I see a woman in a room. She has her back to me but she knows I am there. She is wearing a white shirt and a pair of black panties.
I watch as she slowly drags them down her legs, steps out of them and turns around to greet me with her fulsome tits and a shaven pussy. She nervously moves her fingers towards her cunt, looking at me for encouragement, still wearing the white shirt as a clear contrast to her tanned body.
I nod towards her cunt and she guides her finger over her clitoris, biting her lower lip in nervous anticipation.
She places herself on the low chair, straddles her legs apart to give me a full sight of her pink and excited pussy wings.
“Now what?” she asks timidly.
“Reach inside”, I say. “Pull you labia back and let me see”.
She expertly divides her skin and reaches inside herself with one singular digit. She moves it softly in and out, moistening her finger with every stroke.
“Take another finger inside” I say. “Stroke your insides and see if you can feel that erect bulge.”
“Can you feel it?” “How does it feel?”
“It feels good, I think” she responds. “Oh yes, I can feel it thickening. Wow!”
I move towards her and kneel in front of her so that I can get a closer look at what she is doing.
I tell her to move further down the chair so that her buttocks are edged towards the rim.
“Widen your legs further and push the fingers in deeper. Don’t rush it. Take your time. Feel the energy of the growing climax. Now reach in deep as though you are trying to wank your clitoris from the other side. Press hard. Feel the orgasm rising”.
She looks directly at me and rubs herself hard, not too hard, being careful to ensure that she is doing as I had directed, reaching inside herself to find the sensation spots.
“Now close your eyes. Imagine that your lover is here. Imagine that it is his fingers that are deep inside you. Imagine how much he is enjoying your cunt getting this juicy. Imagine how much he would like to be sitting where I am, waiting for your climax. How badly do you want his cock right now? How much do you wish that his juicy cock was dribbling in front of you? How much would you like him to be fucking you right now, withdrawing just in time to shoot his stuff all over your tits?
Think about him fucking you. Go on, rub harder. Use your imagination. Fuck yourself just like he does. See him watching you do it. Go for it girl. Push harder”.
Whilst she was going for it, I had already inserted my own fingers into my own cunt, such was the excitement at my encouragement for her.
“I’m cumming” she said and as she did, she dribbled a small but clearly visible ejaculation from her pussy. Speckles of cunt juice trickled onto white towel on the floor and she looked down in fascinated glee.
“Oh fuck, I’ve peed!” she screamed.
“No you haven’t!” I said. “Remember we completely emptied your bladder beforehand. Look at the towel. It’s not even the colour of urine. Get down and smell it. I assure you, it is not piss.”
Unassured, she reached down to inspect her juices. An inquisitive glance towards me, and she smiled.
“It looks pretty clear!” she said.
“It’s a good start” I said “but I think you could shower him. You have that capability and that is why you are here isn’t it?”
“Can you show me how?” she asked.
In a way, I was hoping that she would ask. I was already aroused by seeing her excitement, knowing that it was my instruction, my words and her memories that had brought her to climax.
“I can but you are going to have to talk to me. Just as I spoke to you – the cruder the better!”
“I’m not sure I can” she responded.
“Try!” I said as I pulled my skirt up and sat where she had been a few minutes before.
I slid my backside down, whipped my legs over the side of the chair and whacked a couple of fingers up my cunt. Slowly I stroked myself, withdrawing my fingers to rub my clit, then returning them to my juiced up body.
“Talk!” I demanded.
“What shall I say?” she asked.
“Tell me how you are feeling, watching me wank. Tell me what you think of my cunt. Tell me what you see and how sexy you feel.”
“I can’t believe how sexy I feel” she said. “I’m so fucking turned on by this. I’ve never seen a woman wank herself. Do you like me watching? Do you want cock right now? Wow, you’re so swollen and so wet….. fucking hell!”
I withdrew my fingers and pressed hard on my clit just at the point of a huge ejaculation that projected straight out of my cunt, spraying all over the towel beneath and speckling her knees with a small spotlet of my sensational cum.
The first ejaculation was rapidly followed by a stream of cum that soaked the towel.
“Fucking hell!” she repeated. “How the fuck do you do that?”
Once I had gathered myself together, I told her. I knew my body. I knew when it needed to cum and when it needed to emit fluids. The two were separate but when they happened together it was sensational. It was like nothing else in the world.
I told her that I fucked my own mind to climax. I thought of my desired cock, how it thrust inside of me, right up to my G-Spot, which really did exist. I told her how I remembered the depth of feeling and the warmth of his cock as he fucked me hard and fucked me slowly. In remembering I was aroused.
I admitted to her that I was aroused by her sexuality and the sight of her pussy, though I would obviously not fuck a client.
She listened and thought.
“I’d like to try again” she said “but I am not sure I would be able to cum again so quickly”.
