It may only be once, or it maybe multiple times. Perhaps you feel guilty but you continue to do it. I have been cheated on and my partner said he was very sorry and he would never do it again. He continued to cheat, something which I could never understand.

So I decided to ask the general public and even though I had been hoping for more personal experiences.

“ being an asshole, thats how people cheat.”

“ Lack of sex, lack of attention from partner, opportunity, high libido, for the excitement, thrill of the chase, variety, immaturity, selfishness, sociopathy.”

“ Loneliness, lack of attention from for the women. Not feeling special any more, and other people make you feel brand new and attractive. They are interested in what you have to say whereas your spouse has heard it all before. Lack of sex is also a big one.

But it will always end in tears and regret. Ale so shame at the lack of moral behavior.”

“ When your not satisfied with what you have got. Most of the time over sex. Or are you ever satisfied.”

How to handle continuous and unnecessary lying

·                      Set strict rules with consequences for anyone stealing money from the kitty, and list the punishment which can range from a two-hour timeout to no allowance for that week. When the child is found lying, carry out the punishment and don’t veer from it. Children have to know that you mean what you say and know that there will be consequences. If you don’t act on it they will take you for granted and not pay much attention the next time you chastize them. Punishment for a toddler need not be anything greater than a two minute timeout in his room.

·                      As a child grows older and is more developed you can start to reason with him. Something like, “if you tell mummy a lie, I will not know when you are telling the truth and I won’t believe you again even though it might be the truth.”

·                      Punishment does not mean sending him for a two minute timeout where he can have the remote control to the television set. It will in fact be a reward where he can watch his own program in peace.

·                      Encourage a child to always tell the truth, especially when he owns up to the infraction. Always punish and reward a child without threatening that you will tell his father. That sets the father up as the bad guy.

·                      Don’t become frustrated and spank. Cutting into his playtime or banning him from watching television is far more effective. Don’t label your child as a liar, but work with him to improve.

http://www.raydajacobs.blogspot.com

An anonymous Christian friend of mine who is a member of the same Internet forum I belong to in Dorchester County started a discussion on what we tell children in regard to Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and so on. At that time, we were able to take polls, so my friend posted the following question and options in a poll:

Do / Did you lie to your children about Santa, etc?

Yes. 

No.

I don’t consider it a lie.

The graphic right below this gives you the results.

Screen shot by author.

The results show two (8 percent) said yes, five (20 percent) said no, and an overwhelming 72 percent (18) said they did not consider it a lie. 

What I found alarming was not that two said yes, but the majority, eighteen, did not consider it a lie. I would think there is more hope for the two than the eighteen. The eighteen who enjoy falsehood have convinced themselves they have done no wrong. These deceivers have deceived themselves.

Deception is a dangerous poison that blurs the spiritual focus and discernment of those being deceived and the deceivers themselves.

Lying is bad enough, but when parents / guardians / teachers refuse to call a lie a lie, this type of thinking is passed downed to the children under them. I feel this adds to the fact that most people do not really surrender to Christ, and when some do, there are those who treat their belief the same way as they would as believing in The Tooth Fairy or Santa. I described what true belief is in a recent article titled, “Why I Use The Sinner’s Prayer.”

Though this was a very small poll, had millions been polled I would expect the same results. Given the fact that President Barack Obama did absolutely nothing to merit the Nobel Peace Prize, I think the world is getting ready to believe the lie (2 Thessalonians 2:11). This is no wonder when people have foolishly convinced themselves that telling a child Santa is real is not a lie even though it is not the truth. If it is not true, is it not a lie?

Let us make this determination (Proverbs 8:7): “For my mouth shall speak truth; and wickedness is an abomination to my lips.”

Notes:

God willing this article will be part of my Bible GemLight series as apatite002.

