Cristina Nehring has an essay on truthdig about the New Erotic Fundamentalism. Her main subject is the relationship between NC Gov Mark Sanford and his South American friend and how this event prompted the press to take a puritanical and fanatical view towards friendship between men and women who are married but not to each other.
On MD there are all kinds of seekers: single, divorced, widowed, separated, married and saying so, married and not saying so. There are prowlers and scowlers, pleasure seekers, friendship seekers, the whole gamut. Thus this is a good place to ask the question, "what is infidelity?"
Nehring says infidelity is not, according to American media, the "Biblical" kind, as in sexual activity, but it extends far outward and includes virtually any kind of relationship at all with a person of the opposite sex who is not your spouse.
Nehring wrote this:
To be human is to be tempted in different ways at different times. It is to navigate emotional ambiguities and erotic undercurrents. With any luck at all, it is to experience emotional connections to many different persons over the course of a lifetime. It is to reach out to “emotionally needy” individuals (who among us can claim to have always been emotionally “un-needy”?); to reach out to them whether they are male or female, homely or comely. If we train ourselves otherwise, we will soon find ourselves in a heartless world indeed. We will sacrifice the possibility of humanity for a frigid and isolating guarantee of fidelity.
Are we all so tainted by our puritanical past that we cannot see the value in friendship no matter what our friend's gender might be? Are we so warped by our culture that we think the only thing a man and woman ever want to do is have sex? Are we so weak and cowardly that we must label platonic relationships evil or wrong or "sinful" or whatever and run from them merely because we can't control ourselves?
There are two sides to infidelity. There is the person having the relationship and then there is the spouse. As a spouse do you or would you be jealous of a relationship between your husband/wife and a person of your own gender? Why? Would them having a close relationship with another be a challenge to the love you share? Would you think they did not love you? Do you trust so little? Or are you just possessive.
We live in a very strange world. An article about the horrors of infidelity rides easily along a column in a magazine like Time surrounded by some of the most sexually charged advertising ever. Fundamentalists and mainstream followers and "common, decent folk" look down their noses at "unfaithful men" who have women friends (always, without question assuming sexual activity) but say nothing of their super-sex-charged world nor hesitate to watch TV shows filled with sexual promiscuity, adultery, nudity and who knows what else behind those closed doors.
A synonym of "infidelity" is "cheating." What is "cheating?" How ever one frames the answer to this it all comes down to the idea of ownership. A man cheats because he steals away what his wife owns, or vice-versa. I would argue that this belief needs to go the way of the dinosaurs, even in the sexual arena, because no human "owns" another. The nature of a commitment such as marriage does require or imply loyalty and maybe even exclusivity but not ownership.
But is having a friend "cheating?" Is a married person never supposed to have a close relationship to another adult? But that's not it, is it? Men and women very often have very close friends of the same sex. It's not only natural, it's expected. Men can go spend days fishing, women can go off on vacations together. But swap the gender and suddenly the same kind of platonic friendship becomes the ultimate taboo. Bob and George can fly off to their annual fishing trip but heaven forbid Bob drive down and spend a couple days enjoying a friendship with his old friend from school Susan!
The assumption is, of course, that men and women cannot have such relationships. It is an assumption that is not true. Relationships happen all the time in the work place and elsewhere, even in church, between men and women. But they are stilted and limited because of jealousies and absurd rules.
We are a nation of hypocrites. It's time we recognized and admitted our puritanical attitudes, discarded them, and learned that as human beings our true nature will never be realized with legal contracts or chastity belts or selfish religious attitudes. We need to realize that human friendship is an all-encompassing need. We should not avoid friendships with the opposite sex because of what others might view as sinful. Neither should we fall into the other puritan trap, that of thinking the opposite sex is there only for sexual gratification or servitude in marriage.
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
|
Visalia1
|
Aug 21 @ 10:04AM
|
|
|
Don't confuse love and lust and if you thought it you did it.
|
|
dharmaseeker
|
Aug 21 @ 10:36AM
|
|
|
That's very fundamentalist of you. Are you saying a man cannot have a friend who is a woman without wanting to have sex, or vice-versa?
|
|
lovestobake
|
Aug 21 @ 11:07AM
|
|
|
Going to get in trouble here, cause most women don't believe a guy who loves her can have sex with another and think no more of it than having a beer. From what I have experienced some women can also just have a beer in this sense. It is the breaking of a promise and the std factor that would have me call it quits. For me it is simple, as one doesn't think of a sister or a sister in law as a sexual possibility, all other women should be looked at in the same manner you if married, or in a commited relationship. I also think if one is getting their emotional well being from another outside of the marriage this is infidelity. Why, cause I believe if this happens the marriage will be in deep trouble, if not over. Marriage = don't touch, and don't bond with third person on a deep emotional level. My Daddy taught me if I stop over a married friends house on impulse, and he is not home, I am to leave. I have been single 29 years cause I wasn't ready for the above.
|
|
BluEyedQT
|
Aug 21 @ 11:10AM
|
|
My oft-stated stance on Friendship between opposite sexes is this:
Intimacy should be between spouses. Chatting, emailing, lunching with this opposite-sexed friend, lends itself to an intimacy which should be reserved for 2. A man and his woman. Intimacy between a man and a woman is not friendship.
I will speak as the woman that I am: Why should my man spend all this time with another woman? What do they talk about? Do they never move beyond Sports or Work or Politics? Of course they do. I would be appalled if my man spoke to another woman about our intimate lives. Not necessarily just sex, but I'm sure his feelings about our relationship would be discussed. Her relationships also. You don't think that an intimacy would be formed by their shared empathy over even seemingly trivial issues with their spouse? Would she not empathize, commiserate with him about any negative issues that we may have? If my man doesn't feel that I am that sympathetic ear, then there is a problem in our relationship which isn't helped by him talking about it with another woman.
