Cross-Cultural Perspectives
It has been argued that limiting sex to socially sanctioned partnerships like marriage contributes to the stability of the relationship, because it makes the union the unique focus of self-disclosure and sexual pleasure. The emphasis on sexual fidelity, however, varies from culture to culture. Around the globe, about half of societies have strong prohibitions against extramarital sex for women, and about a quarter object strongly to extramarital sex for men (Frayzer 1985). Extramarital sex is permissible for men in half of societies, but it is permissible for women in only one quarter. This double standard—controlling female sexuality more than male sexuality—has been traced to the desire to insure the paternity of heirs. It has also been attributed to the unequal power between the genders— inequality that supports a man's sense of ownership over a woman. Masculine roles, by contrast, often encourage sexual adventuring. For example, brothel visits are a common ritual of male camaraderie in Thailand and elsewhere.
Monogamy, the institutional form of marriage permitting only one spouse at a time, still confronts extramarital relationships, particularly for husbands. La casa chica, or little house, is an established Latin American custom whereby married men maintain a second partner and family. Although polygamy, the custom of taking multiple wives and concubines, is illegal in China, the tradition has made a comeback among businessmen, who can afford to maintain a young mistress in her own apartment. These institutions, of course, still serve to protect the family and the marital relationship by minimizing the intrusion of secondary partnerships. Even in societies where extramarital relationships are casual and fleeting, a degree of secrecy and discretion usually surrounds the activities to minimize marital disruptions.
In honor-based Arab societies, which place a high value on female chastity, relatives may feel obliged to put an unfaithful wife to death. In other societies, casual sexual liaisons outside marriage are widely accepted both for men and for women. This is the case in parts of Africa. Where children are regarded as belonging to broad kinship groups, there may be less concern with paternity and with controlling female sexuality. Where financial responsibility for offspring falls to women, they often rely on supportive sex partners in order to provide for themselves and their children. In urban Nigeria, for example, two-thirds of men and one-third of women in monogamous marriages reported that their most recent sexual encounter was with someone besides their legal spouse.
The less tolerant attitudes in Western nations may be traced to Christian teachings on marriage and sexuality. In the twenty-four largely Western and industrial countries in the 1994 International Social Survey Program, most people stated that extramarital sex was "always wrong" (Widmer et al. 1998). Fully 80 percent of U.S. respondents condemned extramarital relations as being always wrong, a figure comparable to conservative Catholic populations like Ireland (80%), Northern Ireland (81%), and the Philippines (88%). The "always wrong" response found less favor in other countries: Australia (59%), Austria (67%), Bulgaria (51%), Canada (68%), Czech Republic (43%), Germany (data reported separately: East Germany, 60%, and West Germany, 55%), Great Britain (67%), Hungary (62%), Israel (73%), Italy (67%), Japan (58%), Netherlands (63%), New Zealand (75%), Norway (70%), Poland (74%), Russia (36%), Slovenia (57%), Spain (76%), and Sweden (68%). On average, however, only 4 percent of survey respondents believed that extramarital sex was "not at all wrong." Thus, moral judgments in Western countries continue to support sexual exclusivity between husbands and wives.
Although people in the United States have become increasingly tolerant of premarital sex and homosexual sex, they voice stronger disapproval of extramarital sex. Disapproval has actually increased in recent decades. According to data from the General Social Surveys, extramarital sex was condemned as "always wrong" by 70 percent of U.S. respondents in 1973. Following a sharp increase in disapproval at the end of the 1980s, perhaps in response to the AIDS crisis, views on extramarital sex largely stabilized and stood at 81 percent strongly disapproving in 1998.
Permissive sexual values reflect liberal religious and political ideologies. Men are more permissive than women. People with more schooling are more tolerant than people with less education. African Americans and people who live in big cities are also more tolerant of extramarital sex. Not surprisingly, people with permissive sexual values are more likely to have adulterous relationships. Only 10 percent of U.S. respondents who say extramarital sex is "always wrong" report having extramarital sex, as compare to 76 percent of respondents who say extramarital sex is "not at all wrong" (Smith 1994).
User Comments Add a comment…
16 days ago
As long as it is a violation of trust and the expectations of the relationship, it is logically ALWAYS WRONG. Instead, one should be upfront with a spouse or fiance and either definite it as an open relationship or break up. If there is no deception, it is not wrong. The problem is that, just by definition, cheating involves deception and is thus detestable.
23 days ago
I wonder what level of emotional intimacy and trust can be achieved when one or both partners feel free to have sex with someone else? Do they believe there is no negative impact on their partner? Are the dallying partners willing to disclose the infidelities? If it's kept a secret, that is clear indication that they KNOW that disclosing it would inflict pain on the other. What happens when one partner is seriously ill? Does the ill partner willingly and lovingly endorse the infidelity? Wouldn't that partner feel emotionally and sexually abandoned? Would you welcome your spouse to your bed if you knew he/she was out carousing? My theory is that separating sex from love is a defensive reaction that begins after one experiences their first crushing blow from love, perhaps in the teenage years. Isn't that a treasured highpoint in one's life - the first love when you feel incredibly special to someone else and you love with all the trust and faith you have? It would seem that those who go on to separate sex from love end up missing out on the biggest thrill of all - total, unconditional love from someone who has seen every facet of you, and still comes back for more. I recall that John Lennon chased all over the world in his youth, but when he found Yoko he said he found what he had been searching for and was finally happy. People who feel truly loved and welcome in this world have no need to look elsewhere.
about 1 month ago
I only have one simple factual comment. The important consideration when looking at the common views on infidelity in different cultures is an assessment of the motivations for sex. In the western world sex is seen as serving 2 main purposes, firstly to enhance intimacy and bonding on an emotional level (in addition to the physical) between two individuals who are in an emotional relationship. The second reason is to procreate. In western culture we have over time maintained the physiological connection between sex and love. On a biological level these are linked through many chemical and hormonal processes that occur during sex for both men and women causing a subconscious bond and trust to form. This makes infidelity a harmful event to the bond between a man and a woman (or any monogamous couple) because the unfaithful party is not simply making a physical connection with the person they are having sex with but either sub consciously or consciously they are making an emotional connection as well. The existence of this psycho-emotional part of sex is very prevalent in traditional Christian western societies. However in some other cultures there has occurred to some extent a separation between the emotional part of sex and the physical part of sex. Culturally there has been a division between the two, resulting in a general acceptance of the physical side's need to be satisfied with whomever is most convenient, weather that be one person or multiple people. There is in some societies, such as in Thailand, a definite diversion of sex for pleasure's sake from sex for procreation and or marital bonding. In some places this diversion is so extreme that in the individuals it boarders on a nearly RAD syndrome separation of the two which has been perpertuated and is now the normal emotional stance on sex for the people of these societies. This can readily be observed by a person with moderate knowledge of psychology and repression of traumatic emotions if they were for instance to speak at length with some of the prostitutes in Thailand. For them the break is more severe but the same is true to a lesser extent, of the people who live in societies where serial infidelity is broadly accepted. In conclusion I think that when examining the social acceptance of infidelity between societies, it is important to look at more than just the religious and or social/political stance of the people but rather at their perception of what is an emotional expression of attachment to their spouse and what is merely a physical need that can be satisfied through many channels. If approached from this angle I would be very curious to know what the statistics would show country by country. For instance if you were to ask these same individuals, (of both opinions on extramarital sex) if sex with their husband or wife held emotional significance for them, and if it did then did they share that same intense connection with those that they engaged in extramarital affairs with? I would be very interested to hear their responses, and also how they go about separating or not separating sex from the emotions depending on who their partner is in each sexual circumstance.