When most people think of contemplating the pros, cons, effects, and consequences of an ethical dilemma, they tend to think of cheating on a test, keeping the neighbor's dog if the neighbor is abusive, or pretending your residents aren't actually drinking if you just walk away from the door and continue about your rounds as an RA.

I decided to look at the ethical dilemma attached with infidelity in hopes of grasping some reasoning and processing the "why" aspect with an analysis through the lenses of democratic ethical concerns, universal-humanitarian communication, procedural code, audience input effects, and narrative attachment.

Democratic ethical concerns relate to aspects of openness, respect, and justice. In the case of a cheating significant other, there is a lack of mutual respect, which leaves either side craving justice. Once an act of infidelity has taken place, there has been a significant loss of mutual respect between the two individuals. Due to one person’s authoritative action, the other is left with a troubling choice.

For example, a guy cheats on his girlfriend with his best friend’s girlfriend. He later decides he made a deceitful choice, and would like forever more to be loyal to his first love. Now, there is a major change in how the girlfriend views her significant other, as well as how he looks at her. After this act of infidelity, the girlfriend is left with a choice. She can either accept what has happened, and attempt to move forward, or choose to end the relationship. Because of his act, she now has to decide how both of their futures will be shaped. This is not a fair distribution of power. As the wounded yet wanted one, she now takes on the responsive role of deciding how this altered relationship is to function entirely.

The equilibrium of power that was once shared is now completely under one side’s control due to heavy compensation from the unfaithful individual. This uneven shift in power caused by infidelity is against democratic ideals, particularly in relation to justice and mutual respect.

A universal-humanitarian approach to the ethical dilemma of infidelity is one of the most prevalent between two in a relationship. Individual truth is often the foundation of a relationship. A situation where strong mutual trust has been ensured in the past is often left rattled after infidelity has lessened that trust. We think highly of those who are honest because honesty and truthfulness are considered some of the top characteristics in someone trustworthy. An act of infidelity gives the impression that the unfaithful is no longer an individual of good morals.

The social guideline in a relationship is to be true to one another. It is expected that a decent significant other would not intentionally commit an act of hurt toward someone they care for. An act of this kind, in combination with harming an innocent, would allow for most outsiders to think less of the individual. From the unfaithful point of view, if sincere sorrow trails behind the act, a heavy battle of self-judgment may shortly follow. Because there is such a clear standard of what is considered right and wrong, self-criticism will naturally take place after committing a moral wrong. After the incident has taken place, the individual at fault may struggle with forgiving themselves for much longer than the faithful lover. They may see themselves as someone who is not worthy of love because they demonstrated poor choices, and hurt their lover in the process. The faithful individual, who was hurt in the act of infidelity, also has a consideration of morals. If there is continued affection for the lover at fault, does that question the dignity of the faithful individual? If the faulty lover has taken mutual trust for granted, it is expected that the trust is eliminated, and it would be expected that anyone with self-preservation would leave the relationship due to the low sense of character that the other has represented.

It is considered wrong to willingly hurt any individual, even more so in a romantic relationship. In having good character, individual truth is honored and placed at high importance. Infidelity is an act that allows for the faithful to question the morals of the other, as well as themselves.

In the case of infidelity, there is a very strict and expected course of action that is considered to be of public knowledge. The standard of behavior toward a significant other consists of caring, truthfulness, honesty, and faithfulness. When faithfulness is discontinued through a faulty lover’s actions, the other is required to have a ritual that follows the authoritarian act. The standard most would consider in this situation is exiling the individual or individuals at fault. Whether this means cutting off romantic contact or contact in general, association is expected to be decreased significantly. It is a regular practice that when a couple ends a relationship for whatever reason, the interaction between the two is reduced. But, when the factor of infidelity comes into play, that expectation is almost required to take place due to public pressure. We are shaped to value those who are faithful to us. And, when that trust is taken advantage of, there will naturally be repercussions. The goal of every relationship is to function together in a healthy, respectful way. When these goals are willingly left unmet, there is a procedure that is expected to take place through the individual who was disrespected.

Placing infidelity into a context where it is labeled “OK” by the audience is a rare situation. Friends and family of the couple react strongly to an act of unfaithfulness on either side of the relationship. Most may not support the idea of continuing the relationship. However, if that is to happen, the audience of those who are aware of the entire narrative of the couple will adapt to the new situation. Apart from audience adaptation, it is commonly thought that there is no flexibility on the concept of infidelity. It is a harshly dealt with issue that is usually resolved with a one-strike deal. This sort of unfaithful behavior may be tolerated if there has been a theme of infidelity in the past from the opposite side of the relationship. In this sense, the couple may be able to see past each other’s flaws, and move forward in learning from past mistakes. However, it is more common that a disloyal partner is treated with a zero-tolerance policy.

There is a natural narrative that follows someone who commits adultery. Common sayings such as “Once a cheater, always a cheater,” are just catch phrases to describe the social view toward infidelity. These narratives are considered too immense and hurtful, that they follow the individual, and taint them for years. We construct this idea that grudges should be held, harsh consequences should follow, and the adulterer should never be looked at as anything else. Once a true division follows, either side can move on outside of the relationship. If the couple decides to move forward with the relationship, it must be carried out together. The unfaithful lover must learn to forgive themselves in addition to the faithful one learning to trust the significant other again. Infidelity is told as a tale of heartbreak, where one has committed a wrong to another. Narratives construct how situations are observed, and how a reaction is constructed.

There are sides to every story, especially with the complex situation of infidelity - how revenge is obtained, how depression soon follows, or how the couple decides to move forward in spite of the past. Narratives allow for different sides of the story to be exposed, and how interactions are to be defined and executed.