Micro-cheating: It’s About the Secrets
What’s perceived as real, has real consequences.
By Loren A Olson MD , first published in P.S. I Love You
[Pleasure] is the intensest desire, the key to the latch of the self, or the promised key, a key that perhaps never turns. — Garth Greenwell, in Cleanness
You’ve got mail.
Shortly after I met my husband, Doug, he said, “I’m monogamous. Very monogamous.”
I loved it when I heard that. I wanted that, too. At least we both wanted it when we said it thirty-four years ago.
I understand, now, that both Doug and I had faced a too-early loss of parents that caused us to struggle against fears of abandonment. We sought some guarantee that in our relationship, it wouldn’t be repeated.
But love and risk are inseparable. Love has no such assurances.
Monogamy wasn’t a difficult commitment to make for either of us, but we were young and idealistic. We didn’t know then — although we know it now — how human we are.
Humans aren’t hardwired for monogamy.
At the very minimum, most of us have contemplated being unfaithful, but many different and conflicting definitions of infidelity exist.
Religious values govern our cultural rules. The Bible does not explicitly prohibit infidelity but equates lust with adultery. The Qu’ran forbids adultery and closes all the avenues leading to it. In the Torah, Judaism recognizes a clash between body and soul but teaches that character strength is based on rational choices.
These Holy Books weren’t written on a word processor. Now we live in a world with the Internet, texting, social media, and dating and hookup apps.
In a more secular society, many couples define their own rules surrounding infidelity, and they vary from disallowing flirting to no-holds-barred open relationships of endless configurations.
I hadn’t heard from Roberto in several years, long after Doug and I were living together. In the days of dial-up Internet, I received a message on AOL, “You’ve got mail.” It was from Roberto. We chatted one night after Doug was asleep.
I don’t remember the conversation — it was so insignificant to me — but Doug remembers it well. He has quoted it to me a few times.
Apparently, I wrote something to Roberto to the effect that I wondered what life would have been like if our relationship had lasted. Doug thought I was being unfaithful; I disagreed.
What I can see now, but didn’t see then, was how chatting with an old boyfriend in the middle of the night might be seen as cheating, even if the boyfriend is six thousand miles away in Argentina.
Some will criticize Doug for having snooped on my computer. But very few of us would just walk on by if we saw a chat with our partner’s old boyfriend or girlfriend on their open computer.
It’s challenging to make a rational choice when body and soul clash.
Micro-cheating isn’t about the behavior as much as it is about secrets.
Cheating and Micro-Cheating.
According to a 2015 poll, one in five Americans admits being unfaithful within a committed relationship. Many of those who haven’t been unfaithful have at least considered it.
Now with virtually universal access to the Internet, cheating has never been so accessible. It’s also never been more problematic to keep a secret.
The Urban Dictionary defines “micro-cheating” as small acts considered disloyal within a relationship, nothing too serious but not innocent either.
These online interactions hover on the border of infidelity. Just seeing what’s out there. A sexually tinged hello often begins, Hi, handsome. Depending upon the response, the messages progress to something more sexually explicit.
What one couple sees as micro-cheating and very important another couple might blow off as insignificant.
Most relationship experts agree that micro-cheating isn’t about the behavior as much as it is about secrets when they are uncovered.
Psychologists and psychiatrists say that behavior alone is not morally right or wrong; it becomes wrong if it impacts another person in a harmful way. The crucial issue is: How does this micro-cheating affect your partner when he or she finds out? (And they almost always do.)
The key that perhaps never turns
I don’t much like the word “cheater.” For one thing, it sounds like a terminal diagnosis; once a cheater, always a cheater and it defaults to dump the cheater. It takes one aspect of behavior and elevates it to master status as if it is the individual’s defining characteristic.
Another reason I don’t like it is that it involves a perpetrator and a victim. I believe that some people are victimized, but some people lock themselves into that role, implying they are helpless. I think people are response-able.
Perhaps this all sounds like a rationalization by a micro-cheater.
When I, at 77-years-old, get a Hi, Handsome from a hot young man, it boosts my ego momentarily. I won’t deny that I get a dopamine rush as attraction, opportunity, and risk combine. I’m tempted to respond even while knowing that the next message will certainly be, Send me a dick pic.
I agree with the sex-advice columnist, Dan Savage, that monogamy is harder than we admit, and we need to acknowledge that reality. Should monogamy in a relationship be raised to a higher value than joy, humor, and loyalty? Is “micro-cheating” raising an impossible standard to an even higher level?
Adultery and infidelity aren’t the same things. Adultery is sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse. Infidelity is disloyalty, a breach of trust.
If one person has a sexual experience with another outside of their marriage but does so with the knowledge and consent of their marital partner, they have committed adultery but are not guilty of infidelity. Infidelity isn’t about sex; it is about trust.
Savage believes that monogamy is right for many couples, but that our discourse about it, and about sexuality more generally, is dishonest. I agree.
Should cheating always be a deal-breaker that destroys a loving relationship?
It’s just for entertainment.
As I was writing this, Doug told me about a friend who buys a lot of scratch-and-sniff lottery tickets. Isn’t micro-cheating the same thing?
Mathematics tells us that the dollar we spend on a lottery ticket is worth seventy cents, but we don’t care. It’s low-cost, high-payoff. Anyone can win, but you can’t win if you don’t play. A rational mind would say, Instead of risking everything, keep the seventy cents in your pocket and just send thirty cents to the state.
Those who buy the tickets say, It doesn’t matter if I win. It’s just for entertainment.
Beyond the satisfaction of basic needs, more wealth doesn’t gain more happiness, and happiness in a relationship doesn’t happen by chance. Success in life is never due to chance.
Hi, handsome is also low-cost with a magical payoff. And so we play.
We cannot help our urges, but we should not lie about them, whether they are flirting, S & M, polyamory, or any of the extraordinary possibilities for sexual expression.
Ken Gault wrote, “Thank you for bringing up honesty. There is too little of it. So little that I find it hard to discuss relationships.”
Talking about our needs can forestall an affair. Or possibly lead to one with permission.
Infidelity is best defined by how much a secret interaction hurts our partner when he or she finds out. It is not about sex; it is about honesty and loyalty.
It is normal to find other people sexually exciting. We can make rational choices. But we don’t always make them.
I wouldn’t have hurt Doug if only I’d said to him, “You’ll never guess who I heard from today.”
About The Author:
Loren A Olson MD
Medium member since Apr 2020
Gay father; Psychiatrist; Award-winning author FINALLY OUT; Sign up for newsletter https://www.lorenaolson.com/newsletter/ My opinions, not medical advice.
Read an excerpt of Finally Out here.
Send your questions and sign up for my newsletter, “Ask the Doc,” here.
Find me on: Twitter |LinkedIn| FacebookP.S. I Love You
