Newspaper: Running group of 8 led to 3 affairs and broken marriages. Do you let your spouse run w/ people of the opposite sex?

This is funny because I also know of multiple marriages destroyed by coed running groups. I mean, you can't really blame the running... It happens at CrossFit boxes, too. And offices... It is just large amounts of time spent with someone new, often around a new activity that your spouse doesn't enjoy/isn't involved in so it feels "new" and "fresh."

The answer to your question is yes they should.

If that running together leads to more than just running together there are problems in the relationship.

The same question could be asked about people of the opposite sex working together or being in any situation where people of the opposite sex come together.

Co-ed running group is fine. Getting too buddy-buddy with someone of the opposite sex is another matter.

I mean, maybe the situation becomes riskier if you are a fat, inattentive spouse. Frankly, the kind of guys who go to "running club" aren't exactly studs. I can't imagine that my wife would be too impressed by a lonely man who works out at the same pace she does.

I've seen it happen from the periphery in running groups I had been a part of. Mostly it has been male coaches going after female runners under their guidance. In one notably egregious incident, the coach was married to a female elite runner and sleeping with a few married women in the group he coached. It all somehow came to light and that group disintegrated. I'd noticed some predatory behavioral red flags early on and distanced myself from him and his group. My wife prefers I not go to fun runs and that's fine by me.

Weird how my G-rated comment that complimented the world's second largest religion was deleted.

Any where men and women are together is a jumping off point to affairs/hook ups.

Gyms used to be single sex. It was assumed that women didnt would be more comfortable working out with just women in the gym. Probably would reduce a lot of drama, no affairs, no women worried about being eye raped, no guys averting their eyes when the girls if half nude.

I don't think that's actually always true. You join a running group looking for people to share the activity with and get some of that team like camraderie. But the more I think about this the more I realize what these really boils down to is unrelated to running - should married people be friends with and spend lots of time with people of the opposite sex alone and without their spouse?

Can you elaborate? This intentionally ambiguous statement doesn't add any intellectual/analytic heft to the thread. It's just a typical KH stink-bomb lobbed into a space where people are at least attempting to have a moderately grown-up conversation.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification!

I don't have an opinion on the overall "issue" (I couldn't care less if married runners have sex or not), but the word "let" seems odd in the above sentence. Are there really married guys out there who have enforceable authority over decisions like this? Maybe I'm a simp, but if my wife tells me she's going to happy hour with people at work or any other group activity she does, it's never a question of her asking me if she can go and me telling her that her proposal is approved or denied. I don't think I'd even want that.

Well that's a new one. Following this comment, my original comment (#4) was restored.

No--you're not a "simp." This whole thread is predicated on the idea that to commit romantically/sexually to another person is to actively withdraw from spaces where one might continue to meet interesting and attractive people, which is such a foreclosed, sad, and emasculated worldview.

My wife loves to dance; I do, too, but really only when inspired by something--particular music, a truly festive occasion, whatever. What I don't like to do is just go to a venue on a random '80s night and bop around to Madonna or A-Ha. Point is, my wife does--and just because she married me, a guy who doesn't love that scene, doesn't mean she has to surrender or abjure that part of herself and not go out dancing. She doesn't do it often, but she will occasionally go out with a girlfriend and dance until early the next morning. I don't exactly love it, but we didn't make vows to stifle or limit each other--but rather to be partners in joyous, realized lives. If marrying me were to force her to amputate that source or muscle for utter joy in her life, what kind of partner would I be?

Sorry for the long response. I'm trying to say that marriage or commitment shouldn't be about shutting doors, except by consent. Spouses don't "let" each other do the things that they love; they keep the home fires lit and the kiddos bathed and fed while their spouse is out pursuing a passion, and then take their own opportunities for living and exploring as they arise.

ma'am, I'm gay.

In what sense?

My spouse is an adult. Therefore the concept of "letting" her do something does not apply.

Men & Women both cheat on their mates; monogamous relationships rarely occur in the real world.

How the hell do people have time and energy for all of this? I honestly don't know how people have the time and energy to cheat when they've got full-time jobs, a family, and a running habit.

LOl @ this nerd who started a run 1 minute slower than the girls 5k pace, and then proceeded to pick up the pace 2 different times on the run, almost certainly without asking.

Wrong. It is Christianity that is right about women.