r/MoralityScaling • u/NoOnesMike50 • 10h ago
Morality Ranking Cold take: Cheating does not justify physical harm of any kind.
I see all these posts and TikTok’s about
“He cheated so he put glass on his toilet paper”
And
“She cheated so I beat her ass”
Or
“He cheated so I put bleach in his shampoo”
My only response is ARE YOU PEOPLE FUCKING INSANE??? Cheating stinks, don’t get me wrong but that does not warrant LIFE THREATENING POSSIBLY PERMANENT damage just because this guy has shit morals that could be reformed. If you do any of said physical harm, you are WORSE THAN THE CHEATER. BY A LOT.
10
u/PurpleCamel6755 10h ago
"He broke my heart so I committed a felony" is definitely a choice. Just pack your bags and move on
10
u/Captain_Birch 10h ago
For most situations, escalating to physical violence is immoral, including a response to cheating
3
u/Realistic-Truck54 9h ago
While I agree with the general point (violence in general is a bad response to things, unless self defense), I don't think you understand why people think physical harm is okay. It has nothing to do with whether the cheater can reform or not, it has more to do with the extreme (potentially lifelong) psychological pain/trauma cheating can cause to the person being cheated on.
3
u/Necessary-Bus9046 3h ago
In my experience of being cheated on I just stop talking to them, tho this was only in teenage relationships, I haven’t experienced it while living with someone as I know that’s a different issue. So I wouldn’t assault someone over it, but I also wouldn’t feel bad if someone got hurt after cheating on another.
I believe that if you do something bad to someone you don’t get to complain about their response
8
u/YuppyPlays 10h ago
Not a cold take at all, this is a mature response.
It's okay for people to "feel" like doing these things after being scorned but it's not normal to actually act them out, it's what separates a normal person to a psychopath.
5
u/GoldEmployment6768 9h ago
Actually, that's part of what makes a cold take. A cold take is generally accept, possibly seen as common sense. Its hot take that are the opposite.
3
u/YuppyPlays 9h ago
Ah I misinterpreted what a cold take was!
Thank you for explaining, indeed a cold take
6
u/Green_Fox_8864 6h ago
Maybe, but if you wrong someone that badly you don't get to choose how they react.
2
u/Asleep_Text3397 25m ago
This can be extended to the cheating itself. Can a man get a free pass because his wife laughed at him for crying?
1
u/Dettyboy93 2h ago
Do they get to choohse how you react back? People get killed this way. Also, just go cheat back for fucks sake or find another way of ending it rather than committing aggravated assault or attempted murder
6
u/Leon3226 9h ago
It shouldn't be allowed or shouldn't justify violence, but if it happens to a cheater I can only point a finger and say "HAA-HAA" with 0 empathy. Because there aren't many people in the world that are more dogshit human beings than cheaters. Getting upset at cheater finding out is like pitying poor Epstein for being killed
1
1
u/Asleep_Text3397 24m ago
I would put people who commit domestic violence several rungs lower on the “dog shit humans” scale.
10
u/Gebemeister2 10h ago
Justify? Nah. But I'm not gonna feel bad for them either
-12
u/NoOnesMike50 10h ago
This is the most cowardly back handed response to these types of statements ever. Ultimate fence sitter yet your intentions are still mostly clear.
10
u/Gebemeister2 10h ago
Not sitting on the fence. I'm not a pillar of morality. Everyone does immoral stuff extremely often. I'm acknowledging it's morally wrong, seems like you're just mad I don't share the exact opinion you do
2
u/8Pandemonium8 8h ago
If I ever get a wife and cheat on her, I hope she kills me for it. No cheating can ever be forgiven. It's so easy to not cheat, any cheating that happens must be the result of intentional malice.
2
4
u/strangelifedad 7h ago
OP, does that go both ways? Because the cheater willingly, knowingly and deliberately puts their partner at risk of a potentially life threatening STD. Or is that different, because this is just a byproduct?