“You will. In time”, I said.
She gathered her clothes together, returned her panties to her cunt, popped her skirt back on, removed her shirt to reattach her bra, and having paid her money, she was walking towards the door.
“Can you fit me in the same time next week?” she asked.
“I certainly can”, I responded.
“And can you do the photo thing too?” she asked.
“I think that can be arranged” I said.
“If you want me to be in the photos as well, my business partner will happily be the photographer, as we discussed earlier”.
“What if he gets aroused whilst taking the photos?” she asked.
I explained that was entirely up to her. If she didn’t want to see him wanking, he would take his stiffy to another room and masturbate himself. Alternatively, I would follow him out of the room and do it for him. However, if it would arouse her further to see how excited he was by taking these photos, he would wank away as he was filming, if that is what she wanted.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
It’s a dream. Possibly a rather far fetched one but I rather like the idea of being a proactive sexual counsellor, offering women the chance to develop their sexuality in a safe environment where they can learn about their bodies and their capacity to cum.
The dream reaches into another realm when I consider the utter joy of sharing this counselling service with my lover, where I can offer his services to arouse beautiful frigid women (we’d only have women that we found attractive) – all part of the service, and not just from behind a camera lens. My cunt is pretty aroused at the thought.
It’s a good dream. It’s a horny and exciting one but there is a little truth in it all in so far that I am genuinely concerned that more women should know the joys of ejaculation.
Nearly a year ago, I wrote a piece on this blog about soaking balls.
http://zenpuss.blogspot.com/2009/06/soaking-balls.html
Please re-read and see how far we have moved forward in a year.
This phenomenon is not unique. I am not the only person who squirts and I do not do it only once a fuck. I somehow have the capacity to juice up pretty quickly these days, such is my state of arousal.
I’ve finally come to accept that it is perfectly normal for me to ejaculate twice or three times in the middle of sex. I am confident that what I emit is not piss and I am telling you that the vaginal orgasm does exist.
It happens when he inserts his fingers and touches the button immaculately. It happens when he sensitises my pussy with his fingers and follows in with his big cock to make me gush.
I gush when I am lying on my back and I can feel the juices trickling under my arse.
I gush when I ride his cock and splash copious juices all over his balls.
We’ve moved around in the bed after sex and found pools of cum in places that are far beyond where our bodies have been.
The other day, I desperately tried to move the duvet in time but to no avail. I left a sopping wet patch on it as the gush rushed out of me at a rate of knots.
This is not an unusual phenomenon and it is about time that women spoke out.
Here’s a slight confession. When I first watched porn, I found it really difficult to believe that the women I was watching were genuinely emitting the amount of fluid that they were. I thought that they had beautifully toned pelvic muscles that could retain a bucket full of water that had been inserted before the cameras started rolling, so that when the film started they could just shove it out. Or that they had some sort of vessel inserted inside that when pressed sprayed in this glorious manner.
Of course, some sites do just that but the reason I thought this was happening was because I couldn’t believe that anyone could emit that amount of fluid in one session? I didn’t believe that it could project that much but that was before I fucked like that. That was before I had sprayed bodies, jeans, floors, carpets and towels with my hurried cums.
I’m not unique. Everyone probably has the capacity and capability to cum like me.
What I would really love to do, was realise this for women throughout the land.
In order to do this, we still have to clarify once and for all that fuck juice ejaculation is not urine. Even if it were, it wouldn’t bother me but I know it would others.
In the meantime, wouldn’t it be great if we could establish some sort of safe counselling services for woman who just want to know their bodies better and are happy for a little glorious sexual recreation whilst they do so?
Sunday 28 March 2010
Saturday 27 March 2010
March Musings
Matt on Marriage
Actor Matt Damon has come out and said something about marriage.
“It’s a ridiculous idea” says the man. “Because it’s crazy – to spend your life with one person and not be totally driven crazy.”
Matt Damon is happily married, has no apparent intention of leaving his wife and two daughters and explains unreservedly that his wife is the best thing that has ever happened to him. And yet he still declares that marriage is unworkable, ridiculous and conceptually insane.
Well done, Mr. Damon. You have started something but who is going to take this statement to a logical debate? Who is there out there who is going to question it further, concluding one way or the other about its purpose, its stability as the mainstay of family life and sexual fulfilment?
I’m not sure that I am that person but I would like to have a stab at setting a debate of sorts.
I think that Matt Damon is saying something rather important.
Those who choose to get married do so with the notion that they have found a life partner that they would like to spend the rest of their lives with. They have come to the conclusion that they do not desire or want another partner and that this is how they want to live their life.
Or do they?
Is this the absolute reason why people choose to get married?
Are there not other factors in play?
Do people get married because it is the thing to do, the expectation rather than what they actually want?
