A personal essay published on HuffPost is prompting renewed discussion about why people cheat and whether infidelity can sometimes be an act of survival rather than simply a moral lapse.
The essay, written by Gail Cornwall, describes a trajectory that began with an instinctive condemnation of a married friend’s flirtation at a wedding and evolved into a more complicated understanding after two close acquaintances, identified in the piece by changed names, engaged in affairs following what the author describes as prolonged psychological control and abuse. Cornwall’s reporting draws on interviews with survivors, journalists and academics, and a review of existing research to probe motives that often go unaddressed in public debate.
Cornwall recounts two detailed examples. In one, a woman referred to as Kelly endured repeated putdowns, gaslighting and surveillance from her husband, including sensors on home entries that reported to his phone and a climate of constant criticism that left her anxious and diminished. She later kissed and slept with another person; the author says she and others interviewed framed that act as a reclaiming of agency and connection that had been systematically denied. In a second, a man called Steve described escalating verbal abuse, social undermining and an emotional environment that left him clinically depressed; an extramarital encounter helped restore a sense of self that ultimately enabled him to pursue a divorce.
Those accounts align with first-person testimony collected by journalists who have examined female infidelity. Susan Shapiro Barash, whose reporting spans decades, and Alicia Walker, a sociologist who interviewed women about affairs, both documented cases in which people in controlling or abusive relationships sought attention, validation or autonomy through extradyadic encounters. Walker told Cornwall that some subjects used online services to set the terms of encounters, a practice she said could function as an "autonomy-recouping response to abuse."
Academic literature offers a mixed picture. Measuring infidelity is difficult: one survey cited in the essay found 33% of Americans reporting some form of cheating, while other studies range from about 20% to 40% lifetime prevalence. Dylan Selterman, an associate teaching professor at Johns Hopkins University, has studied "extradyadic infidelity motives" and concluded that motivations are heterogeneous: some people stray because of deficits in their primary relationship, others for issues rooted in their own histories or desires, and a third group has motives that mix the two.
A 2011 academic paper that views intimate partner violence through an evolutionary lens argued that victims of aggression are unlikely to be passive and may develop defenses against partners who use derogation, threats or control tactics. The paper suggested that intimate partner violence can "backfire on the abuser" because some victims find avenues for escaping, a framing Cornwall cites as consistent with the accounts she collected.
Researchers and writers consulted for the essay caution against treating infidelity as a single phenomenon. Wednesday Martin, author of Untrue, described a strategy anthropologists call "mate bridging," in which people in constrained situations test alternative partnerships as a route to exit. Julia Nemeth, an assistant professor at Ohio State University who studies brain injury caused by intimate partner violence, told Cornwall, "women do what they need to do to survive and feel a sense of control." Cornwall notes that men and nonbinary people can experience similar dynamics.
At the same time, experts emphasize the limits of existing research and the role of stigma in shaping both behavior and inquiry. Walker suggested that cultural condemnation of cheating may suppress nuanced study of why people stray after being controlled or abused. Pamela Druckerman, author of Lust in Translation, provided cross-cultural context, noting that attitudes toward extramarital affairs vary widely and that Americans have grown more absolutist over time: a 1973 poll found 70% of Americans said affairs were "always wrong," that rose to 82% by 2004, and a 2025 poll cited in the essay measured the share at nearly 90%.
Cornwall’s reporting also highlights how media and literature reinforce straightforward moral narratives. Classic novels and mainstream films long depicted adulterous protagonists as deserving of punishment, while pop songs and contemporary cinema sometimes offer more ambivalent takes. Dylan Selterman told Cornwall that audiences often prefer clear, good-versus-bad stories, which complicates public conversations about the complexity of infidelity.
The accounts detailed in the essay, along with the academic and journalistic sources Cornwall cites, underline three recurring themes: the diversity of motives behind affairs, the potential role of controlling or abusive partners in precipitating infidelity, and a relative scarcity of systematic research specifically probing infidelity as a response to abuse. Cornwall says she found many personal testimonies online and through social media but little peer-reviewed literature that explicitly examines reverse causality — that is, abuse precipitating infidelity rather than infidelity precipitating abuse.
The essay is careful not to endorse extramarital affairs as an advisable escape tactic. Cornwall writes that understanding motives is not the same as condoning actions that can cause harm to partners and families. Instead, the piece argues for a more nuanced public discourse that recognizes when infidelity may be entwined with efforts to survive or regain autonomy in abusive circumstances.
Advocates for survivors and some researchers say the conversation matters for both policy and practice. If a subset of affairs functions as part of a strategy to leave a controlling relationship, supporters say, that insight could affect how domestic violence services screen for risk, counsel survivors and design exit strategies that do not rely on actions that may themselves carry legal or social penalty.
Cornwall’s piece concludes with a call for greater empathy and more nuanced research. She writes that meeting people like Kelly and Steve altered her personal calculus about judging cheaters and underscored how cultural narratives, stigma and a lack of focused study can obscure the lived realities behind many affairs.
The essay adds to a small but growing conversation in cultural and academic circles about the intersection of intimate partner violence and infidelity. Experts cited in the piece say further empirical work is needed to quantify how often infidelity functions as a survival response, to understand demographic patterns, and to explore how social stigma may shape both behavior and scholarly attention. Until then, Cornwall’s reporting urges readers to recognize complexity even as they continue to confront the damaging consequences that infidelity can cause for individuals and families.