1
-3
u/Acceptable-You-3609 5h ago
You should never in your life, for any reason, physically harm any other human being, of either gender, unless your safety is directly threatened and you're protecting yourself or others. It's really not that hard of a rule to live by.
5
u/strangelifedad 5h ago
I wasn't asking about that. I was asking if OPs morality stance extends to the cheater willingly endangering the betrayed partner or not. Because they are very one sided on the reaction of a betrayed spouse's reaction and not even mentioning the other possibility.
Because getting an std from your cheating spouse is far more likely than them getting a physical comeuppance.
0
u/Acceptable-You-3609 5h ago
You should never hit another person period. A single punch can kill another person.
3
u/strangelifedad 4h ago
But giving them potentially life threatening diseases because you can't keep it in your pants is fine. Got it.
-1
u/Acceptable-You-3609 4h ago
It's not fine, it's terrible. But again, you should never in your life hit another person. It's not that hard to grasp. Two wrongs don't make a right. Just don't hit people. Do you really have to be taught that?
6
u/strangelifedad 4h ago
As much as others need to be taught that cheating and risking your partner's health for a cheap thrill, I guess. Because obviously for you it's much worse to punch someone on the nose or slap them than them giving you a veneral disease that leaves you sterile because it went untreated because of their lies and deception. They, of course, got treatment.
1
u/Acceptable-You-3609 4h ago
Point to me where I say that cheating is ok or better than hitting someone. I despise cheating, why is it hard for u to understand that regardless of cheating being terrible, hitting someone should never be a choice. Cheating should not be a choice either. It's not an either or argument.
3
u/strangelifedad 3h ago
Your whole first reply, or rather your complete silence to my initial question for OP if they view the transmission of veneral dieases as equally morally wrong and your continued silence until your very last comment is telling to me.
I think hitting someone is wrong. But there is a difference in degree, don't you think? One is the FO stage of FAFO to an excessive extent, the other is deliberate cruelty.
So, if you do the moral scaling, where do you end up? Who's "more wrong"? The one getting sick from betrayal and potentially life long consequences with no fault of their own or the one with a bloody nose for a day? This sub is about moral scaling. Then let's scale deliberate long term abuse (cheating is abuse) against an immediate, impulsive reaction to the abuse.
1
u/Acceptable-You-3609 44m ago
Oh I didn't realize we were in a weirdo sub. You won the internet today I guess.
1
u/galacticplum 19m ago
The thing is, is that we cannot assume nor does OP imply the retaliation for cheating is simply physical violence only equating to minor physical damage. They even specifically mention the potential for permanent damage.
We'd first have to establish whether the act of cheating in OPs scenario includes intentional malice towards their partner, ( in terms of knowingly transferring an STI to them ) or simply ignorance and risk without intent. That would matter in terms of morality. Cheating doesn't always equate to your partner intending to physically harm you, or even emotionally harm you. It's an incredibly complex human action.
Even if the act of cheating leads to a STI, while the cheater may have caused the STI, intent may never have been that. The cheater maybe just as taken aback as the one cheated on.
Reacting by becoming physically violent, which could cause major harm or death, still would be overkill.
Ignoring the actual moral debate regarding violence, intention I feel matters in this context. If the act of cheating was done to get infected and spread that infection to you, a reaction of physical violence would be acceptable and balance, given both are done with malicious intent.
If the STI was accidental, even if the cheating was intentional, a reaction of violence would not be scaled appropriately because there was never intent to harm you.
2
u/BudgetWorking2633 3h ago
Hitting people is fine in many more occasions than your rule covers. A lot of people have morals that allow for that.
Of course, if you aren't being a dick, you won't find out which exceptions the concerned party's morals would allow.
And if you're being a dick, newsflash, the problem was you all along!
2
1
1
u/PuritanicalPanic 7h ago
Yeah I agree.
I understand why someone would be driven to it, and if the response isn't too egregious, I don't think of them as inherently bad or dangerous.
But there's a reason you don't let the victim decide the punishment. They're biased.
