BF Wants to Take Long Weekend Trip with Female Friend

[greywolf]

I do agree that a lot of times cheating happens when there's an opportunity. But personally I wonder, Do I want to be with someone who hasn't cheated on me just because they haven't had the opportunity to? I don't know about that...

[FathomFear]

I do agree that a lot of times cheating happens when there's an opportunity. But I personally I wonder, Do I want to be with someone who hasn't cheated on me just because they haven't had the opportunity to? I don't know about that...

 

Exactly.

 

You want a house with solid foundations. Not a house of cards you shelter from the wind.

[FarthestEdge]

I do agree that a lot of times cheating happens when there's an opportunity. But I personally I wonder, Do I want to be with someone who hasn't cheated on me just because they haven't had the opportunity to? I don't know about that...

 

Good point.

 

However then we're led back to the 'test the relationship' hypothesis...Which is also wrong IMO. Ideally she should want him to go, because she wants him to take advantage of the opportunity. She could suck up her insecurities (which are an emotional reaction) and use her logic (that she CAN trust him) to get her through the 4 days. Maybe the person who needs to prove something, is the OP herself. Maybe she needs to prove to herself that her resevations about this are about HER insecurities, not HIS infidelity.

 

Or maybe not...I don't know. Like I said, I see both sides. I think they are just operating on two very different wavelengths. Since he isn't here asking for advice, my advice to her is to stretch outside her comfort zones....IF she wants the relationship to work long term. Some effort to meet him somewhere in the middle would go a long way.

[hexaemeron]

Actually, respectfully, that's exactly what it means.

[oldenoughtoknow]

Nope. This wouldn't work for me.

 

My grandfather used to have a saying (okay, he had a lot of 'em, but...) "Most brothels have a bar, I don't wouldn't go to one if I only wanted a drink."

 

Your BF's friend is having marital problems. He's pretty naive if he doesn't see the elephant in this room. And the way he's handling the situation reminds me of a disrespectful child. If this is a test, he's the one who's failed.

[karvala]

I do agree that a lot of times cheating happens when there's an opportunity. But I personally I wonder, Do I want to be with someone who hasn't cheated on me just because they haven't had the opportunity to? I don't know about that...

 

That depends if you're planning on regularly giving them the opportunity. If not, then why worry about it.

 

It's rather like saying you don't want to be with someone who steals money that's left lying around. Are you going to start leaving money lying around all over the place just to make sure you're not with someone like that? What other temptations are you going to test your partner with?

 

At the end of the day you can stress test someone as much as you like, and eventually most people will fail. You can say you don't want to be with someone like that, in which case you have a single life to look forward to. People aren't perfect; the art of a relationship is to help your partner be as good as they can, not test them to make sure they're already perfect and discard them otherwise.

[Juxtapoz]

she can trust her boyfriend, but it doesn't mean she has to trust the girl. and in this case, by the way she sounds, i wouldn't trust her either.

[karvala]

Actually, respectfully, that's exactly what it means.

 

Actually, respectfully, that's not at all what it means. Trust is one thing, boundaries are something completely separate. Even if the OP were 100% confident that her bf were not going to cheat, that still wouldn't automatically make his proposed trip okay. Some people, including myself and I suspect the poster you replied to, think that things like sharing a bedroom on a romantic trip should be reserved for your partner only, as a special experience, regardless of whether or not cheating will take place. Not everything has to be turned into a test case for trust just to show your liberal credentials. Sometimes boundaries can be a positive thing.

[hexaemeron]

Actually, respectfully, that's not at all what it means. Trust is one thing, boundaries are something completely separate. Even if the OP were 100% confident that her bf were not going to cheat, that still wouldn't automatically make his proposed trip okay. Some people, including myself and I suspect the poster you replied to, think that things like sharing a bedroom on a romantic trip should be reserved for your partner only, as a special experience, regardless of whether or not cheating will take place. Not everything has to be turned into a test case for trust just to show your liberal credentials. Sometimes boundaries can be a positive thing.

 

You're absolutely right, since apparently so few of us actually put our money where our mouth is where trust is concerned. And if you need boundaries to make your experience feel special... well... I guess that's your experience then.

[Angel_325]

It is a respect issue because my boyfriend understood why I would not be comfortable with it. He agreed that it would be awkward if she stayed over but thought he'd ask me just in case I was okay with it, in which case he would let her do it from time to time since he did before. The girl in my situation did not respect me not being okay with it and continued to ask my boyfriend. He told her he was no longer single and certain boundaries had to be respected. He defended me NOT his friend, which is what her boyfriend should be doing. Not making her feel bad for something that is normal, that 90% of us would feel in her situation. Why should she be okay with her boyfriend spending a long romantic weekend alone with a female friend, especially since she has problems with her marriage? Why is she asking him to go with her. Has she no other female friends? Her boyfriend complaining about her to his friend is also very wrong. That is a red flag for me.