Our romances are hardly ever what they seem.  We all want a connection that is designed on visibility, closeness, and believe in, but in fact, our connections do not always perform that way.  More often than not, our romantic connections include secrecy and deception.  Actually, if you want to look for can be found and disloyality in your own lifestyle, the best beginning is near to home.  Spouses and partner, men and friends, often lie about their real thoughts for each other, the thoughts they have for others, and their investment level.  Indeed, it is safe to say that individuals save their greatest and most serious can be found for those they really like.

For better or more intense, our romances are full of paradoxes which we try to forget, play down and neglect.  For the most part, this technique works well.  Until the day comes when it does not, and with little caution or planning we have to experience face-on the actuality that our near connections are not exactly what they appear to be. 

Eventually, almost everyone will get a partner or associate in one of their can be found.  Certainly, we have difficulties interacting with what we have discovered and interacting with the point that someone near has tricked our believe in.  We do not anticipate our fans to deceive us, nor do we have knowing into how and why can be found happens. 

In equity, it should also be described that it is just as likely that a associate or partner will get you in one of your own efforts to deceived.  And surprisingly, we are just as not really prepared to cope with this type of scenario. 

Ignoring the paradoxes designed in in our romances changes out to be a expensive technique and most individuals pay the price for this decision, abruptly, and all at once.  It’s not so much that coming to conditions with the use of can be found in romances will fix all of the issues you are going to experience, but it will guarantee help to decrease the pressure, pressure, and concern that happen when can be found gradually comes to lighting. 

In actuality, when it comes really like and romantic endeavors, most of the things we believe, are not real.  Most individuals believe that all of their marriage or relational issues can be settled through “communication.”  We believe that can be found is challenging to obtain, that inaccurate a associate needs a lot of attempt and thought, and that enchanting fans can tell when a sweetheart is relaxing, and so on.  None of these commonly presented values, however, are reinforced by the proof.  Rather, our romances are presented together by a sensitive stability of both candor and deception.  And both are crucial to making our romantic connections perform. 

In actuality, romances include two essential functions which allow can be found to flourish: numerous chance, as well as the need to deceived.  As we get near to another individual, we deliberately and accidentally offer them with a lot of information about who we are, disclosing ourselves through both our conditions and actions.  Developing this type of closeness or distributed understanding is crucial, as it assists as the groundwork for a lot of essential advantages.  Through our near connections, we make profits with regard to our health, money, and psychological well-being. 
   
Because connections offer so many essential advantages, it should come as no shock that individuals have a tendency to perspective their enchanting fans in a good lighting.  We position a lot of believe in in our enchanting fans.  We think we know them well.  But while our believe in absolutely provides us with a feeling of protection and relaxation, it also sets the earth for deception.  For as we believe in our fans more, we also become more assured but less precise at identifying when in fact being informed. 

Every appropriate research attests to the point that fans are dreadful at informing when their fans are relaxing.  Actually, discovering can be found with anyone is challenging to do, but fans control to take this common failing to a amazing low.  Again, as we become more assured that we can tell when a sweetheart is relaxing, the actual reverse changes out to be real.  This “truth-bias” or “blind faith” provides the best chance of enchanting fans to practice can be found.  After all, who makes a better sufferer than someone who is willing and willing to believe in everything you have to say? 

Not only do near connections make a amazing chance of can be found to happen, they also make the need.  While romances offer many advantages, they also are generally far too constrictive.  Most everyone has sensed the restrictions of a near connection from a chance to time; quite simply you are no longer free to do what you want, when you want, and with whom you want.  So closeness provides remarkable advantages, but at an tremendous cost – the decrease of your independence and independence. 

Lying to a enchanting associate allows us cope with the restrictions that our romantic connections can charge.  Quite seriously, misleading a enchanting associate changes out to be the most effective and effective way of maintaining the advantages we get from our romances while seeking extra-relational objectives and actions behind a lover’s returning. 

