates

 

[blaquehorse]

Come on Manly, lighten up. Must you guys put your teeth into everyone?

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Fuck off.

 

[MickeyLee]

hmm that whole 1 in 10 thing, if ya sample group were culled from daytime talkshow guests.. i believe it :biggrin:

trust/mistrust... so... of all the men accusing their women of being cheating whores.. only about 1/3 had reason to distrust.. the other 2/3 are just assholes?

 

[ManlyBanisters]

It is a little sad , I admit, though my attitude is not cynical, it is just realistic.

Yes, I do have a citation for the 1 in 10 claim, and I should also point out that some studies have shown the figure of husbands unwittingly raising other men's children due to the wife's cheating to be as high as 30%.

Who

You can't even read your own source properly.

It says that one third of men who seek paternity tests turn out not to be the father. (You do realise, I hope, that that means two thirds of men who seek paternity tests are wrong to doubt the mothers of their children.)

It also says that of men not seeking paternity tests but who are given them anyway (test groups, etc.) less than 2%* turn out not to be the biological father.

* < 3% out side of Europe and USA / Canada

None of that says 1 in 10. It does say "the standard nonpaternity rate that is most commonly mentioned across cultural settings is 10%", but that does not mean that all those men do not know the full story of the paternity of their children.

Do you know what 'non-paternity' means? It is a child not having his/her biological father's surname: Non Paternity | dnakin.com.

 

[B_derbytom1976]

You can't even read your own source properly.

None of that says 1 in 10. It does say "the standard nonpaternity rate that is most commonly mentioned across cultural settings is 10%", but that does not mean that all those men do not know the full story of the paternity of their children.

Do you know what 'non-paternity' means? It is a child not having his/her biological father's surname: Non Paternity | dnakin.com.

"The standard nonpaternity rate that is most commonly mentioned across cultural settings is 10%. This is quite extraordinary in that it is difficult to imagine that 1 out of every 10 children is sired by someone other than the man who is recognized as the father."

Clearly, in the context of this article, non-paternity means a cuckolded husband.

I'm really surprised you are not already familiar with the 1 in 10 claim. It's very common knowledge, although it is contended, both higher, and lower.

Here is another source : -

http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP05358362.pdf

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

All these people harping on about trust. I'm really quite amazed. I don't know of any relationship where both partners have absolute 100% trust, all the time. It's just not humanly possible.

Nearly every long term couple I know of has had some cheating happen at some point in their relationship. It happens.

It's worth remembering that some scientific studies say that as high as 1 in 10 children are the result of adulterous relationships, where the wife has cheated without the husband's knowledge, and yet the husband still unwittingly helps raise the child.

You can only trust one person in life 100%, and that is yourself. And I'm not even 100% sure about that, actually...

100% horseshit. I know dozens of people in relationships of complete trust and have been in relationships in which I trusted my partner 100% and they me.

You're full of it.


@ OP, if you don't trust your GF not to cheat on you then you don't have a meaningful relationship. Move on, go find someone else who can make you happy and allow her to find someone who can do the same for her.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

"The standard nonpaternity rate that is most commonly mentioned across cultural settings is 10%. This is quite extraordinary in that it is difficult to imagine that 1 out of every 10 children is sired by someone other than the man who is recognized as the father."

Clearly, in the context of this article, non-paternity means a cuckolded husband.

I'm really surprised you are not already familiar with the 1 in 10 claim. It's very common knowledge, although it is contended, both higher, and lower.

Here is another source : -

http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/EP05358362.pdf

1 in 10 is bandied about a lot - there is no supporting empirical evidence.

That link proves nothing and gives evidence of nothing either. The intended meaning of 'non-paternity' in your original link is left ambiguous. The definition of non-paternity is as I linked.

I'm sorry you believe the sensationalised bull-shit. I don't. I don't think we are going to agree so let's just leave it there, eh?

I agree with what hilaire says about trust as well.

 

[B_derbytom1976]

100% horseshit. I know dozens of people in relationships of complete trust and have been in relationships in which I trusted my partner 100% and they me.

You're full of it.

I'm quite new to this site, and I'm finding that a lot of people here are really quite rude. Are there no moderators that advise individuals to keep their tone more civil?

About the notion of 100% trust. Essentially this would mean that there are absolutely NO secrets between the people in the relationship.