[hexaemeron]

You know... you're right. Why should we possibly have anyone around us at any time who have problems or issues in their lives? (You know, REAL people) We should only have pre-approved, perfect situation people so that our own perfectly cultivated insecurities and idiosyncracies can be properly nurtured and go completely unchallenged in the name of... boundaries.

 

Sorry, but in this context "boundaries" is a comfortable euphamism for "ownership" or "possession" or "I'm so afraid to be alone since I've invested so much in this person" -- If you're not prepared to handle being alone without him, you probably don't have any business trying to be in a healthy relationship WITH him.

 

There is more to life, love and learning than people's insecurities.

[FathomFear]

Again, resorting to buzzwords like "boundaries" is really only masking the underlying issue again relating to trust. You only need to put up a "boundary" if you lack trust in your partner's ability to direct his or her own life.

 

For example, if I were dating a guy (and were practicing monogamy) and set a "boundary" that he couldn't have other guys over at his house without me being present, then I'm basically saying that I don't trust his ability to conduct himself in that setting. There's no way to sugar coat this and resorting to word salad of "Oh, it's not about trust--it's about respect" or "Oh, this is just a natural boundary of relationships" doesn't fly. It's just a facade to distract from an insecurity that's being projected.

 

To be completely honest, I think it's quite horrible that anyone would want to date someone while having the mindset that the only thing stopping the other person from cheating were a bunch of pre-defined "boundaries". How good could that possibly feel? I would only be satisfied by monogamy if it were freely given to me by my partner. I wouldn't be satisfied by monogamy born from me setting up a laundry list of "ground rules" that restricted what my partner could and could not do, just to prevent him from cheating.

[hexaemeron]

I think this really speaks to a fundamental question. Why do you want a relationship? Do you want to truly spend your life with an equal? Or are you doing everything you can to trap someone into sticking around so you can feel good about yourself because you FOUND someone who cares?

[FathomFear]

It is a respect issue because my boyfriend understood why I would not be comfortable with it.

 

But again, that doesn't justify your kneejerk reaction. Being respectful of a direspectful insecurity isn't exactly admirable, IMO.

 

Not making her feel bad for something that is normal, that 90% of us would feel in her situation.

 

The popularity of a certain position doesn't make it valid. It's undeniable that many, many people out there are jealous and insecure and want to shelter their partners from any possible scenario like the one described in this thread. That doesn't mean we shouldn't sit down and think very, very hard about these feelings though, which is what we're doing here.

[FathomFear]

I think this really speaks to a fundamental question. Why do you want a relationship? Do you want to truly spend your life with an equal? Or are you doing everything you can to trap someone into sticking around so you can feel good about yourself because you FOUND someone who cares?

 

Yes. And I think there are many other factors here too. There are some underlying kneejerk assumptions that straight men and women can't be friends--or that even males and females in general can't interact without it turning into romance. Heck, I (a gay man) asked a female (straight) friend of mine if she wanted to go to Vegas for a weekend this February. She had her heart set on going but in the end her boyfriend never accepted the idea. He knew I was gay and everything--but he just couldn't stomach the idea of "his" girlfriend staying in a hotel room with another man. It's a different scenario than than one in this thread, of course, but it just goes to show how these insecurities can manifest even in more absurd ways.

[karvala]

He knew I was gay and everything--but he just couldn't stomach the idea of "his" girlfriend staying in a hotel room with another man. It's a different scenario than than one in this thread, of course, but it just goes to show how these insecurities can manifest even in more absurd ways.

 

That should tell you that in fact this is not always about a fear of cheating, but rather the fact that friends and partners are not the same thing, a distinction which seems to be lost on you at the moment. Tell me candidly, is there anything you would not want your partner to do with a friend of his (and I include sex in that)? And if so, could you explain to me how that is not a boundary. Or if you acknowledge it is, then explain to me why you get to decide on behalf of the aforementioned 90% that this is an acceptable boundary, but going on a romantic trip together is not one?

[Angel_325]

You know... you're right. Why should we possibly have anyone around us at any time who have problems or issues in their lives? (You know, REAL people) We should only have pre-approved, perfect situation people so that our own perfectly cultivated insecurities and idiosyncracies can be properly nurtured and go completely unchallenged in the name of... boundaries.

 

Sorry, but in this context "boundaries" is a comfortable euphamism for "ownership" or "possession" or "I'm so afraid to be alone since I've invested so much in this person" -- If you're not prepared to handle being alone without him, you probably don't have any business trying to be in a healthy relationship WITH him.

 

There is more to life, love and learning than people's insecurities.

