Men are unwilling to sacrifice

The argument

On this account infidelity is best understood through the underlying economics of a relationship rather than through any single act of betrayal. Relationship fulfilment, proponents argue, depends on the balance a partner strikes between the desire for self-gratification and the willingness to sacrifice that desire for mutual benefit. Every lasting relationship asks its members to forgo immediate satisfactions in return for a good that arrives later and arrives jointly; where that trade is refused, the relationship yields less to both partners, so a man unwilling to make it is liable to find himself in a partnership that satisfies him poorly. Studies are cited to the effect that men are less inclined or willing than women to sacrifice immediate satisfaction for long term fulfilment. Proponents argue that this general disposition has a specific consequence at the moment infidelity becomes possible. Presented with an opportunity to cheat, a man weighing his own immediate wants against a shared future is, in real terms, more inclined to put his own needs first, because the satisfaction on offer is present and certain while what it costs is deferred and shared. Women in the same situation are described as more likely to weigh up the costs and benefits before committing infidelity, and that deliberation is what makes the step less likely to be taken. The conclusion is comparative rather than exculpatory. The claim is not that men are incapable of restraint, only that a lower willingness to sacrifice makes the immediate option more attractive to them more often, which is the reasoning proponents offer for why men are statistically more likely to cheat. On the same reasoning, such men are frequently unhappy in their relationships well before they are unfaithful: a partner who will not trade self-gratification for mutual benefit is a partner for whom the relationship is chronically underperforming, so the unfulfilling relationship and the infidelity are two results of one refusal rather than two unrelated facts.

Context

Humans are naturally wired to seek self-gratification. If this urge surpasses the desire to create a meaningful romantic partnership, the likelihood of infidelity increases.

Premises

Counter-arguments

The self-gratification/self-sacrifice dichotomy is false. There are innumerable other factors that go into shaping relationships and their overall health.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The dichotomy is stipulated rather than established, and the counter's objection stands: communication, circumstance, commitment and much else shape a relationship, so a single axis running from self-gratification to sacrifice cannot carry the explanation. [Rejecting P2] "Studies show" appears with no source, sample or measure, and even at face value an average difference on a willingness-to-sacrifice scale does not transfer to a specific act. The conclusion also does not reach the position it is filed under: a general preference for immediate satisfaction would predict infidelity in contented relationships as readily as in unhappy ones, so it cannot show that men cheat because they are trapped.