Also, if this woman Friend cannot be My friend, then yes, there is something wrong.
Having opposite-sex friendships is a slippery slope. Relationships in this day and age are hard enough to nuture without one of the parties having a sympathetic ear to (and thus encouraging) any troubles in that relationship.
I will state this fact: My father (married to my mother for over 60 years) NEVER had a close friendship with another woman. Didn't email anyone, didn't chat online, phone, didn't meet for lunch....neither did any of my friend's dad's. It wasn't necessary and it just wasn't done.
Let him hang with the Guys. I give him anything he could need from a woman.
|
|
POPO
|
Aug 21 @ 11:40AM
|
|
Traditional Wedding Vows:
Traditional Wedding Vows 1:
I, (name), take you (name), to be my (wife/husband), to have and to hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish; from this day forward until death do us part.
Traditional Wedding Vows 2:
I, (name), take you, (name), to be my [opt: lawfully wedded] (husband/wife), my constant friend, my faithful partner and my love from this day forward. In the presence of God, our family and friends, I offer you my solemn vow to be your faithful partner in sickness and in health, in good times and in bad, and in joy as well as in sorrow. I promise to love you unconditionally, to support you in your goals, to honor and respect you, to laugh with you and cry with you, and to cherish you for as long as we both shall live.
Traditional Wedding Vows 3 (traditional civil ceremony vows):
(Name), I take you to be my lawfully wedded (husband/wife). Before these witnesses I vow to love you and care for you as long as we both shall live. I take you with all your faults and your strengths as I offer myself to you with my faults and strengths. I will help you when you need help, and I will turn to you when I need help. I choose you as the person with whom I will spend my life.
In these top three wedding vows that are exchanged, where does it say;
[quote] Men can go spend days fishing, women can go off on vacations together. But swap the gender and suddenly the same kind of platonic friendship becomes the ultimate taboo. Bob and George can fly off to their annual fishing trip but heaven forbid Bob drive down and spend a couple days enjoying a friendship with his old friend from school Susan!
Now I'm a simple kind of man, so forgive me if I seem outta line  But when two people unite Exclusively either in a Relationship or by Wedding Vows, they forske all others. You can have friends of the opposite sex, but if you have conversations or meetings you wouldn't have in front of your partner/wife, or you exclude your partner/wife from...YOUR CHEATING  If not sexually, emotionally, you chose that one person as they chose you to be best friends and always be open and honest, and not put doubt or questions in their mind or heart. Nor make them feel any less then number one in your life! If you are truly Committed to each other, you don't need the outside interference of others. Having a friend is one thing, having a person of the opposite sex to go do things with tells me you think less of your own spouse.
Why bother being Exclusive or getting married if you feel the need to spend time with others? Your simply not ready for a real true relationship. Personally I would never do anything with another woman, unless my wife or lover is present, and if my friend has a problem with that, Fvck -em their not much of a friend to chance putting my relationship in peril or doubt. You can't be serious with your reasoning here are you?  Why would anyone want to go spend days with someone of the opposite sex?? Without clearly having their partner/present? Even best friend couples have had problems cheating with each other, and your promoting going off for days with the opposite sex? It's not ownership It's ethics morals respect and love for your partner, to insure they have nothing...nothing at all to worry or wonder about, If your so in love with the one your with, you don't need that sort of drama or connection with another, you find that in each other.
I find this or (your) thinking like Tap Dancing on a Land Mine....
|
|
cherishlife7898
|
Aug 21 @ 11:41AM
|
|
It has something to do with morality and dicipline I think .It's cool that if men and women can be bosom friends without any intimacy which is called pure friendship . But can that be possible ? Men and women are two very different creatures and the fighting between them never stops if our society exists .True responsible love should be monoply which is precious and worth cherishing and it can never be shared . Only do they share their bosom friend , they can call it friendship or it could be excuses for both --- seeking the extra affairs.
If things go like that ,love is no longer precious , everyone is synical and there's no trust or responsibilty any more ...why do we need love ? What will the world be like without certain principles? This kind of freedom is just like flying kites , they will definitely fall and damage themselves without the restriction of the lines .
|
|
dizzydoll
|
Aug 21 @ 12:45PM
|
|
|
Would them having a close relationship with another be a challenge to the love you share? Would you think they did not love you? Do you trust so little? Or are you just possessive.
and there in lies the problem. even tho 99% of people will not admit to this, they do feel threatened by their significate other bonding in any way with others of the opposite sex.... they live in each others pockets . they assume this is their safety net.... and it might be, if both fear loosing each other 
now, i believe in reincarnation... and in each life a fair amount of lessons learned come via association with others. this means if we restrict ourselves in marriage/relationship to the few couples we care to mix with..... then we will have to come back to face many more lives just to meet those we are supposed to learn from.... 
that alone compells me to stay single and meet and learn from those i must............ and then move onto the next incarnation on a clean slate 
|
|
observed50
|
Aug 21 @ 1:16PM
|
|
Like every other facet of our lives...our intimate relationships are surrounded and fenced in by beliefs far more than they are informed by our real experience, feelings and perceptions. Let's address some of the more glaring illusions of our beliefs...
1.) "Til death do us part" is a human construct. It is a construct born out of organized religions, and born in a historical period in which 'til death' wasn't very far away...we died much younger. In 1900, before the last child was out of the house, graduated or working, one parent was likely to be dead. Today, the period of time a non-divorced couple has after the children leave is usually longer than while they were there because we have pushed back the threshold of death so significantly. As a human construct...what was it meant to do...and what is it doing post children out of the house?
2.) "I can give my partner everything they need." First...it has never been true that one person can do that for another, and as long as we're social animals, it will never be true. As a social animal, we need many inputs to grow, to verify our sense of reality...all sorts of ways other people are important...and the more, the better. As a social animal, the greater the number of sources of my input, the more I will learn, be tested, be mirrored.