How do we decide when to lie and when to tell the truth?  Well, most of time we do not deliberately think about inaccurate our fans.  Rather such choices are controlled by our thoughts and just seem to happen when the right scenario provides itself.  Often a feeling of pleasure, chance, and pleasure can cause us down routes we had no objective of visiting.  A feeling of worry, reduction, and worry, on the other hand, immediate us to cover-up what we’ve done and be more traditional in the short-term.  Fortunately our thoughts are very good at examining circumstances and maintaining our inaccurate conduct within boundaries.  Our thoughts immediate us to restore some of our liberties while also enabling us to sustain the advantages we get from our romantic connections. 

When you take a take a step returning and put it completely, the image that comes out tends to be rather interesting.  Because our romances are so fulfilling yet constrictive, we are at the same time more genuine and more inaccurate with those we really like.  Furthermore, we position the most believe in in the individual who is most likely to deceived us, just as we are most likely to deceived the individual who likes and trusts us the most.  These are just a few of the paradoxes that appear when getting a near look at the use of can be found in our romances.  Most of what is discovered operates reverse to our most valued values about really like and romance; that is, the idea that finish visibility and closeness are a main and interpreting function of being in really like. 

Initially most individuals prevent looking for can be found by a beloved.  But as you begin to analyze your own conduct more carefully it becomes more complicated to disregard the level to which can be found, disloyality, secrecy and deception are ever existing in our near connections.  Hopefully, you will take on a higher gratitude for the reasons of your connections as well as a better knowing of what it means to be in really like.  Regardless of concluding, getting a near look at can be found in your lifestyle will change the way you perspective yourself and others.

Real world experience tells women to be very wary of men who promise too much. And men to be wary of women who tell them they love them right away then play out the baby game later. Only to find they were not the father. Then we apologize.

We all tell lies at some time in our life. No one is immune to this behavior; it comes from a fear of losing something or a fear of not getting what we believe we ought to have. Far too often these so called apologies leave us feeling empty.

The feelings of betrayal we are left with often for both sexes’ drives us to new behaviors with our latest partners.  And these fake halfhearted apologies are better left unsaid.

Work place apologies can offer us just as much in the way of nothing. Angry outbursts or belittlement directed at us then an apology. This time the apology comes in the form of food. Food used to coax us back into performing without any disruption.

Other apologies come in the forms of coffee drinks or small gifts. Again we are left alone feeling empty unsupported and angry.

Watching our televisions we are hearing lamer ass apologies from those who ought to act better or so we think. Finding no peace no harmony we turn to alcohol, cigarettes, sex, gambling, church, food, exercise or anything that will allow us to escape the clamors in our brains.

Life would be so much easier if we found ways to not offend and just left our falsehoods behind. Alas we are human and we are fallible.

Perhaps the best we can do is when we have realized how deeply we have hurt another just don’t ever do what it was that caused the pain. Then we may be closing in on being something better ourselves.

Written by: Derrick A Jasper Freelance writer 2012 April

Have you ever heard the Eagles’ song, “Lyin’ Eyes?” Now, there’s a computer program that analyzes eye movements and is better at identifying deceitful people than expert human interrogators

“What we wanted to understand was whether there are signal changes emitted by people when they are lying, and can machines detect them? The answer was yes, and yes,” said researchers from the University of Buffalo in New York.

The researchers developed a new system that scrutinizes a trait – eye movement and uses a statistical technique to model how people moved their eyes in two distinct situations: during regular conversation, and while fielding a question designed to prompt a lie. People whose pattern of eye movements changed between the first and second scenario were assumed to be lying, while those who maintained consistent eye movement were assumed to be telling the truth.

Previous experiments in which human experts coded facial movements found significant differences in eye contact at times when subjects told a high-stakes lie. Utilizing these differentials, the researchers set out to create an automated computerized system that could improve upon human accuracy in revealing liars.

To train the system, the researchers used a serious of videos that showed people with various skin colors, head poses, lighting and obstructions – such as glasses.