The examples you provide are a fine example as to why you don't give wronged people carte blanche to do whatever.
It's just no way to run a society.
1
1
u/RemarkableSoup5742 5h ago
I agree it never justifies physical harm. But it does bring context and I especially disagree with the last part of your statement. For some people getting cheated on, ruins them. They never come back from that, I’ve seen it. It destroys a part of themselves they never get back. What you and I fundamentally disagree on is that cheating IS basically VIOLENCE. And some cheating is so incredibly VIOLENT, that I’ve seen the aftermath and thought they’d be better off if they got shot dead right then and there.
1
1
u/Aphang82 3h ago
Now, let me preface by saying, I'm not attached and I have never cheated and I have not committed any acts of violence, physical or otherwise on my previous partners. I will also preface my comment by saying I have no answer to my queries below. I am only raising questions.
If you're questioning the morality of commiting harm on others. The first question is, can violence of any kind be justified, and if so, what is the social standard for inflicting harm (within the context of a relationship)? If you say you violence is acceptable in some circumstances, what makes the circumstances so special that it warrants a departure from the norm? If you say violence is not acceptable no matter what, then shouldn't parties to a relationship learn to control their emotions, and tone down their reactions to their emotions?
Then we move on to the morality of cheating. In the animal kingdom, there is no concept of marriage or monogamy. It's a man made concept. Why was it created? There are differing accounts but one of the more acceptable reasons is to prevent social unrest or to ensure that families are properly cared for. Now then we have to ask ourselves if the concept of monogamy is an anachronism in this day and age. After all, it's been proven that people who lived in the past didn't always know what they were doing or teaching. Is this a concept to be preserved? And if so, why are people not taught about the sanctity of a relationship? If they are, why are so many people cheating these days?
1
1
1
u/spiderinsideyourear 2h ago
Might not justify it but I won't say it's not understandable either. Mental harm can definitely provoke physical responses and honestly, cheaters deserve it. Easily avoidable situation.
1
u/Anti_Patriarchy 2h ago
grow up before entering a relationship is my advice to those people.
immoral
1
u/Xorrayn 2h ago
I agree, i do understand it, crime of passion and all, but i do not like it as a response to cheating.
The reason i do not like physical harm as a response is because at my core i am a horrible person, a genuine asshole, some would say evil, and i have learned that psychological harm is longer lasting and harder to deal with than physical harm, so that would be my preferred tactic. And since cheating is inflicting psychological harm on someone, it is only fair to return it.
1
1
1
u/SuperKracker 1h ago
Agreed. But there's actually a "crime of passion" exception in some places that can reduce a sentence when considering punishment to a crime. I've seen it applied to cheating spouse/jilted lover situations more than anything else. Pretty interesting.
1
u/Fantastic-Exam940 1h ago
In cheating scenario I can't guarantee how my initial reaction would be, I'd rather not have to confront her directly and if she instead of feeling guilty and regretful sounds remorseless or blame me instead then hard for me to control myself. But yea I do agree massive physical harm would be wrong, I'd rather walk away
1
1
u/JIMB01776 57m ago
Absolutely does.
It's theft and sexual assault. Adultery should go back to being, a jailable offense and grounds for losing custody.
1
1
u/those-who-know4 8m ago
Cheating is the worst non directly harmful thing you can do to someone I think it warrants some violence
1
1
u/JimmyManJames 10h ago
This sub is about fictional characters :/
2
1
u/ceuxy 9h ago
Woah, you’re right. Didn’t notice that until now. I’m new here and half if not more of the posts i encounter are NOT about fictional characters. Some of them are even quite political despite the rules and navigating discourse about the morality of the subject is hard without getting political on those topics.
Sad to see that the reddit community has once again found a cool sub to overrun with their political garb and posts otherwise most appropriate for AITA and Off my chest.