 

I guess that's where we differ. To me trust is to be given but that does not mean everything is allowed and nothing is off limits. Very few of us feel as you feel so I hope you have found or will find someone who feels as you because you are in a small minority when it comes to this. Your opinion and that of others who share your views is valid, but that does not mean that you are right or we are right. To each his own. That is why we date people who share our values. Her boyfriend obviously does not share her values if he is upset that she is not okay with him going on this trip.

[Angel_325]

That should tell you that in fact this is not always about a fear of cheating, but rather the fact that friends and partners are not the same thing, a distinction which seems to be lost on you at the moment. Tell me candidly, is there anything you would not want your partner to do with a friend of his (and I include sex in that)? And if so, could you explain to me how that is not a boundary. Or if you acknowledge it is, then explain to me why you get to decide on behalf of the aforementioned 90% that this is an acceptable boundary, but going on a romantic trip together is not one?

 

Agree with you 100%.

[FathomFear]

That should tell you that in fact this is not always about a fear of cheating, but rather the fact that friends and partners are not the same thing, a distinction which seems to be lost on you at the moment.

 

No, it doesn't tell me that. His rationale was that "I am a guy". He tried to consider it on a few occasions but never relented in the end. He admitted that he wouldn't have reservations if she went with a female friend, which demonstates to me that he wasn't able to see me as a "friend" because of the genitals I have in my pants.

 

Tell me candidly, is there anything you would not want your partner to do with a friend of his (and I include sex in that)? And if so, could you explain to me how that is not a boundary.

 

If I were in a relationship with a guy and was practicing monogamy, I would expect that he not have sexual relations with another guy. But here's the key--I would expect him to conduct himself in this manner on his own accord. I would not set a list of ground rules to prevent him from "lapsing".

 

I mean, I also wouldn't want my partner to cut off his fingers with a knife. But that doesn't mean I'd prevent him from using knives while alone or with other people while I am away. It just means that I trust he'll be careful and only put himselves in situations where he knows that he can handle himself, on his own accord.

[Miss Firecracker]

After reading all these posts about how insecure my behavior is, I have decided to tell my husband to pick any woman he likes and go away with her.

[FathomFear]

But again--to relate this back to the OP's situation. If I were in her shoes I would leave the decision up to him. If he felt that he could not stop himself from cheating on me, then I would expect that he choose not to go (assuming we had an agreement of monogamy). If he told me that he could easily handle it, then I'd be helping him back his bags and helping him write a list of sourvenirs. Although it sort of begs the question. If my boyfriend told me that he could not stop himself from cheating while going on a weekend vacation with another person, then I would say our commitment wasn't all that strong to begin with.

 

In any case. Respect is not "Sorry, dude, you can't go on this trip. I think you might cheat on me". Respect is "You decide if you can go on this trip while still holding true to our commitment to monogamy".

[FathomFear]

After reading all these posts about how insecure my behavior is, I have decided to tell my husband to pick any woman he likes and go away with her.

 

Which is a healtheir monogamous relationship? Dating a guy who occasionally spends time with other women but never pursues them romantically, or dating a guy who is not allowed to spend time with other women but would (or might--it's impossible to know) pursue them if he was?

 

Because to be honest, I don't see how anyone could possibly find the latter at all satisfying.

[karvala]

So if he got blind drunk, and picked up a chainsaw, presumably you wouldn't stop him, because you believe it's up to him to be careful, and you wouldn't want to limit his freedom even in a situation which is more hazardous than normal? Or do you believe that sometimes it is better to step in and minimise the chance of serious damage, even at the risk of temporarily limiting someone's freedom?

 

But in any case that's all about cheating still, and I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about setting boundaries which define what a relationship with a partner is, and what a relationship with a friend is, and what the difference between those two is.

 

You acknowledge that if you had a monogamous relationship with a partner, that involve boundaries; specifically that he couldn't have sex with other people. You set that boundary because you want to distinguish the relationship from an ordinary friendship. My point to you is that many people have additional ways to distinguish those, i.e. further things that they wish to share only with their partner, something which to them is part of the definition of a romantic relationship. Why is it that one form of behaviour, sex, is okay to limit to partners alone, but not other forms of behaviour such as sharing a hotel room with a member of the opposite sex?

[karvala]

Which is a healtheir monogamous relationship? Dating a guy who occasionally spends time with other women but never pursues them romantically, or dating a guy who is not allowed to spend time with other women but would (or might--it's impossible to know) pursue them if he was?

 

Because to be honest, I don't see how anyone could possibly find the latter at all satisfying.

 

The OP is not proposing to block her bf from spending time any time with other women. Indeed, he already DOES spend time with this other woman. It is ONE, extreme, situation that she has reservations about, not ALL situations as you describe it here.

[karvala]

In any case. Respect is not "Sorry, dude, you can't go on this trip. I think you might cheat on me". Respect is "You decide if you can go on this trip while still holding true to our commitment to monogamy".

 

Or Respect is "I'm not going to share this romantic experience with someone else because I would rather share it with you, my partner."