Oh dear. I usually avoid analogies since they often fail to convey the intended message.

There are a variety of ways to dig oneself out of an emotional swamp. Some of them are ethical, beneficial, and moral. Others are unethical, harmful, and immoral. Some are even despicable. Theft and fraud fall in the latter category. Most of us would not excuse the use of theft and fraud to dig oneself out of an emotional swamp. Similarly, I would not excuse cheating on one's spouse, which could be considered a form of fraud.

My analogy was intended to equate theft and fraud with cheating as a means to extract oneself from a difficult situation. One can choose more acceptable means to reach that end. The fact that many people choose to act in unacceptable ways does not render those ways excusable

The fact that people are reluctant to take steps to extract themselves from undesirable circumstances has no bearing on the ethics or morality of cheating on one's spouse or what it indicates about the cheater's character .

Yes, I make judgments about people's character by observing their actions. It is perfectly valid to do so. I will continue to do so. I will not change in response to your disapproval.

=======================

I hope you'll excuse me for not knowing who Tony Robbins is.😎

The phrase you quoted:

“People will do more to avoid pain than they will to gain pleasure...”

is common knowledge.

You said so in your comment:

" It’s literally everywhere…"

I have long been familiar with the idea expressed in that quote. However, it has no bearing on the question of whether cheating on one's spouse is ethical or excusable.

The fact that Mr. Robbins stated it is of no consequence. Mr. Robbins' affirmation of this item of common knowledge does not render the thought more truthful or profound. No thought is of greater profundity or importance because it happens to be reiterated by a popular celebrity.

If Mr. Robbins has helped you and as a consequence you idolize him, that is your prerogative. But attributing a statement to him will not render that statement either more or less impactful. I will evaluate the statement on its own merits, regardless of who uttered it.

"Wow…you had to leave a thread and go write a response in a new one."

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I posted my comment as a response to your comment. How is that starting a new thread?