The researchers used the not-critical beginning of each video to establish what baseline eye movement looked like for each subject, focusing on the rate of blinking and the frequency with which people shifted their direction of gaze.

Hard to Hide Those Lying Eyes

They then used their automated system to compare each subject’s baseline eye movements with eye movements during the critical section of each interrogation – the point at which interrogators stopped asking mundane questions and began inquiring designed to produce lying. If the machine detected unusual variations from baseline eye movements at this time, the researchers predicted the subject was lying.

The results suggest that computers are able to learn enough about a person’s behavior in a short time to perform a lie/truth judgment task that challenged even experienced interrogators. Specifically, the automated system correctly identified liars 82 percent of the time. Experienced human interrogators average closer to 65 percent.

The researchers warned, however, that the technology is not foolproof: A very small percentage of subjects studied were excellent liars, maintaining their usual eye movement patterns as they lied. The next step, she added, will be to expand the number of subjects studied and develop automated systems that analyze body language in addition to eye contact.

Check your “lyin’ eyes” at the door, ladies and gentlemen.

Click here for more articles by The Writin’ Cowboy.

“The Ways We Lie” by Stephanie Ericsson, published in 1992, in the Utne Reader, and “The World of Doublespeak” by William Lutz, published in 1990 by Harperscollins Publishers, in Doublespeak, comment on various methods of dishonesty and their consequences for society. Ericsson describes several broad categories of lying and concludes that people should strive to be as completely honest as possible, while Lutz focuses on doublespeak as one particular method of dishonesty. Both believe that deceit is ruining society, breaking down communication, and destroying social connections. However, is it possible to be too honest? Too much honesty can cause irreparable damage to relationships of all kinds in the same way that too much dishonesty can, while selective dishonesty can save lives and protect those that we care about.

            In “The Ways We Lie,” Ericsson concludes that people should be totally honest regardless of the context of the situation. While she admits that functional lies may have a place in society, she also directly contradicts this statement with her following quotation and the rest of her conclusion. When Ericsson states that totally eradicating dishonesty is not easy, she implies that people should be totally eradicating it.  Some of the evidence presented in the text also contradicts her thesis. Her sections on white lies, deflection, and delusion demonstrate that these are defense mechanisms designed for survival and adaptation. They are ingrained in human nature, and are virtually impossible to defy. Ericsson’s use of personal examples only serves to further disprove the conclusion she arrives at. Her week of total honesty unraveled relationships, cost her money, and damaged business partnerships, showing that too much honesty can actually be detrimental. Ericsson makes a paltry attempt at being objective in her analysis of dishonesty. She is unable to maintain neutrality and her text is colored in this bias which is off-putting and serves to take away from her argument. The conclusion she arrives at seems to suggest that she selectively acknowledges some facts in her text, but ignores others. Her use of quotations serves to add credibility to her argument in some cases, but in others, like her section on white lies, it actually contradicts her thesis. The fact that famous and prominent members of society have disagreed with her analysis of lying detracts from her credibility. Ericsson also seems to take some extreme examples of dishonesty and generalizes with them. In her section on ignoring facts, she uses the example of a Catholic priest who is abusing children and implies that, in all cases where facts are ignored, this sort of outcome will result. Sometimes, people just make mistakes. If everyone acknowledged every fact, all relationships would disintegrate. For instance, men and women in monogamous relationships are also attracted to other people. It is simply human nature. Both partners typically ignore this fact in order to keep the relationship together. They both know that it is unlikely either will ever act on those desires. Ericsson assumes the reader is already a relatively “honest” person. “Dishonest” people and people who see certain kinds of dishonesty as necessary in social interaction would disagree entirely with her argument.