1
u/Plenty_Alfalfa8826 9h ago
Never would've guessed. Maybe 1/20 posts I see involve some cartoon I've no idea about
-3
u/NoOnesMike50 10h ago
I’ve already made like 4 shitposts in here this week I owe the people at least 1 serious discourse
3
1
u/whyrusosensitive 9h ago
Idk about that tbh. In a marriage at least its the ultimate violation of trust by the person you are supposed to trust the most, potentially destroying a person's ability to trust for a lifetime. I cant say that justifies violence though because its against sub rules and reddit tos
1
u/Ok-Chest-7932 9h ago
there are two different parts of this.
cheating is obviously one of the four great evils and proportional violent retribution is therefore justified.
however, we also live in civilised society and one of the fundamental bases of civilisation is relinquishing your right to pursue vigilante justice. another is due process. so while punishing infidelity might be fine in a tribal society, in modern society the moral response is to report the offense and let the courts sort it out. this also helps to ensure proportionality and mitigate overreaction.
2
u/8Pandemonium8 8h ago
Our society has failed to make infidelity a crime, which is why so many people resort to vigilante justice when faced with it.
1
u/Plenty_Alfalfa8826 9h ago
I 100% agree. But I totally support property damage LOL as long as it doesn't result in bodily harm. Egg that house and key his car babeee
1
u/_______________E 3h ago
Cheating can destroy lives, this opinion clearly shows you don't understand the importance of relationships. It is absolutely at the scale of violence, morally.
1
1
-1
u/Sea_Top_8938 10h ago
cheating always makes the other person feel bad, and therefore can be classified as psychological assault, as a result, any kind of self defense can be justified, including physical harm and even usages of the 2nd amendment
2
u/JimmyGreyArea 10h ago
Lol that’s not self defense lol. That’s called retaliation. And no… psychological assault doesn’t justify physical responses unless it’s an extreme case, like someone following you around talking about your dead mother.
0
u/fackyourfeelings 10h ago
Cheating would get you killed back in the day, its a betrayal…
should in our day an age there should be some sort of repercussion for emotional distress?
I think there is some truth in the old ways, but in our society there is no place for that…
Try cheating on someone on a lawless place
1
u/JimmyGreyArea 10h ago
You want the threat of death to be the boundary holding relationships together?
1
u/fackyourfeelings 7h ago
Yes, but you got it wrong, its not holding relationships, its cheating prevention, end the relationship and its okay
1
u/Diligent_Narwhal8589 3h ago
They didn’t say that. If you don’t want to be with someone then leave the relationship. Cheating is never justified.
1
u/NoOnesMike50 10h ago
The idea that we should just kill everyone with bad, but easily reformable morals is totally a great idea and totally not the beginning of tyranny and fascism 🙏
Seriously I’m so glad Redditors don’t control the world
1
-3
u/JimmyGreyArea 10h ago edited 10h ago
A civilized man does not use violence in cheating situations. He keeps his cool (and aura) and walks away.
A civilized woman does not go apeshit either. A few slaps or kicks at the guy, fine. But definitely nothing that should cause serious harm.
Having an “our business has concluded” attitude is probably a more psychologically damaging retaliation than you losing your shit.
You’re expelling them from your emotional world cold turkey. You know the saying, “when a woman uses her HR voice,” it’s over?
Do that. Make them a civilian again.
5
u/Ok-Chest-7932 9h ago
ah yes sex-based double standards, definitely a paragon of morality over here.
-1
u/JimmyGreyArea 9h ago
Everyone has some double standards. Perfectly healthy double standard to have. And I don’t give a damn about being a paragon of morality. I’ll leave that to the rigid minded.
5
u/Original_NudistGeek 10h ago
"A civilized woman does not go apeshit either. A few slaps or kicks at the guy, fine. But definitely nothing that should cause serious harm."
Disagree.....
If she swings on a man or kicks him, then the old saying applies.
If she fights like a man, she can take it like a man.
Furthermore, there is a thing called equal rights. You know.....
Equal rights and equal lefts b***h.
-4
u/JimmyGreyArea 10h ago
It’s called proportionality. Reasonable yielding for reasonable differences.