But the larger issue is...why in heaven's name would I ever want one single other human being to be THE source of my feedback from a gender? The only possible value in that is to assuage the fears of my partner...but what does that have to do with my greatest growth and unfolding, the greatest likelihood of my expressing my possibility? And the same is true for my partner. Why would I ever want to so delimit my partner from her fullest expression but because I am afraid? Why would I want my partner to live imprisoned by my fears? Wouldn't I want them, in true intimacy, to help me confront my fears and grow beyond them?
We want loved unconditionally, so we can feel and be accepted, loved and understood within all of our foibles and follies, but we want to love conditionally..."I'll love you as long as you behave as X, Y and Z."
I don't know if fundamentalism is helpful to the conversation...but I think pushing folks to see how fear impacts intimacy, pushing deeper intimacy aside in order to live in the illusory world of control and fear-abatement...such conversation and inquiry is deeply needed. We impose monogamy as if it is some god-given institution of connecting, while trying to act as if the divorce rate is unrelated to the institution of marrage as we currently construct it.
Infidelity for me is a taser that the social herd uses to keep people from straying away from the herd-approved coupling. Ultimately, in a world that is far more dense in communication networks and content, we will have to step away from defending coupling as the best and most effective way to couple...to designing something that is rebuilt from scratch to provide a more effective and loving model that doesn't reinforce our jealousies and fears willy nilly.
|
|
BluEyedQT
|
Aug 21 @ 1:57PM
|
|
Observed50, The social construct of the "herd mentality" is the natural outgrowth of social evolution. There is safety in the herd. Not everyone wants to or needs to break away. I Can give my partner everything he needs in the context of a committed, loyal and loving relationship with a woman. He can discuss the stock market with his broker.
Fear is also a natural instinct. It is what alerts us to being aware of what is happening to and around us. As long as we don't let it adversely bind us, it is a very useful tool.
I have found that the only unconditional love is between a parent and a child. No partner is likely to be "perfect". It is the graceful acceptance of these foibles that foster a strong bond.
Setting personal boundaries is not "control". It is how we choose to safe-guard ourselves. I am not a proponent of polyamory, which is what you are advocating. There is nothing new about it. Coupling evolved because the alternative wasn't working. While the reasons for fostering the continuance of monogamy as the ideal have changed, they are still valid to the vast majority of people and society as a whole. Change will not come in my lifetime or yours.
I wish you well in finding a partner(s) who will support you in your quest.
I want one man who wants one woman. Me.
Peace
|
|
RareQuestor
|
Aug 21 @ 4:05PM
|
|
|
My oft-stated stance on Friendship between opposite sexes is this:
Intimacy should be between spouses. Chatting, emailing, lunching with this opposite-sexed friend, lends itself to an intimacy which should be reserved for 2. A man and his woman. Intimacy between a man and a woman is not friendship.
I will speak as the woman that I am: Why should my man spend all this time with another woman? What do they talk about? Do they never move beyond Sports or Work or Politics? Of course they do. I would be appalled if my man spoke to another woman about our intimate lives. Not necessarily just sex, but I'm sure his feelings about our relationship would be discussed. Her relationships also. You don't think that an intimacy would be formed by their shared empathy over even seemingly trivial issues with their spouse? Would she not empathize, commiserate with him about any negative issues that we may have? If my man doesn't feel that I am that sympathetic ear, then there is a problem in our relationship which isn't helped by him talking about it with another woman.
Also, if this woman Friend cannot be My friend, then yes, there is something wrong.
Having opposite-sex friendships is a slippery slope. Relationships in this day and age are hard enough to nuture without one of the parties having a sympathetic ear to (and thus encouraging) any troubles in that relationship.
I will state this fact: My father (married to my mother for over 60 years) NEVER had a close friendship with another woman. Didn't email anyone, didn't chat online, phone, didn't meet for lunch....neither did any of my friend's dad's. It wasn't necessary and it just wasn't done.
Let him hang with the Guys. I give him anything he could need from a woman.
So, to clarify one point, you have no objection to being considered a sex object? If gender is the most important criteria in a relationship, then relationships are essentially reduced to which set of genitals a person has. That is the basis of all of the stereotypes about men and women.
|
|
BluEyedQT
|
Aug 21 @ 4:47PM
|
|
RareQuestor: Do you deny the inherent differences in men and women? Differences in communication styles and goals?
Genitals are only the outward (or inward) manifestation of our biological selves. I don't worry that my heterosexual partner is going to have sex with his same-sex buddy, so that situation wasn't even considered in my argument.
I generalize because to try to cater to all the differing populations of transgendered, gay, lesbian, etc. would just be too exhausting. I was only speaking of me and my relationship goals.
I have been treated like a sex object and when that occurs, buh bye.
|
|
oklacheri
|
Aug 21 @ 6:22PM
|
|
I've worked along time with only men and we all got along and even talked about private issues in our marriages but...and this is a big ONE. We never made plans to go out for lunch together or meet after work for drinks.
I was married and to me that was stepping over the line. I told my husband about the conversations that I had with my male friends and he was fine with that.
He never asked me if I was interested in them though. I think it was because he knew that I came home to him every night and slept beside him only. But if I had gone to that after work drink or had a long lunch he would have wondered. I would wonder too if he did.
You can have friends of the opposite sex but there is a fine line that you have to stay back from. I do agree that there are times when being a friend can step over that line and as an adult we all know when that happens...and when it does it's the love for your mate that should make you say......nope...
|
|
dharmaseeker
|
Aug 21 @ 7:22PM
|
|
Interesting responses. It appears that all those in favor of absolute monogamy, as in no opposite sex friends, are possessive. Lots of first person pronouns:
I give him anything he could need from a woman. ...blueyed
The perfect woman. Must be a thousand guys lined up at your door.
