Abstract

Marital infidelity across gender and racial groups, Name, 2008, takes on the assumption that individuals engage in infidelity regardless of gender and race or ethnic groups. It covers studies done by social and behavioral scientists spanning decades, including contemporary findings on marital infidelity that includes recent evidences of age differences among those who commit adultery. It affirms the notion that adultery hinges not on gender or color, but on the opportunity factor.

Marital infidelity across gender and racial groups

Introduction

            Rock solid faithfulness and loyalty or commitment to a spouse must appear to be the anti-thesis of infidelity. When a husband or wife strays, it is considered to be irregular and thus unacceptable whether the society happens to be in New York or in a remote village elsewhere (Parker-Pope, 2008; Schmitt, 2002). This statement is an assumption that most if not all cultures, regardless of race, see infidelity the same: cheating is not a normal thing to do to one’s spouse and is an affront to men and women from all colors.

            This paper attempts to present in précis an up-to-date picture of contemporary marriages and the incidence of infidelity. It looks into similarities and differences between male and female infidelity as well as across racial or ethnic groups.

Discussion

            Studies on relationships and aberrant behaviors within the bounds of a committed relationship or marriage say differently on the rate of infidelity across cultures and gender. There are no fixed rates as experts indicate that data may be affected or influenced by participants’ truthfulness in admission of the incidence of infidelity whether they be male or female (Parker-Pope, 2008). According to these studies, males usually lie about the occurrence not to hide themselves but to brag about their conquests as this does seem to highlight virility while women used to limit revelations; they don’t say much about commissions of infidelity because of society’s double standard which views women who commit adultery as promiscuous and thus a most undesirable prospect (Parker-Pope, 2008).

            Demographics also show that basic reasons why marriages fail include the incidence of adultery or sex outside of marriage.  The causes of divorce include factors that the individual spouses have long established in their personal lives as they grew up in their own families (Amato & Booth, 1997). Those who come from broken homes tend to repeat the same events in their own married life, as this is not only about having the right skills and knowledge of marriage and parenting as it is about having the right characteristics or attitude of forbearance, forgiveness and humility (Rodgers & Rodgers, 2002). These characteristics appear to get lost when the pain of adultery or infidelity becomes so real. According to these studies, divorce becomes the ultimate recourse as the commission of infidelity and the resulting emotional separation happening before the physical and final legal one is very painful and often unforgivable an act for the offended spouse (Papalia et al, 2002).

            By definition, a common way of understanding what comprises infidelity is the accepted concept that adultery or infidelity happens when a married man or woman engages in an illicit relationship of another person other than the spouse. Though various literature insists that confusion abounds as to the correct and acceptable or universal definition of the term, what scientific studies can offer are notably those that pave the way for understanding the dilemmas of people involved in the affair which includes the “victim” as well as his/her perpetrator. This is usually the path that clinical therapists or those in the helping profession provide their audience. It is therefore admittedly true that there are still a lot of gaps in the existing body of knowledge pertaining to the issue, including a concise and universal definition of infidelity (Parker-Pope, 2008).

            Acceptably, this paper adheres to the notion that it is more than the sexual or physical involvement that is at stake or in question, but also the intimacy in the other levels (Schützwohl, 2004) of an individual’s personal life (e.g., emotional, economic, intellectual, social, and spiritual areas). It therefore assumes that adultery knows no such differences across cultural backgrounds and gender.

            However, though infidelity maybe looked at in more subtle ways by either male or female, it remains to be defined as the commission of sexual act towards a person who is not one’s spouse. It usually Gottman and Silver (2002) made lengthy and detailed scientific studies on marriage; what makes it work and provided insights for couples to improve fledgling marriages and further enrich and enhance those that are quite good. They say that evidences point to the argument that adultery is not just the root cause of some divorces or separations, but might be a symptom that marriage is not working and that needs (not only the physical/sexual intimacy aspect) are somehow not being met by the spouse (Parker-Pope, 2008).