            In “The World of Doublespeak,” Lutz believes that doublespeak is a tactic that should be avoided entirely. He also believes that it serves to destroy communication and social interaction because it does not actually communicate anything. Its purpose is actually to avoid communication of something. Even in situations where the government feels it necessary to fudge facts or hide the truth, Lutz finds it repugnant. He also believes that everything should be delivered in “plain” English so that average citizens can understand it. Lutz and Ericsson both agree on nearly every idea. Unlike Ericsson, however, Lutz does not present any evidence that shows doublespeak to be a positive thing in any context. His implied goal is to rid the world of doublespeak. Legal “jargon” is cited as an area where doublespeak is at its worst and Lutz believes that the jargon should be eliminated because it is designed to mislead consumers. Lutz assumes a lot in his text about the intended audience. He assumes people have a decent knowledge of U.S. history, that people have read texts such as “1984,” and that they understand what an Orwellian society is. It would serve him better to provide a little more background in these areas to the readers who are unfamiliar with these concepts. Lutz’s claims that all doublespeak is clearly thought out and cleverly designed to deceive and corrupt are unsubstantiated. Some of the examples provided in the text could also have been cases where the speakers were legitimately confused or unknowledgeable on a subject. Lutz also writes as if the general public has no responsibility to research and analyze themselves. He seems to believe that all of the blame should be put on the establishment, the leaders of the country, when really the public is responsible for perpetuating this system by electing these people to office. Though Lutz acknowledges the lack of critical thinking by some, nowhere does he analyze why this might be. His citation of “1984” is an extreme example of what theoretically could occur if his scenario completely played itself out. Doublespeak has existed for far longer than the U.S. and the world has not developed into an Orwellian dictatorship.  People in modern times, in contradiction to his belief, are becoming much more critical of what they hear. People consistently convey that they no longer watch the news or read newspapers because most of what they see is nonsense and propaganda. People are beginning to realize when they are being lied to.

Actually, doublespeak can be a useful tool. Looking at foreign policy through the eyes of the government, one can understand why they purposely deceive the public sometimes. The public can be naïve and is sometimes unaware of potential threats until it is too late for it to act. This can lead to national security issues. Societies are generally reactive, not proactive, and the government uses deception to counter that shortcoming. In this context, doublespeak is necessary to placate the public into believing they have been informed, while the government is following a different plan of action behind the scenes for the protection of the country.

While dishonesty and doublespeak can serve to destroy social networks and communication, too much honesty can result in the same consequences. For instance, if two people, just beginning to date, start dumping all of their secrets onto one another they could push each other away because too much is being revealed too soon. In this case, too much honesty would not strengthen a social bond, it would destroy it. Honesty and dishonesty operate on a continuum. Anyone acting too far on either end of the continuum serves to hurt their ability to communicate with others and ruin social connections. Communication and social interaction require a complex and difficult combination of honesty and dishonesty. This involves not only verbal communication, but non-verbal communication as well. In fact, the majority of communication is non-verbal. This includes eye contact, breathing patterns, dress, the way we stand or walk etc…The reason that a certain amount of dishonesty is required in oral communication is that it is virtually impossible to lie with our non-verbal communication. The purpose behind it is to balance out the forced honesty of non-verbal communication.

Despite what most people think, deception is not always based on selfish or hurtful motives. People often deceive with noble intentions. They lie to each other to protect the ones they love. The truth can be especially painful, and in many cases the person with the secret does know better than to reveal it because it might inflict pain. People often do not want to hear the truth. Sometimes they even ask questions specifically to hear an untruth. When someone asks if they look fat, ugly, or old, they do not want to hear someone say yes in response. They want to hear them lie to build up their self-confidence.