I know that sounds sarcastic and it is but honestly, do you really think this is true? I think it would depend upon the man, too. It would require a perfect match.
Rare is the man or woman whose spouse is the perfect match mentally, physically, emotionally, or even intellectually. Some men have more in common with women, some women have more in common with men. Why should gender be a limit in having friends who share a common interest?
I will state this fact: My father (married to my mother for over 60 years) NEVER had a close friendship with another woman. Didn't email anyone, didn't chat online, phone, didn't meet for lunch....neither did any of my friend's dad's. It wasn't necessary and it just wasn't done.
My dad didn't either. And he was the most miserable man I've ever known. My mother was often cruel, begrudging, and though it was never discussed I am positive I'm sure she never enjoyed a day of physical pleasure. In previous generations wives were owned, whether anyone admitted it or not. Women "knew their duty" and many never once would even think the thought "I'm all my man needs and I can give him what he wants." People thought differently then. But today is not then. People think differently and are different.
I believe if there was not such a taboo against cross-gender friendships the divorce rate would be much lower. Not all men want only sex from a woman and I would like to believe there are many men and women who have the willpower to simply know the parameters and stay within them. Does the word "no" mean anything? Or the word, "responsibility?"
have in front of your partner/wife, or you exclude your partner/wife from...YOUR CHEATING If not sexually, emotionally, you chose that one person as they chose you to be best friends and always be open and honest, and not put doubt or questions in their mind or heart. Nor make them feel any less then number one in your life! If you are truly Committed to each other, you don't need the outside interference of others. Having a friend is one thing, having a person of the opposite sex to go do things with tells me you think less of your own spouse.
I completely disagree. How many men or women have friends of the same gender whom they care for deeply? What does a set of genitals have to do with friendship? And why is caring for another person a betrayal of love to another? It's absurd to say one can't love more than one person. If it were not true country music would not exist!
There are many, many married people who are not "best friends." My parents were far from it. In an ideal world spouses should be best friends but in the real world there are a thousand reasons people get married and stay married and being "best friends" is rarely the case. A person who can care deeply only for one other person is a very shallow well.
Would them having a close relationship with another be a challenge to the love you share? Would you think they did not love you? Do you trust so little? Or are you just possessive.
and there in lies the problem. even tho 99% of people will not admit to this, they do feel threatened by their significate other bonding in any way with others of the opposite sex.... they live in each others pockets . they assume this is their safety net.... and it might be, if both fear loosing each other ...
I agree entirely. Marriage is security. It means that "special someone" will "be there" no matter what. It used to be more that way than it is now. It also used to mean different things to men and women. To men it meant they had a way to relieve their sexual desires, someone to keep house and have kids. To women it meant literal security without which she would starve and be homeless.
Marriage should never have been that. If all someone thinks of when they think of marriage is security then they're using their spouse, not loving them unconditionally. Love, true and absolutely lasting love, is all about giving, not taking.
Genitals are only the outward (or inward) manifestation of our biological selves. I don't worry that my heterosexual partner is going to have sex with his same-sex buddy, so that situation wasn't even considered in my argument.
It should have been. And that is the crux of the argument. It's not that a man and woman can't be friends, it's that they can't help having sex as friends. It's a truly low opinion of humanity that says men and women can only come together if the objective is sex.
I generalize because to try to cater to all the differing populations of transgendered, gay, lesbian, etc. would just be too exhausting. I was only speaking of me and my relationship goals.
Nehring actually used an example of how gay couples act as an example of how friendship should work. I cannot ever understand that type of relationship but I do understand the point she made. It probably is that the partner relationship is different in the first place and leads to less possessive attitudes.
I have been treated like a sex object and when that occurs, buh bye.
What about commitment? What about "for better or worse?" I thought you were the one who always fulfills the man. If the man does not fulfill your needs, treat you like you want to be treated, you're just off to find someone else? With this attitude and the option to switch around rather than stick with the one to whom you are committed to makes all the difference.
The longer a couple is married the more they either learn to respect each other or resent each other for their differences. These days the simple answer is divorce. In the old days that answer was not even considered by most. Men just had lovers and women just suffered.
Marriage is a creation of religion. In the west it is and always has been defined by Hebrew law and beliefs. Christianity and Islam merely inherited it and made a few modifications. Marriage was also a cultural creation that insured children were parented. But even parenting must not necessarily be a husband/wife thing. Very often t
|
|
dharmaseeker
|
Aug 21 @ 7:58PM
|
|
|
I've worked along time with only men and we all got along and even talked about private issues in our marriages but...and this is a big ONE. We never made plans to go out for lunch together or meet after work for drinks.
I was married and to me that was stepping over the line.
Why is it over the line? What makes it over the line? And what's the difference between a working lunch or a dinner after work? It's just a meal. What if the job requires travel and friends/co-workers dine together? What if a married man or woman are on a trip and run into an old friend or classmate? Is it "over the line" for them to have a few drinks or some coffee and talk old times? It's all silly provincialism. It's nit-picking.
This kind of thinking is just as goofy as "if you think it you've done it." The religious/moral/cultural thought police are on the job!. If this is true there's hardly a man alive who hasn't committed adultery a thousand times or more. There's no difference in this attitude than it would be to cut someone's hand off in a Muslim country for wishing he had something someone else had. If he thought of taking it he took it. If people could get pregnant from thinking the world would not hold all the babies.
|
|
Visalia1
|
Aug 21 @ 8:41PM
|
|
|
Yes you can have a friend, what I am saying is that Love has nothing to do with having sex, you can certainly and hopefully Love your friends and Love everybody for that matter, if your friendship turns to sex ( for the sake of sex) that is lust.
|
|
BluEyedQT
|
Aug 21 @ 8:56PM
|
|
dharma, I was speaking of the ideal relationship that I strive for.
