Does the phrase one infidelity, a hundred times not used also apply to marriage?

I think in the love field, this sentence is also very appropriate. Take me as an example, I think there is no saddest time for a person to cheat on you more than when someone else cheats on you, there is no doubt about it, let alone a partner. If a person you love the most cheats on you, even once, especially in love, I will never be able to bear it, of course, except for the "white lie" I can accept, nothing else will be accepted.

I believe that many people are like me, they are extremely principled people, and if others provoke their lower limits, then please get out of my life<>

I don't know if you have watched a TV series called "Wife's Lies", I will probably talk about the plot, and I can't remember much before, everyone will experience it for themselves. It was the hero of the TV who lived with his father and grew up to be a surgeon, while his sister separated from them a long time ago, and after the separation, his sister continued to provide him with education, so that he could afford to send his brother to medical school. Later, his sister married into a wealthy family, and her husband also loved him very much and loved her very much, but her husband's family was only a little bad, as if she looked down on the poor, so as an older sister, she has been hiding that she still has a father and younger brother who are not rich, but it happened that his younger brother is the lover of the sister's husband's sister, and the younger brother broke up with the girl decisively, just because he was afraid of revealing it outside the home.

But his sister's husband unknowingly noticed it, and then sent someone to investigate her family background, and found that her sister had been cheating on her husband, which finally caused various conflicts.

I think this is a typical example, if your wife has deceived you on even the most ordinary information, then what reason is there to continue living? I don't think there's any need to go on.

Why is it that some people are able to remain loyal to love, while others are less faithful? Why do some people seem to be able to maintain a relationship for a long time, while others are always changing objects? Snyder and Simpson (1984) hypothesized that differences in people's love lives could be explained by their personalities.

In particular, they point out that what we call self-monitoring in the human personality is related to loyalty. In a nutshell, self-monitoring is used to describe the degree of control over one's behavior in a certain environment or condition. People who have a lot of control are able to change their behavior in response to changes in their environment.

In contrast, people with poor self-monitoring skills are likely to behave consistently across different conditions. Snyder and Simpson hypothesized that people who scored lower on self-monitoring tests were more likely to maintain a relationship for a long time than those who scored higher. To test whether this hypothesis is valid, they asked college students to rate their self-monitoring skills and describe their romantic and dating experiences.

…Analyzing the relationship between the "self-monitoring score" and the "number of months in a relationship" in the questionnaire based on the intuitive representation of the study's random variables, "it seems that Snyder and Simpson's ** is correct — people with weaker self-monitoring skills are more likely to maintain a relationship for a longer period of time than those with stronger self-monitoring skills." In this case, we say that there is a negative correlation between self-monitoring ability and the length of time a romantic relationship is maintained, i.e., the self-monitoring ability score is higher and the duration of the relationship is shorter. At the same time, it can be found that the relationship between the two is not strict.

Some of the respondents had similar self-monitoring scores, but they maintained romantic relationships for a variety of years. If there is a positive correlation between these two random variables, it means that people with higher self-monitoring ability scores will maintain romantic relationships for a longer period of time. ”

The above is a statistical statistic, not a functional relationship, so it is not absolute. But from the perspective conclusion, it is not difficult for us to come to such a view: when choosing a mate, do you want to choose true love, or choose an excellent opposite sex.

An excellent person of the opposite sex may have a strong ability to self-monitor, and for love, even the period of love is extremely "concise and neat"; On the other hand, sincere true love may be a person with poor self-monitoring ability, and may even show a perverse, rough, and outrageous temperament, but have a consistent attachment to you (perhaps very sadly).

Is it hard that you are still looking for that particular sample, that is, the person who has a high self-monitoring ability score and will maintain a relationship for a longer period of time? It's too much to memorize, it's like buying a lottery ticket, who will be that outrageous strange bird, and just let you bump into it. Difficult!

It just means that he has done something wrong, and if he is disloyal to a person once, he will not use it for life, that is, he will never use this person in the future, which means that this person already has this, which is to you. It's dangerous, you can't use this money anymore if you're short-sighted, otherwise it may lead to more serious and terrible consequences.

Don't be a man without loyalty, you must be principled, otherwise if you violate it once, others will no longer trust you, let alone hire you to work.

I think this means that the person is not allowed to betray. In his eyes, one infidelity could mean a lifetime.

As the name suggests, once you are disloyal to the other person, the other person will not be in contact with you for the rest of your life. Because if there is a first infidelity, there will be a second, a third, and so on. Make people perpetually distrust you.

This is a snake bite, ten years afraid of the well rope. Don't give those who are disloyal a chance, and don't worry about it in the future. Agree with the above view.

If you find yourself disloyal to your master, you will not be used for life.

That is to say, once if the party finally ends up with the people, there will be no lifelong maintenance and can no longer be used.

There are only the first and countless betrayals, and as long as you are unfaithful once, there will be no trust in the future. As long as there is the first time, the rest is an infinite number of times. There is a saying that the so-called loyalty, just because the bargaining chips for betrayal are not enough, is also very reasonable.

Once disloyal. Loyalty, never used for life. Well, one without loyalty. It's for life. I don't need him.

This means that if you are unfaithful once, you may have a second, and your character will not be good and you will not be trusted.

Human beings are inferior. When a person is unfaithful for the first time, he refreshes his bottom line once. And when this mistake is easily forgiven, the time interval between future infidelity will continue to decrease.

In order to reduce economic losses, mental losses, and time costs, when a person has the first infidelity, don't appoint him if he has a hundred chances! One infidelity can be forgiven, but it will not be used for life.

In life, there will always be some things that make us unhappy, there will always be some people who will deceive us, and it can be said that the word "trust" is becoming less and less common. If a person betrays us once, we can choose to forgive him, but we must not be deceived a second time, once unfaithful, never for life.

The leader is afraid that you will be stabbed in the back.

If you are faithful once, you will never be reused again in this life.