I don't understand how discussing an open relationship is so hard if one party isn't providing for the other. And if that party refuses such an agreement all while neglecting and disrespecting the other party, why are they still together?
If the argument is that it's just sex and it's not a big deal:
- Why can't the unsatisfied party just abstain?
OR
- Why would the other party refuse an open relationship?
In that context, I don't see how cheating can't be interpreted as lying and a breech of trust. Because if the other party is okay with 'it's just sex' and unable to provide, then why wouldn't already be in an open relationship?
If the argument is that the other party is a controlling abusive despot, then we are discussing a whole other issue than 'I am sexually unsatisfied, but as long as I can cheat everything will be ok' territory.
Can you point out the irrationality?