I WOULD fulfill my Man's needs for female companionship.
I AM heterosexual and am speaking only on that.
I would know if a man is treating me as only a sex object BEFORE I made a lifelong commitment to him.
I'm sorry your father was so miserable. My experience was growing up in a home where affection and love were an everyday thing. Nothing is ever perfect, but there was always love. No need for my Father to look outside the marriage and for female companionship.
The respect I show my man will involve my never giving him any reason to doubt my fidelity. That includes socializing alone with other men outside of the work setting.
You tell me that that isn't what most men would want? By sacrificing such a minor thing as my hanging out with the boys? That is nothing. I hold my man in higher regard than to risk him worrying about such nonsense. Anything else would be selfishness on my part.
Maybe not everyone who socializes with the opposite sex is cheating, but you can bet that when someone does cheat, it started with socializing with the opposite sex.
|
|
dharmaseeker
|
Aug 21 @ 9:30PM
|
|
|
The respect I show my man will involve my never giving him any reason to doubt my fidelity. That includes socializing alone with other men outside of the work setting.
You tell me that that isn't what most men would want? By sacrificing such a minor thing as my hanging out with the boys? That is nothing. I hold my man in higher regard than to risk him worrying about such nonsense. Anything else would be selfishness on my part.
Maybe not everyone who socializes with the opposite sex is cheating, but you can bet that when someone does cheat, it started with socializing with the opposite sex.
OK, I understand what you're saying better.
I don't know what "most men" want. To be honest, there's not one in a hundred men I've known I had much respect for. They're either hen-pecked and submissive or they thrive on macho and have no respect for women at all.
It is selfish of your man to demand such exclusivity in my opinion. If you choose not to have male friends out of respect believing such is due, that's fine. But if someone avoids men for fear of what their husband will think there's something wrong with the picture.
Doubting fidelity can happen without you ever having a male friend. In fact I know people and have relatives who have acted that way. One relative has kept his wife virtually locked up for nearly forty years and would probably kill any man that looked at his wife. He'd probably kill her, too. He's a bad man. Jealousy, the act of not trusting, does not need a logical reason. On the other hand, if a spouse has confidence in the love given there is never any doubt no matter what. Granted, that kind of love is probably rare but it exists. This I know for a fact.
I cannot say how you would act in a relationship but I can say, also, that I've never, ever known any marriage of any friend or relative ever where the partners are so in sync that every need is met by each spouse. Love is many times learning to accept the differences. True love is not jealous if a spouse has friends or relatives who fill in gaps (I am not talking sexual).
I wouldn't say every act of sexual infidelity started with social activity, either. Men who seek only sexual gratification skip the social scene if possible. They go for the "third rate romance, low rent rendezvous." On the other hand, when there are no secrets and spouse, friend, all are aware of the relationship, there are barriers automatically installed that prevent infidelity.
I will always believe insisting on exclusivity from a spouse when it comes to friendship or any other thing is selfishness. There's a difference, of course, in looking for a substitute rather than a friend. If there's a need for a substitute anything then the relationship is not what it should be anyway and maybe should be ended. True love, though, builds a partnership that lasts forever. It does not, however, demand exclusivity but is the definition of freedom and trust.
|
|
RareQuestor
|
Aug 22 @ 1:12AM
|
|
|
RareQuestor: Do you deny the inherent differences in men and women? Differences in communication styles and goals?
Genitals are only the outward (or inward) manifestation of our biological selves. I don't worry that my heterosexual partner is going to have sex with his same-sex buddy, so that situation wasn't even considered in my argument.
I generalize because to try to cater to all the differing populations of transgendered, gay, lesbian, etc. would just be too exhausting. I was only speaking of me and my relationship goals.
I have been treated like a sex object and when that occurs, buh bye.
My point is simply that when you effectively claim that men and women cannot have a platonic friendship, you are essentially reducing to men and women to sexual objects--including yourself. I believe that this ultimately a self-defeating way to live.
Consider if you will that your argument is used to justify many of the repressive customs of the Islamic world. Such societies certainly have lower rates of infidelity, STDs, et cetera, but they are also much less productive. Women in America and other secular nations are free to mingle with men and to contribute to society. Pick any profession and you will observe how it has changed and improved since women began entering the workforce in the 1960's.
In the same way, I think that a loving couple who permit each other to maintain old friendships or even establish new friendships with the opposite gender will ultimately be stronger. Opportunity is always accompanied by risk.
|
|
travelwoman
|
Aug 22 @ 1:38AM
|
|
But is having a friend "cheating?" Is a married person never supposed to have a close relationship to another adult? Careful where you put your eyes....
Careful of the distance between you and him/her...
Careful of your every thought....
Careful of your feelings....
Lust is harder on men, lust is harder on young people....
Friendship is only possible if one cannot even imagine having an intimate, romantic moment with the other person.
Or.... it is possible when not married.
I'm alone. I've been on a tent trip with a friend. Nothing ever happened.
Because it is impossible.... at least to me. (I'm not living in his mind....)
The attraction is below zero.
But.... IF I were married, I would not go on a trip with a friend.
I would go on a trip with my husband.... 
Or else I don't need to be married..
|
|
southernlass
|
Aug 22 @ 3:51AM
|
|
Marriage for me means fidelity; it doesn't mean that we can't have friends of both sexes, but I think that these friends should be our friends and understand and accept that we are a couple and we socialize as a couple.
Were I to desire a host of single/married male friends as a married woman, I would not marry. Were I to desire an open relationship, I would not marry. I believe in trusting my mate one hundred percent, but I don't believe in being foolish and giving my partner or myself enough rope to hang ourselves and the marriage. This doesn't mean that I would mind if he kept up with his female friends of the past, as long as there is respect and honor exhibited for our marital relationship.