A friend of mine recently told me that he got married because everyone else was doing so. It wasn’t that he felt he was going to miss the boat. He just felt that he was expected to find a wife, marry her, have children and live happily ever after.
At the time when his friends were getting married, he had been in a relationship for a couple of years. It appeared that the next stage of endorsement for the relationship was the matrimony. He married his girlfriend, not because she was “the one” but because she happened to be around at the time.
Another friend of mine also recently told me that he got married because he wanted to have children. To do so out of wedlock would not have been right. He did the expected, got married with full pomp and ceremony and duly fathered two delightful children.
Another friend got married because he believed in the dream. He loved his partner. He thought that his life was secure and stable and that he would never want to feel sexual or emotional intimacy with another woman. He loved his woman completely and he wanted to tell the world that this was his chosen woman.
None of these friends are still with their wives.
Friend number one tried really hard to maintain the relationship but the truth of the matter was that he never really had that intimacy and affinity with his wife, even when they were dating.
Friend number two had thought that he was doing the right thing. He thought that he could maintain a relationship for life but there was something lacking that made him look elsewhere, despite the fact that he loved his wife and desperately wanted to be there for his children.
Friend number three did love his wife too. He had married her for all the supposed correct reasons, i.e. he loved her, wanted to share all of his passions with her.
He changed.
He didn’t turn into a monster. He didn’t lose all of his moral grounding. He didn’t change in a negative way. He simply changed.
The man who married at the age of 28 was not the same man who divorced at the age of 42. They were incomparable people yet were the same person. The 28 year old had grown. That is all, and because of this, he had outgrown what he deemed to be an outmoded existence that did not fulfil him.
Each one of my friends has, in their own way, understood the craziness of the concept of marriage.
It hasn’t worked for any of them, and just like Matt Damon suggested would be the case for him, none of them has rushed back into another marriage. None of them wants to get remarried. In fact, none of these three even live with their current partners of fuck buddies.
It is absolutely right to consider the absurdity of expecting that a couple of people who constantly live together do not have their moments of distress with one another. There has to be times when life is not as positive as it once was but that is not to say that one disagreement or discretion means that the relationship is doomed to termination.
The same could equally be said of couples who do not live together. A relationship cannot be on a permanent high. There has to be times when the connection is slightly tempered by other factors, however hard that is to accept.
Ultimately, the trick is being able to talk about it and not pretend that there is nothing wrong.
If only people would be honest with one another about the state of their relationship and how they feel, it would make life so much easier to manage. It may be painful to acknowledge that your partner is not attracted to you, either on a temporary or permanent basis, but it is far easier to intelligently manage this than be confronted by an intuition that is twisting and turning a range of notions and ideas in your head.
This is precisely what is happening to a friend currently.
Maybe Matt Damon is only half right. Let’s replace the word ‘marriage’ with ‘relationship’. Does the actual ceremony take away from the fact that as human beings we have a difficulty in sustaining long-term partnerships?
If we know that marriages or relationships are ridiculous and that spending a life time with one partner is bound to bring about times when you want to throttle someone, why on earth do we continue to place this type of relationship on a pedestal, providing generation after generation with an unrealistic, unattainable expectation? It is not fair!
Having said all of the above, it doesn’t mean to say that it is unworkable.
For the three friends that I previously mentioned, I have three more where their marriages work impeccably. For the three friends I have mentioned previously, I have three more that have marriages that rock to and fro yet exist in one form or another without provocation or angst.
For the three friends who have walked away from their marriages determined to remain single, I have three more who have found intimacy and love with others. Just because one marriage or even two or three relationships do not work, it doesn’t mean to say that a monogamous relationship will never work. Nothing is or should be set in stone.
Matt Damon recognises the ludicrous expectations of marriage yet is prepared to have a go at it because, for him and for his wife, that is what they have chosen to expect.
But why do we never consider the alternatives?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Bigamy
Here’s another question.
Why is it illegal to be a bigamist yet you cannot get sent to prison for having an extra-marital relationship?
I was thinking about this the other day whilst driving through suburbia, full of semi-detached houses with the nuclear family of mum, dad and 2.4 children residing in these havens of potential unreality.
As I drove down a road with hundreds of houses lining either side of the street, I wondered how many of the residents were truly monogamous. When I am talking about monogamy here, I am thinking about those who have not had a sexual kiss, fuck or fondle with another person other than their partner. Obviously, I assume that everyone has had a mind fuck about having sex with someone else, even it is the cliché of a grope with George Clooney or a pondering of what really lies beneath Kylie Minogue’s gold lame hot pants.
Why is bigamy illegal? Is it because it is morally corrupt? In which case, as I said, why are those of us who fuck around not being sent to either a prison or hospital to pay repentance for our sins or to be cured of our over-indulgent libido?
Is bigamy illegal because there are some monetary implications in it? I don’t think so.
