Should We Expect Same Moral Standards?

Okay, I jumped into another thread and spoke about how I cheated on an ex-partner long ago and he only found out when I was caught by his bugging device. Which was set to record all my conversations. He then chased me outta house. I now own same house but that is different story.
But here is a thread for a Saturday night.
Should we expect the same level of loyalty to our partners as we may have in real life? Should our partners/wives/husbands demand or even expect us to abide by REAL world rules in a world that should be relatively free of such restrictions. Please dont get me wrong - there are perversions and obvious deviances that I hate and it is a pity they came to our world. This is NOT a thread about those topics. This is a question about regular sex (lol!)
But my question is a serious one - would you feel cheated or throw out a girlfriend in SL who had experimented in an experimental world? And for women readers of this thread - would you feel same about male/female partner? AND - Have you ever cheated?
My SL partner allows me to have immense freedom and I love him all the more for it, by the way.

Personally, a cheat is a cheat. Whatever level the cheating takes place at, it's still cheating.

Like any relationship, it depends on expectations. If you want an open relationship, it should be clear from the get-go. But that comes with its own consequences.

No relationship is one-size fits all, but some are markedly healthier than others. But we can't force everyone to think the same, so... the drama goes on.

I feel like we are cheating on Strife when we start General Discussion topics like this on the RA forum.

Sorry Raymond - I just curious, is all. This is Resident Answers. If people not interested they dont have to add two cents worth

I wrote about this in the Herald last month.

Bottom line for me is that it's up to the partners to decide what rules apply. If the partners are okay with an open relationship, that's cool. If the partners expect strict monogamy, that's cool, too. If the partners have less than full monogamy, but someone circusmcribed rules (eg, no sleeping with someone of my sex, but you can have a bf/gf of a sex that is not mine), that's cool too. What I think is not cool is when either (1) the parties meander along the path without discussing what rules apply (either assuming that RL conventions *do* apply or, conversely, assuming that they do *not* apply) or (2) the parties agree to a set of rules, and then one party breaks the rules without telling the other or without leaving the relationship. I see this all as an issue of informed consent, trust, and willingness to abide by the standards that the couple sets.

I do *not* think that you get an automatic free pass for philandering just because it is taking place online. The people you have relationships with online are real people with real feelings, and they can be just as easily hurt as can people in RL. You may not take it that way yourself, but believe me there are many who *do* take it that way, and to me it's not kosher to simply walk around blithely, pretending that everyone else takes the feelings lightly like you may be doing. It's important to discuss openly with any potential SL partner or longer term lover what your expectations are either way (ie, monogamy, not monogamy, limited monogamy, etc.) -- and I think in a place like SL where there are no pre-established societal norms, these discussions are critical. I don't think it's cricket to say "well, this isn't RL, so it doesn't matter what I do here, lol ... hun, it's just a game, lol ... lol get a life lol ...". I think every person who chooses to interact in a romantic-ish manner with someone else in SL owes them the respect to discuss these matters openly so that expectations can be set, or that bad situations can be avoided by unearthing an incompatibility in expectations at the early stages.

There are no one_size_fits_all guidelines, whether virtual relationship or otherwise. There should be an understanding between two people and the lines clearly drawn. 'Cheating' is simply when one steps over that agreed line.

I understand. People have just been getting a lot of flak here lately for straying away from what this forum is intended for. Glad I'm not a res/mod. Carry on.

..and what Victorria said ^

Jig, you just gotta treat people with respect.

If you want an open relationship, make sure the other person understands that.

If you had an affair when they thought you were an exclusive couple .. well, that's pretty bad, but dropping a chat bug in something you own is hardly a sign of respect either.

I've only had a relationship in SL with somebody I lived with in RL (not a proper SL relationship at all then), so I can't really answer the remaining questions from experience.

It's as I said above really, if I was having a relationship with somebody who wanted to experiment with other people, I'd expect them to be upfront with that information (I wouldn't have a problem with it as it happens), and my hurt would depend upon the intensity of our friendship. If somebody I'd known six months (only in SL) did that to me, I'm sure it would hurt. If I'd only known them a few weeks, maybe not.

Cheating on somebody in RL though. A million times worse. Been there, done that, and found it VERY difficult to logout.