For me, I'm in favor of old fashioned monogamy and desire someone who finds me exciting enough just as I am, who has been there and done his thing with "variety." I want us to be best friends and have those we socialize with together.
|
|
ragtopcookie
|
Aug 22 @ 5:31AM
|
|
|
Ive read every post.....and i agree with alot of them.....i think its possible to be friends with the opposit sex while being married.....but i think its much harder not to fall into that trap of ever having an affair with one of them.....i remember years ago...going thru divorce......and at work......being friends with many married women......but as i talked to a few of them.....some wanted to go to bed with me right after.....nothing was ever said or brought up like that when i was married.....but once i was so called free.....a few of the married women made a move towards me.....and i remember not expecting it.....all i wanted was a womens perspected opinion as to why a woman might want to cheat of their husbands........i guess they took it as a reason to do so......and a few of them....i sat down with and asked them why they might think that i wanted to be apart of something that happened in my marriage to cause its end......and believe it or not.....i lost each one as a friend...as if turning them down was a slap in the face.....thats what i never understood.....i needed friendship.....and understanding....not sex from sombodies wife.....and i guess what really blew my mind.....was the fact that they were willing to meet me some place and have sex.....and then...they were going home to their husbands...as if nothing ever happened.....just like my exwife was doing......just for the record.....i work at a large hospital.....lots of people there......and i never had sex with any of them......cookie
|
|
POPO
|
Aug 22 @ 10:55AM
|
|
Popo wrote;
have in front of your partner/wife, or you exclude your partner/wife from...YOUR CHEATING If not sexually, emotionally, you chose that one person as they chose you to be best friends and always be open and honest, and not put doubt or questions in their mind or heart. Nor make them feel any less then number one in your life! If you are truly Committed to each other, you don't need the outside interference of others. Having a friend is one thing, having a person of the opposite sex to go do things with tells me you think less of your own spouse.
dh wrote;
I completely disagree. How many men or women have friends of the same gender whom they care for deeply? What does a set of genitals have to do with friendship? And why is caring for another person a betrayal of love to another? It's absurd to say one can't love more than one person. If it were not true country music would not exist![/quote]
Having friends from the opposite gender, is not a problem, your embelishing my comment, Going on trips or hanging out with just you and your "friend" of the opposite sex, is in where the problem lies, friends tend to give their advice and opinions, based on their friends side of something. Now either you have no friends of the opposite sex, or you just don't get it? Most relationships that amount to anything, start out as friends, and developes over time into lovers.Not all friends become lovers. But friends even with the best of intentions can find them selves in situations, that could compromise the friendship.
Friends also tend to take your side of the situation, and if your taking your marital problems or disagreements to your so called opposite sex friend, that's a problem!
You need to man up! and discuss that with your mate, you know the one you say your in love with, (keep others out of it) not put your business on the streets.. Your Cheating your relationship when you do that! Is a third wheel going to solve your problems? No! Is a third wheel going to understand both sides and help work it out? No! If you need to have a third wheel or friend out side of your marrige/relationship to have fun, You got Issues! 99% of my friends are Females, I don't usually agree with the thinking of most men  Your thinking and reasoning in this post confirms that.
I agree we can love many, but we should only be "In Love" with one! Relationships that include more then two are not healthy, it brings others into something designed to be shared by two. Any man or woman who is going to be honest understands that friends can give bad advice, even with the best of intentions, and a good friend will take your side first. That's a problem Chief! because now you have an allie against your mate..and simply put that ain't right Cheating is not just sexual, Cheating can be emotional as well.
dh wrote;
There are many, many married people who are not "best friends." My parents were far from it. In an ideal world spouses should be best friends but in the real world there are a thousand reasons people get married and stay married and being "best friends" is rarely the case. A person who can care deeply only for one other person is a very shallow well.
Trying to justify your thinking based on your parents or others you know, is quite shallow indeed, It shows weakness  Part of being a man is standing up and making your own judgements, not following the crowd or those before you. That's a cop out! Who care's what others do in their marriage? If your friends are swingers, does that, then mean it's cool? If most of who you know, are not best friends or are married for reasons other then love, maybe you should consider finding friends who actually are in love? There is a saying that goes like this "If you walk with the wise you become wise" "If you walk with the stupid you either become or remain stupid" apply that thinking to any aspect of life.
Having the need to find friendship with the opposite sex outside of a relationship, to me personally, shows weakness and shallow minded ness, meaning one has a difficult time Communicating or Simply needs affirmation from others, or makes bad decisions with whom they supposely are in love with.
continued on next response
|
|
POPO
|
Aug 22 @ 10:56AM
|
|
Continued..
Sorry your arguement is weak and has no merit in my book... I would further contend, that one who needs outside friendships with the opposite sex, has low self confidence issues and lacks understanding of the real reason why two people join as one and forsake all others, anything less is destin for failure or distance. You can try and justify it as you will.. But in my opinion, a real man finds comfort and fun in the arms of his special someone, and needs not an outsider for that. If he does, he's not truly in love with the one he's with. He has a room mate not a life partner! But that's just me... 
Good luck with trying to convince a woman, your female friend is just a friend, and the only reason why you two go on trips together or hang out is purely a friendship.
If my girl found the need to go on trips with her guy friend and go hang out with him, I would help her pack her bags.....All of them..  If I'm not good enough to be your best friend, then run to him who is. 
|
|
dharmaseeker
|
Aug 22 @ 9:30PM
|
|
|
Having friends from the opposite gender, is not a problem, your embelishing my comment, Going on trips or hanging out with just you and your "friend" of the opposite sex, is in where the problem lies, friends tend to give their advice and opinions, based on their friends side of something. Now either you have no friends of the opposite sex, or you just don't get it? Most relationships that amount to anything, start out as friends, and developes over time into lovers.Not all friends become lovers. But friends even with the best of intentions can find them selves in situations, that could compromise the friendship.