The fact that it is so difficult for people to be totally honest all the time proves that it is ingrained in human nature, and is supposed to exist in society. It is not hard to imagine society breaking down due to too much honesty in much the same way that it could break down because of too little honesty. There are idealists in the world who would suggest that the only way to be truly honest is to communicate every single thought to everyone around you. Imagine people speaking their mind with no filter in front of it, insulting people they don’t like. When the wrong people are insulted, violence could result. A little selective dishonesty by omission could thwart a confrontation. Imagine subordinates being totally honest with their bosses. How many workers would get fired? There is a place in society for dishonesty, and it should be mixed with the right kind and correct amount of honesty. This combination is the very glue that holds organized society together. The idea of eradicating dishonesty completely is comparable to that of communism or socialism. They all appear perfect on paper, but when applied to real life, they are impractical. Human nature and emotions are not accounted for in these theoretical concepts.

            There is world of difference between someone whom most would consider a “dishonest” person and someone who selectively uses dishonesty as a means of maintaining social connections, sparing feelings, and governing a body of people. Generally, someone who is dishonest uses lying as a means of personal gain or a way to hurt others. A person, who utilizes dishonesty selectively, without the intention of gaining personally or hurting others, is still considered an honest person in society. Both authors seem ignorant to the fact that dishonesty, in all its forms, is necessary for a functioning, non-chaotic society.

Little did I know, my fiance was basically living another life behind my back.  I won’t get into the grim details of how I found out this information, as it’s just too complicated and difficult for one outside of the situation to understand.

He was listed and engaged in many dating sites, to start with.  This isn’t a simple matter of cheating, no!  Don’t for a second believe that.

We never got to live together, which, in my case, should have been a red flag.  I wanted to live with him, and he knew it.  If anything, I was more financially able to make that happen.  I truthfully would have taken care of the expenses but he never expressed wanting the same.  He always made it sound like it would have to happen way down the road.  I knew our engagement would not be a short one.  Blinded by love, I was in bliss.  I felt that I found the love of my life and had things locked in without the legal stuff just yet.  Things were good in my eyes at the time. 

His lies were out of control.  I understand that I am not always an easy person to deal with.  I relied on him emotionally, as I was, and still am, going through quite an amount of chaos.  He didn’t do a great job of being there for me, but it was better than nothing.  Again, in hindsight, this should have been a red flag.

Little did I know until recently, he was being someone else’s support system.  He was their rock.  He was this to multiple people.  He was getting various things from various people and giving things in return.  He had multiple relationships were he seemed to only do one job of a boyfriend.

Here I am today, still trying to process this.  I wonder how much of it was real to him.  I conclude that he has a mental problem.

Honesty can come in many different forms. It comes when you tell your friend that she truly does look “weird” in that specific outfit. It can also come when a mother tells her son what really happened to their pet dog. Although honesty comes in many different ways, it all has a general meaning: the quality of telling the truth. It is when you can tell the truth, without adding extra details or removing certain parts. However, it also has its negative form, the form of deceit. Honesty can be both helpful and harmful, depending on how it is used.

            What is the “truth”? Being honest means you tell the truth. The truth, in most cases, is exactly what happened, no added flourish or removed details. In the quote, “A half truth is a whole lie,” (a Yiddish proverb) that is explained. However, when you are honest, you have the quality of being able to tell the truth; you know it will hurt someone, but you still tell them the whole truth. Also, it is when you constantly tell the truth. Telling the truth once and lying twice isn’t being honest, it’s being deceitful. Mark Twain states, “If you tell the truth, you won’t have to remember anything.” By telling the truth, you are being honest.

            On the other hand, honesty can hurt a person. For example, if you are talking to your friend about what made someone leave her, she might get mad at you. If the whole truth was that you told a person rumors about your friend, and then he left her, your friend would probably get mad at you, as it is your fault. To tell the complete truth, you must risk your friend getting hurt. However, people can also use honesty to deliberately hurt someone’s feelings. Imagine you are in a situation where you are confronting an “enemy” of yours, whose boyfriend left them. If you tell her the truth that he cheated on her for you, you are trying to hurt your enemy’s feelings. This is a very negative way to be honest.