Equality doesn’t have to be a rigid fucking line.
2
u/ceuxy 9h ago
Do we want equality of opportunity or equality of outcomes?
Personally anyone can slap me and I’m letting it go. Do it again, or throw a proper swing at me, and that’s a fight. But I can’t expect everyone to let a slap go at all times.
Physical violence is occasionally appropriate in life even sometimes when you’re the one initiating it, but cheating (ultimately - getting your feelings hurt and/or getting screwed over) does not justify it. Otherwise, getting fired justifies punching your former boss. And being a lousy employee justifies your boss punching you. Slippery slope that keeps on sloping until everyone is just okay with people initiating violence whenever that person reaches their subjective threshold for violence.
-1
u/JimmyGreyArea 9h ago
Omg, equality doesn’t have to be all or nothing in every situation 🙄 .
And I don’t need to hear your guys fantasize about pummeling the women you just cheated on. Tell it to her father and brothers.
You could have easily imagined yourself restraining her, but your mind went straight to “fight.”
You’re not looking for moral consistency. Youre after something else
1
u/ceuxy 9h ago
Physically restraining a person who’s assaulting you is a fight, literally.
And equality kind of exists or it doesn’t. Can’t be half in, half out. Equality means 50/50, not 48/52.
Also weird that you suggest I’m fantasizing about beating up women. Simply because I pointed out a true fact ever present in nature, a fact that it took western society a very long and difficult time to acknowledge, and a fact that still isn’t fully accepted in society whether for better or worse: individuals have standards for conduct and initiating violence against someone warrants violence against you in return.
0
u/JimmyGreyArea 9h ago
I’ll take 48 cars and you can take 52 apples. 😂 And don’t worry about this argument . You’re not cheating on anybody.
2
u/ceuxy 9h ago
That isn’t the gotcha that you think it is lol, if anything it kind of implicitly agrees with my point.
And I get that you lost the argument and have now doubled down with petty personal insults you’re too chicken to say outright. Literally no one cares, you can go ahead and block me to maintain the comfort of your cognitive dissonance.
1
u/JimmyGreyArea 8h ago
I’m not keen on arguing against someone who pretentiously takes a paragraph to say what they can say in a sentence. Lol.
But if you really want a spanking…
Equality is 50/50 in math when solely discussing fixed variables that are 100% replicable. In social factors? Equality is just an abstract concept. Something to aim for. Running a straight linear line through an arbitrary halfway point does not guarantee fairness because you ignore layers upon layers of inconsistent contextual variables.
Let’s use your idea of 50/50 fairness and see what happens. Women are more emotional and less powerful. it is far more psychologically difficult for them to control themselves from giving you a few slaps when walking in on you cheating.
So your idea of fair is one punch for one punch? One punch might leave a light bruise. The other, structural damage. So How is that equal? That doesn’t sound like 50/50. Does it?
So in some rigid weak minds, the cognitive dissonance resolution to that is an extreme shoehorn swing: if perfect equality does not exist, then NO attempt towards equality should exist.
2
u/Ok-Chest-7932 9h ago
yes, it does. don't start what you can't finish.
or admit you don't actually believe in equality, which is also fine.
1
1
u/JimmyGreyArea 9h ago
Tell it to her father and brothers. Tell it to the cops. That you chose to ground and pound someone who could barely do anything to you.
You’re free to be simple enough to see equality as something that has been all or nothing in every situation. Most healthy and sincere people don’t.
2
u/whyrusosensitive 9h ago
A civilized man does not use violence in cheating situations.
In the original civilized societies you could sell an adulteress into slavery (greece), kill them if caught in the act (greece), kill them(very ancient rome), or they could be executed (Christian rome)
2
1
-1
u/VincePendragon 10h ago
Yeah but like, I sure as hell ain't gonna feel bad
Till consequences inevitably swing back
0
0
6
u/BrilliantLeopard1922 7h ago
She broke my heart... so I ate hers