Ever heard of willpower? You're suggesting people don't know how to say no. I think people are responsible enough to say no.
Friends also tend to take your side of the situation, and if your taking your marital problems or disagreements to your so called opposite sex friend, that's a problem!
You need to man up! and discuss that with your mate, you know the one you say your in love with, (keep others out of it) not put your business on the streets.. Your Cheating your relationship when you do that! Is a third wheel going to solve your problems? No! Is a third wheel going to understand both sides and help work it out?
This would not be seeing a friend, it would be seeking a substitute. There is a difference.
No! If you need to have a third wheel or friend out side of your marrige/relationship to have fun, You got Issues! 99% of my friends are Females, I don't usually agree with the thinking of most men Your thinking and reasoning in this post confirms that.
Sure I have issues. Men, as a rule, do not impress me. Most of the ones I've known were cowards. Many of them are obsessed with sex. Otherwise they're obsessed with sports. I have met very few men I had any respect for. If that's issues then I got'm.
You're still confusing friendship with romance, friend with substitute. What do you mean by "fun" anyway?
I agree we can love many, but we should only be "In Love" with one! Relationships that include more then two are not healthy, it brings others into something designed to be shared by two. Any man or woman who is going to be honest understands that friends can give bad advice, even with the best of intentions, and a good friend will take your side first. That's a problem Chief! because now you have an allie against your mate..and simply put that ain't right Cheating is not just sexual, Cheating can be emotional as well.
I disagree that there is even such a thing as "emotional" cheating. You're thinking is very provincial and traditional and I simply disagree. If one can only be "in love" with one, is that love forever or not? If it is what of the hundreds of thousands of divorced people? Which was true, the first, second, third?
Actually I don't know what the answer is for other people. I am "in love" and have been since I was twenty and will always be with the same woman. Nothing and no friend will ever change that. But that does not mean I cannot have good friends nor that my wife can't. Again, it's still reducing humanity to sex if one cannot have a friend and disregard gender.
Trying to justify your thinking based on your parents or others you know, is quite shallow indeed, It shows weakness Part of being a man is standing up and making your own judgements, not following the crowd or those before you. That's a cop out! Who care's what others do in their marriage? If your friends are swingers, does that, then mean it's cool? If most of who you know, are not best friends or are married for reasons other then love, maybe you should consider finding friends who actually are in love? There is a saying that goes like this "If you walk with the wise you become wise" "If you walk with the stupid you either become or remain stupid" apply that thinking to any aspect of life.
What does "man up" mean? Just because a person has a particular set of genitals does not mean he has courage or judgment. You take my quote out of context. I was not basing my life/marriage on my parents or anyone else's for that matter, not that I need to justify our relationship. My wife and I are best friends and we are in love. I don't walk with anyone.
I have not actually ever known any couple with the relationship we have. I've certainly never known a couple anywhere who met each other's every need. That is an impossible expectation entirely. One spouse might entirely please the other but I do not believe it is possible without that spouse entirely sacrificing themselves. If spouses are not themselves and do not allow each other to be whom they are and accept each other as they are there's problems with the relationship.
Having the need to find friendship with the opposite sex outside of a relationship, to me personally, shows weakness and shallow minded ness, meaning one has a difficult time Communicating or Simply needs affirmation from others, or makes bad decisions with whom they supposely are in love with.
This is just ridiculous and unnecessarily insulting. Do you mean by "difficult time communicating" having a difficult time blending in with the crowd, going along to get along, learning and acting like one enjoys things one doesn't just to make "guy" friends? It's not a question of need, anyway. Need implies seeking someone to fix something empty in self. True friendships are not based on what someone needs but what someone has to offer to the friend.
Sorry your arguement is weak and has no merit in my book... I would further contend, that one who needs outside friendships with the opposite sex, has low self confidence issues and lacks understanding of the real reason why two people join as one and forsake all others, anything less is destin for failure or distance.
Another assumption and insult. I've been married for over thirty years to my best friend. I have an idea what it takes and what is required.
You can try and justify it as you will.. But in my opinion, a real man finds comfort and fun in the arms of his special someone, and needs not an outsider for that. If he does, he's not truly in love with the one he's with.
You're still talking about romance. You're still assuming a man and woman cannot be "just friends." It's a very low opinion of humanity. You might b
|
|
POPO
|
Aug 23 @ 11:30AM
|
|
Popo wrote;
Having friends from the opposite gender, is not a problem, your embelishing my comment, Going on trips or hanging out with just you and your "friend" of the opposite sex, is in where the problem lies, dh wrote;
Ever heard of willpower? You're suggesting people don't know how to say no. I think people are responsible enough to say no. Willpower? I never sugested willpower, you did! Willpower has absolutely nothing to do with this, Common sense and respect for your partner does. If two people are happly married why would they need or desire a third wheel?
Popo wrote;
Friends also tend to take your side of the situation, and if your taking your marital problems or disagreements to your so called opposite sex friend, that's a problem!
You need to man up! and discuss that with your mate, you know the one you say your in love with, (keep others out of it) not put your business on the streets.. Your Cheating your relationship when you do that!
dh wrote;
This would not be seeing a friend, it would be seeking a substitute. There is a difference. Countless friends even with the best of intentions have become substitutes.Divorce cases are filled with so called friends who became adultry partners, some even became the new spouse after the divorces.
Popo wrote;
No! If you need to have a third wheel or friend out side of your marrige/relationship to have fun, You got Issues! 99% of my friends are Females, I don't usually agree with the thinking of most men Your thinking and reasoning in this post confirms that. dh wrote;
You're still confusing friendship with romance, friend with substitute. What do you mean by "fun" anyway?