            On the other hand, there is deceit. Deceit is the opposite of being honest (telling the truth), so deceit is basically telling lies or “bending” the truth. When you lie, you are being deceitful. Lying is when you “bend” the truth or make up a story for what happened, so you do not get in trouble or to divert suspicions from you or someone else. If you are deceitful, you are constantly able to lie, without a hesitation. When one is deceitful, they lie consistently, and often to avoid trouble.

            However, if you “bend” the truth, you are still lying, and being deceitful. A quote from Aristotle states, “A half truth is a whole lie.” Whether you add extra details or remove some details, you are still lying. This is shown by the quote from Aristotle.

            Despite deceit being a negative trait, it can be used in a positive manner. Take the movie “Life is Beautiful”, for example. In the movie, an Italian-Jewish family (father, mother, son, and uncle) are sent to a Nazi-controlled concentration camp, during World War II. However, the son does not know this. The father manages to make it seem like a game, so his son does not become scared and void of hope. To do this, he lies about what the German Colonel says, and makes up “rules” for the game.

            In “Life is Beautiful”, a father lied, constantly, to his son. Although he was being deceitful, he was doing this to protect his son. He wanted to protect him so his son would not be scared, so he made up this game (while being deceitful). However, there is another way to be positively-lying. This can be when you lie so your friend’s feelings are not hurt, or their emotions changed. For example, you find out that your friend’s boyfriend is cheating on her. You tell her to break up with him, but lie about the reason. You were being deceitful, yet it was so you do not hurt a friend.

Although honesty and deceitfulness can be both positive and negative, no-one can be completely “honest,” nor completely “deceitful.” One time or another, we all lie, without being honest.

What person hasn’t thought about that one person – maybe your spouse or boy friend – and said, “is he telling the truth?”

Sure you have. It’s probably the same question you ask when your boss denies you a pay raise because “we’re short on funds, right now” while he drives home from work in his Rolls Royce. Or perhaps you were told you were being laid off because the company ‘was going in another direction.” Wouldn’t you love to be able to decipher if the person was being truthful or not?

Well, now there’s an “app” that will let you do just that.

The Cheater Meter

The device is called “The Cheater Meter” (see www.thecheatermeter.com) and it’s available for download at the iTunes Store for just 99 cents.

Developed by physiatrist Ish Major after years of research, the cheater meter is designed “to empower women to level the playing field when it comes to finding Mr. Right before they find out he’s really Mr. Wrong!” Sounds a little sexist, but let’s play along with the good doctor.

The app promises to help women tell if a guy will cheat BEFORE he actually does! “The Cheater Meter is an extremely simple but extremely accurate 10-question quiz that tells you if your guy or any guy, will or will not cheat!

According to Dr. Major “most women report their biggest fear in a relationship is being cheated on.” He says he performs tests for tons of medical problems every day. And he now wants to give women the power to run their own test for relationship problems just as quickly.”

Secret Formula To Uncover Cheating

Dr. Major says he’s uncovered “a secret formula” after studying years of research on relationships, marriage, divorce and cheating. All that research forms the basics of the iPhone app.

Dr. Major specializes in women, children and families and says the majority of his patients come to him because of past or present relationship problems. He says the new app reveals why men cheat, what are the signs someone is cheating, the Top 10 traits of cheaters, how to prevent it from happening, and how best to control the damage in the aftermath of cheating.

The good doctor also claims to answer questions such as why are men such dogs, and why do I keep getting 
all of the bad ones? 
There’s also tips that answer why things always starts out good…
then goes wrong.” And the familiar refrain of, “I don’t think there are any good guys left.”

Finally, the doctor offers the rhetorical question: “If he’s stupid enough to cheat, the world should know he’s dumb enough to get caught.”

Whether women will flock to download the cheater meter app is open to question. But, its mere presence may make a lot of guys sit up and take notice. Yes, there’s a new relationship cop in town and there’s an app for that.

Click here for more articles by The Writin’ Cowboy.