            In a different study, Blow (2005) tried to analyze the existing researches on the subject which offer an explanation of the nature of infidelity and had found out that these studies are not unified in their findings; which points to a diversity of approaches thereby producing entirely differing results. Blow asserts that this is the landscape when books, self-help literature and manuals are flooding the market year in and out. What often failed are methodologies of the studies done on the issue basically by clinicians.

            Given this picture, it is still worthwhile to note that experts in group behavior identified the increased incidence of women engaging in extramarital affairs essentially due to their wide opportunities today to interact with more men than their earlier counterparts. Equal opportunity is equally applicable to women’s infidelity these days. This goes without saying that race or color, or ethnic origin is not a factor to consider regarding the issue of marital faithfulness or unfaithfulness is concerned. This means that the only thing perhaps to consider is whether men or women differ in infidelity and not whether cultural background is a factor to consider if a person can actually commit adultery or not (Gottman & Silver, 2005).

Conclusion

            This study examined different sources to try to establish any dissimilarities or similarities of infidelity between male and female or between people in different cultural or ethnic backgrounds. However, despite many arguments that had arisen as to the seemingly sparse and diverse literature specifically on the issue which is attributed to the added confusion on demographics as well as a consensus on the definition of the term, existing evidence seemed to press a clear portrait that women when given a chance, commit infidelity in as much the same rate as men regardless of their color or culture.

            One study (Schützwohl, 2004) referred to the different ways male spouses respond to a wife’s infidelity and vice versa. It appeared that males prefer to think that they can accept to a wife’s emotional unfaithfulness but not when she succumbs to the physical or sexual act. Women spouses are rather accepting when husbands stray for as long as they don’t commit themselves emotionally towards the women with whom they have affairs. This is the common reaction and the only dividing difference on the occurrence of infidelity between genders. Although this may be the prevailing sentiment and what seems to be normative, yet individual reactions may still reflect otherwise; which means that women may be accepting of their men having sexual intimacies with other women for as long as the men won’t be leaving the wives. This is also the most common way that women cope with the pain of having been betrayed. However, the divorce demographics and the increasing rate of couples opting for a living-in type of arrangement rather than getting married, may actually reflect the realities of coupling. The general idea then is that there is no such thing as a permanent relationship or commitment, and infidelity seems to be an inevitable prospect for any married couple. This is a grim perspective especially for those whose persuasion is that of a liberal or postmodern kind of existence, where everything is relative and where there are no absolutes anymore. With this kind of negative outlook, it is no wonder that relationships on a temporary level will perpetuate, and everything else is imaginable as a consequence. From abandoned families and criminality – these are all possible ramifications of the pessimistic perspective that are entailed with people whose values include such impermanence or lack of faithful commitment to a specific person. Unless a semblance or “order” be restored, i.e., individuals begin to really think of the dire consequences, the disintegration of families and thus of society, unless every person committing him/herself to a relationship begins to think of a permanent commitment that is for life and death, infidelity will be as normal a thing to happen everywhere.

Reference

Gottman, J.M. and Nan Silver, (2005). Seven principles for making marriage work. Crown        Publishers. New York.

Papalia, Duane, Sally Wendkos Olds, Ruth Duskin Feldman. (2002) Human development. 8th    edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Parker-Pope, T. (2008). Either infidelity is on the rise or honesty is, studies find. New York          Times News Service. Retrieved December 2, 2008 at             http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081028/news_1n28infidel.html

Schützwohl, A. (2004). Which Infidelity Type Makes You More Jealous? Decision Strategies in           a Forced-choice Between Sexual and Emotional Infidelity. Abteilung Psychologie,           Universität Bielefeld, Postfach 100 131, 33501 Bielefeld, Germany

            Retrieved December 1, 2008 at http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/ep02121128.pdf

Schmitt, D. P. (2002). Are Sexual Promiscuity and Relationship Infidelity Linked to Different Personality Traits Across Cultures? Findings from the International Sexuality Description     Project. In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, S. A. Hayes, & D. N. Sattler (Eds.), Online        Readings in Psychology and Culture (Unit 6, Chapter 4), (http://www.wwu.edu/~culture),           Center for Cross-Cultural Research, Western Washington University, Bellingham,         Washington USA.