I'm confusing nothing...  I understand the difference of friendship and romance, my point is this...often times friendship turns to romance, and in there lies the possibility of a problem.
Popo wrote;
I agree we can love many, but we should only be "In Love" with one! Relationships that include more then two are not healthy, it brings others into something designed to be shared by two. Any man or woman who is going to be honest understands that friends can give bad advice, even with the best of intentions, and a good friend will take your side first. That's a problem Chief! because now you have an allie against your mate..and simply put that ain't right Cheating is not just sexual, Cheating can be emotional as well. dh wrote;
I disagree that there is even such a thing as "emotional" cheating. You're thinking is very provincial and traditional and I simply disagree. If one can only be "in love" with one, is that love forever or not? If it is what of the hundreds of thousands of divorced people? Which was true, the first, second, third? Interesting... Cheating the relationship comes in all forms, I see why you defend such actions, It seems to me you think, if your not physically in bed with someone, then it's not cheating in your mind. That opens the door to porn, web cams and online or in person playing with another outside the marriage, as long as no physical contact is made
dh wrote;
But that does not mean I cannot have good friends nor that my wife can't. Again, it's still reducing humanity to sex if one cannot have a friend and disregard gender.
your blog said going to visit Susie from school and further suggest it's just fine to hang out with either single people or anothers wife/husband. Why would married people consider this? having friends is one thing, having friends you go alone to spend time with from the opposite sex, disrepects the wedding vows and can leave doubt with the partner in the relationship.
dh wrote;
What does "man up" mean? Just because a person has a particular set of genitals does not mean he has courage or judgment. You take my quote out of context. I was not basing my life/marriage on my parents or anyone else's for that matter, not that I need to justify our relationship. My wife and I are best friends and we are in love. I don't walk with anyone. Then why the need to justify walking with friends of the opposite sex?
Man-Up simply means Man-up I'm not talking about genitals (you are making that argument) I'm simply stating if your going to be with one, then be with one, and not invite others into your relationship!
Continued..
|
|
POPO
|
Aug 23 @ 11:31AM
|
|
Thus my response..
Having the need to find friendship with the opposite sex outside of a relationship, to me personally, shows weakness and shallow minded ness, meaning one has a difficult time Communicating or Simply needs affirmation from others, or makes bad decisions with whom they supposely are in love with. dh wrote;
This is just ridiculous and unnecessarily insulting. Do you mean by "difficult time communicating" having a difficult time blending in with the crowd, going along to get along, learning and acting like one enjoys things one doesn't just to make "guy" friends? It's not a question of need, anyway. Need implies seeking someone to fix something empty in self. True friendships are not based on what someone needs but what someone has to offer to the friend. Thus my response...
Sorry your arguement is weak and has no merit in my book... I would further contend, that one who needs outside friendships with the opposite sex, has low self confidence issues and lacks understanding of the real reason why two people join as one and forsake all others, anything less is destin for failure or distance.
dh wrote;
Another assumption and insult. I've been married for over thirty years to my best friend. I have an idea what it takes and what is required. Popo wrote;
You can try and justify it as you will.. But in my opinion, a real man finds comfort and fun in the arms of his special someone, and needs not an outsider for that. If he does, he's not truly in love with the one he's with.
Inconclusion..We simply disagree..  I wouldn't be in a relationship with someone who feels the need to go outside of the marriage, for friendship with those from the opposite sex, I would not do that to them, especially as you suggest taking off and spending time with Susie your high school friend 
I find that disrespectful to the one left behind wondering or hoping nothing happens. It can pose doubt that doesn't belong there.That in and of it's self is an insult. It seems to me that's Tap Dancing on a land mine.. It further sounds like your trying to justify to someone or others that what you do is normal? It's not It's abnormal 
|
|
dizzydoll
|
Aug 23 @ 12:59PM
|
|
|
travelwomen: But.... IF I were married, I would not go on a trip with a friend.
I would go on a trip with my husband....
well i never got married but i went on a long trip with a married female friend and her husband didnt mind... and believe me, we could have been naughty. i dont believe in sexually open relationships but i do believe in keeping our friends of the opposite sex from the past and even gaining more in the future.
i still keep in touch with my ex boyfriend, his wife doesnt know otherwise she would be upset. he drank too much when we were an item, now he is a reborn... both conditions i wouldnt have settled for.... but we are friends. we laugh, we share and we love each other as brother/sister.
i am friends with a married man on this site.... his wife doesnt even know he is on this site. we inspire each other, we laugh, we praise and we have fun with each other... nothing more .
i respect all these people i refer to and they respect me.... and if i were to get married (altho i see no point in it) or involved none of this would change  and my significant other wouldnt be a part of these relationships.... just like i wouldnt expect him to give up or include me in his long standing platonic relationships.
and with all this freedom i have provided throughout my life.... not one man who i was involved with has strayed... and nor have i . you might say, how do i know this? lets just say, women know....  if not, it would have leaked out which never happened
|
|
dizzydoll
|
Aug 23 @ 1:07PM
|
|
|
oh, one more thing.... my most recent ex's kids still visit me, much to his annoyance. when we broke up i told them i was not breaking up with them. but he says i am stealing his (teenage) boys, i ask you? anyway, neither the boys nor i pay any attention to him . in your opinions is my keeping in touch with these boys also an OOB (out-of-bounds) ? even tho i know them since they were 5 and 7 years old.
|
|
dizzydoll
|
Aug 23 @ 2:09PM
|
|
after seeing all these comments restricting married people.... its clear to me why we have so many divorces now  boredom must have a lot to do with it.
also my ex traveled periodically overseas, he traveled on business before i met him and i knew he had friends of both sexes abroad but we never discussed them. We had excellent communication and he knew where his heart was then and where it is today.... he is happily married today  but we are still friends
|
|
|