Written by admin on 2009-04-07T04:19:47+0000">April 7, 2009 – 4:19 am
Extramarital sexual relations, sexual inter course of a married person with someone other than the spouse, have been considered sinful criminal, and immoral throughout the history of Western society. Theologians of all times and creeds have treated adultery as a heinous act, and as late as the seventeenth century the penalty for adultery in most of the New England colonies was death. Although few courts enforced such laws, whippings, fines, and brandings were common. During the nineteenth century, adultery came to be viewed more casually—for males—and upper-class men might have mistresses or meet their surplus sexual needs with servants, as long as they were discreet (Murstein).
A double standard for adultery traditionally has been recognized and rationalized. A trenchant example was provided by the British literary figure, Dr. Samuel Johnson:
Confusion of progeny constitutes the essence of the crime; and therefore a woman who breaks her marriage vows is much more criminal than a man who does it. A man, to be sure, is criminal in the sight of God; but he does not do his wife a very material injury … if he steals privately to her chambermaid. Sir, a wife ought not greatly to resent this (Boswell).
The reasons for the double standard are not difficult to identify: the long tradition with legal sanction of the view of woman as property, in which a man who committed adultery with a married woman was violating the property of another man; and as noted by Dr. Johnson, the possibility of uncertain parentage, clouding matters of ownership of property and inheritance.
Although the double standard may have lost ground in recent years, condemnation of extramarital sex continues to be very strong in our society. In studies conducted during the past twenty years reviewed by Hunt, all reported that the “great majority” of their respondents disapproved of extramarital sex. In Hunt’s own sample, from 80% to 98% said that they or their mates would object to extramarital affairs. In a recent study of a national sample of 1,044 registered voters representing various regions, races, ages, and religious groups in the United States, 76% of the respondents said that it is “morally wrong” for a man to be unfaithful to his wife, while 79% believed that it is wrong for a woman to be unfaithful to her husband. Female respondents were somewhat more conservative than male, and both male and female were more disapproving of unfaithful wives than of unfaithful husbands (Time).
Our discussion here will be on a distinction proposed by Smith and Smith between conventional adultery and consensual adultery. The former is characterized by secrecy and deception, unknown and uncondoned by the spouse. The latter is characterized by openness and consent of the spouse. Consensual adultery may take the form of a spousal agreement for such activity for one or both mates.
*81/187/5*