Hmmm, reading the thread. Speaking for myself, maybe I am immoral not only in SL but in RL?? Or is it amoral? And not being sarcastic but is this a generational thing? That may be due to my upbringing and reading Emily Bronte at age 15. But this is interesting to me. After all SL is a mix of all ages and beliefs so I like what I am redaing.

I didnt give HIM the chat bug - he gave it to me hidden in a painting - I felt like he had given me a dose of the clap. And it was my lover/new partner who found the final bug device.

What's Emily Bronte got to do with it? Last I heard, she lived from 1818-1848 and wrote poetry n such. I seriously doubt she said "go out and have extra-marital affairs." But whatever, maybe I misread her.

Oh I realise he gave you the device. I just need to learn how to write properly. I was trying to say that what he did was just as bad. Sorry.

It's an issue of honesty.

Emily Bronte wrote Wuthering Heights, a very sinister book in which one character gets the gravedigger to dig a hole next to his dead-lover's grave so he can "lay" with her from time to time.

Interpret that how you wish. It's a very dark and violent novel. One of the most disturbing I've ever read. Nothing like the silly film. Completely unexpected from a female of that period (indeed I believe it was first published under a man's name).

once a cheat, always a cheat. i have no respect for that sort of behavior.

No, it's not immoral, it's a clash of expectations that were never discussed properly. Can't rush into a relationship and skip the "what is it you expect and want from this" talk... ever. Not even if it's a one-night thing. There's always expectations and unless you talk about them, you're just asking for drama.
Sell me some of your land, Shorty

Yeah, I've read it. I agree with you that it's pretty disturbing, but just because someone read it when she was 15 doesn't mean that Emily Bronte was advocating adultery or cheating or whatever. Or that if someone read it when she was 15 that her entire life should be based on the moral standards of one book. Dunno.

Just to answer some of your more specific questions



It depends. If it was someone I was seeing casually, no. If it was someone who had agreed to be exclusive with me, I might -- but it depends on the circumstances heavily, the explanation, the goimng forward plan and the like.



Yes. I don't draw distinctions there -- I don't subscribe to the "one of each" theory.



Actually not -- not in the context of a relationship where there was a commitment to be exclusive. I go through periods in SL where I am just messing about with many people, and then I go through periods of committed monogamy. I feel fine either way, it just depends on the circumstances and the people.



What do you mean?

To me, that kind of justification suggested the OP was trying to excuse herself as a roleplayer. I could be wrong, but like you, I can't think how else it relates to the situation. I've sure heard about most dark aspects of Emily's book being roleplayed Second Life. (adultery, child abuse, treachery, violence .. as for incest? i'm not so sure. ) It just makes me wonder how many roleplayers think that, because they're living a fantasy, the moral values and respect expected of them are diminished.

Victoria had it right. It's about the agreements the couple have about their relationship. If they haven't determined what those agreements actually are, they are just asking for trouble - kinda like signing a contract with a lot of blank lines in the text.

When someone is betrayed - or at least feels betrayed - it really hurts. I think most of us sympathize. but at least here in SL no offspring are involved, no RL property or assets, no-one picks up a gun and kills someone with real blood and real police showing up; it really is "just" a bunch of pixels. Good way to learn some of life's lessons, IMO.

well if you agree to a exclusive relationship you shouldn't cheat. But I'm sure it can happen.

Thing is a lot of people ASSUME a online relationship is exclusive when the subject has never even come up.

Now the subject should come up if its important to one party or the other. No one should assume either an open or an exclusive relationship.

But the modern you absolutely are exclusive after first sex that pervades due to AIDS shouldn't be necessary.

Interestingly, the Catholic church (in the US, at least) for a long time now has had an institution it calls pre-Cana (not sure of spelling). It essentially involves the devout young couple sitting down with a priest or other church representative in a series of counselling sessions where they go over a list of, I believe, 25 key questions the Church believes are critical for people to deal with before marriage - not only religious doctrine, but secular basics like children, sex, money, careers, etc. Dunno what it does for the divorce rate, but I understand a lot of people who went through it found it very valuable.

Sounds like something of the sort ought to be undertaken by everybody who considers marriage.

As if anybody does do anything sensible when the marriage deamon hits them over the head and they have to rush off willy-nilly to tie the knot...

There is no divorce in the catholic church.