"No secrets" means not keeping any information from your partner. That means that checking their yahoo messenger, email, and phone, is NOT an issue.

Therefore these people that are attacking OP for his apparent lack of trust, are in fact hypocrites. In a relationship with 100% trust, checking someone's messenger would be 100% okay.

 

[MickeyLee]

trusting your partner has nothing to do with "no secrets"
i kinda actually hate that homogenized-blob relationship ideal.

i trust the boy because of who is he... and he's not emotionally hemorrhagic.
seems to me, demanding to know everything about your partner is sign of mistrust and doubt.

the boy is who the boy is.... i know him. i don't need to read his diary :tongue1:

 

[B_derbytom1976]

1 in 10 is bandied about a lot - there is no supporting empirical evidence.

That link proves nothing and gives evidence of nothing either. The intended meaning of 'non-paternity' in your original link is left ambiguous. The definition of non-paternity is as I linked.

I'm sorry you believe the sensationalised bull-shit. I don't. I don't think we are going to agree so let's just leave it there, eh?

I agree with what hilaire says about trust as well.

Why so angry? And wrong too...

Here is yet ANOTHER source for the 1 in10 statistic. Furthmore, this article also includes studies which have shown the rate to be up to 30%. The assesment is that non-paternity of children by the man believed to be the father varies with social status.

"The research shows that the lower a purported father’s socioeconomic status, the more likely his wife got someone else to father the child. From a Darwinian standpoint this makes perfect sense, since she wants her offspring to have the highest-caliber DNA, which may not come from the stiff she settled for at the altar."

One Out Of Ten People Weren&#8217;t Fathered By The Man They Believe Is Dad | Disinformation

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Not angry. Still leaving it.

If you think you having the last word and more links to bloggy type stuff makes you the better person then well done.

 

[B_derbytom1976]

trusting your partner has nothing to do with "no secrets"

If you trust your partner 100%, and know that they can trust you 100%, then there should be no issue with them going through your messages, or with you answering every question 100% honestly.

It's 100% unrealistic.

seems to me, demanding to know everything about your partner is sign of mistrust and doubt.

With 100% trust, it wouldn't be a case of demanding - there would be no need to demand, because ALL the information would be freely given. "Nothing to fear, nothing to hide".

Obviously, I don't think this is realistic, and I dont' know anyone that lives this way. Everyone has their secrets, and everyone lies sometimes. Even good people cheat, sometimes by accident, and sometimes they deeply regret it later. We're not rational beings, especially when it comes to sexuality.

Frankly, I find the most untrustworthy people are those that DEMAND 100% trust of you, and get offended when they don't get it!

 

[B_derbytom1976]

Not angry. Still leaving it.

If you think you having the last word and more links to bloggy type stuff makes you the better person then well done.

Well done for leaving it. I can tell by your last post, you have left the matter entirely. Good for you.

That post was not 'bloggy', and it contained references to MANY scientific studies which you can look up, if you ever chose not to be in denial about this issue, and claim it is false simply because you don't like it.

Here it is again, so people can check for themselves and SEE there are references, rather than believe your dishonesty : -

One Out Of Ten People Weren&#8217;t Fathered By The Man They Believe Is Dad | Disinformation

How ironic, ManlyBanisters, that you are trying to trick people away from seeing the truth of this matter, and yet you attack OP so vehmently for his apparent lack of trust. Could it be that dishonest women are those that demand trust most of all?

I thank you in advance for leaving this discussion, as you said you would, ManlyBanisters. Good bye.

 

[MickeyLee]

if ya need a hug, you can just ask for one :smile:

who said anything about demanding trust. going on long term partners, there was never a demand of trust. i just gave them my trust.. and didn't expect the same level of trust in return. was just all fuzzled and floaty when the same trust was given.

*ponders* trust doesn't exclude individuality. maybe? yeth... exactly. ya are supporting an very unrealistic way of living with 100% trust. having your own space is not the same as hiding anything. having a self outside of the relationship is not lying by omission.

cheating.. ya don't cheat on accident *unless you were FBs with some crazy clingy bitch who inisits that you're dating when clearly you're just hooking up*

ya make a choice, ya go through with an act you know will be hurtful. is sigh of immaturity, has nothing to do with trust.. have everything to do with people not valuing trust.