Is bigamy illegal to prevent dishonesty and protect innocent human beings from being abused in some way? Possibly but that still doesn’t explain why additional sexual relationships are acceptable, at least in the eyes of the law.
Quite frankly, going back to Mr. Damon, I cannot understand why anyone would want to get married twice. I certainly wouldn’t want to get married again, and I cannot see why someone would want to marry two people other than to confirm some sort of parity in affection between the two people in his or her life. And isn’t that bizarre in itself? As I have said before, I adore being told that I am wanted and needed. I adore the genuine affirmation that comes when a connection between two people is so right but why on earth would I need another marriage to do that?
I want to hear words and I want the affection and intimacy demonstrated in real things, not a piece of paper that allegedly ties one person to another.
But then, I’m not sure that anyone should be tied to another human being at all – unless you fancy a little bondage of course.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Breaking Hearts
A friend spoke to me about her lover. She was explaining that he had told her he was frightened of “breaking her heart”. He explained how he did not want her to leave her husband, not because he didn’t love her but because he couldn’t really cope with that sort of pressure.
He wanted to maintain his freedom at all costs but he also had commitments to his children and to the mothers of his children that meant he just couldn’t give the type of commitment that he thought my friend required.
He said that he thought her desires and needs would ultimately lead to him breaking her heart as he would undoubtedly reject her at some point.
On one hand, one has to admire his honesty. On another hand – what an egotistical prat! Who on earth does he think he is to presume that he has the power to make or break this woman? Does she not have a mind of her own?
Some months ago, I was given a timely reminder that I was responsible for my happiness; no-one else. It was spelled out to me quite clearly. It was something that I should consider absolutely.
It was the right thing to say.
My happiness is of my own making. Naturally, some people contribute to that but ultimately it is me that chooses to either be happy or not.
So what does that all say about broken hearts? Bloody stupid phrase, by the way!
Realistically, the only person who can break your heart is – you!
Others might put a dirty great big spanner in the works but it is up to you how you manage this and how you move forward. Just as with any mental illness, being in love is something that has to be dealt with by the person foolish enough to fall into such unrealistic states.
But of course, it is not quite that straight forward. If not responsibility, there has to be some consideration from others who contribute to your state of wellbeing. A society totally focused on the passion and requirements of the individual without any consideration for others is not a positive place to be. Doing good for and by others has to be a societal pleasure!
All of this made me think about a film I once saw starring John Malkovich and Michelle Pfeiffer.
If you have never seen this movie, then do so. It is an intriguing look at the dimensions of relationships, power, greed, love, expectations, societal norms and so forth.
Here is the summary from www.imdb.com (another must for those who are interested in films).
Set in France around 1760, the Marquise de Merteuil needs a favour from her ex-lover, Vicomte de Valmont. One of the Marquise de Merteuil's ex-lovers, Gercourt, is betrothed to a young, virtuous, woman called Cecile de Volanges. The Marquise would like Valmont to seduce Cecile before her wedding day, thus humiliating Gercourt. Meanwhile, Valmont has a conquest of his own in mind: Madame de Tourvel, a beautiful, married, and God fearing woman. The Marquise doesn't think that Valmont can seduce Mme de Tourvel. She tells him that if he can provide written proof of a sexual encounter with Mme de Tourvel, she will offer him a reward: one last night with her. Valmont, however, will find himself falling in love with Mme de Tourvel, and facing the deadly jealousy of the Marquise de Merteuil. All along, Cecile de Volanges is used as a pawn in this game of sexual conquest and scorned love.
Malkovich (Vicomte de Valmont) goes about getting the beautiful Pfeiffer to fall in love with him.
Spoiler alert for those who do not wish to know what happens.
She does fall in love with him, to the point of utter despair when she cannot see him and when he tells her that he no longer loves her, or possibly that he never loved her in the first place.
And yet, on returning to the Marquis he says, “I ended by falling on my knees and pledging her eternal love. And do you know that, at that time, and for several hours afterwards, I actually meant it.” (Ho, ho – how true! Or no ho-ho’s at all. How utterly sad that he couldn’t admit to his love lasting a darn sight longer than several hours).
Madame de Touvel’s heart does get broken, irretrievably.
When I first watched this film, I thought this a little far fetched. How could anyone suffer physical ailment because of a lack of love? Could someone really die of a broken heart? Could this woman really be that pathetic?
I have since softened my approach to her and her demise.
I still think it is impossible to believe in other people breaking your heart. As I stated previously, is it not within each of us to be responsible for our own happiness? Of course this is the case. A broken hearted person manages the heart from within; using the body, the mind and the soul to either further damage or recuperate. The perpetrator has not done the damage. They have merely instigated it.
But poor Michelle, I couldn’t get out of my mind. For years and years, this character has sat uncomfortably on my mind.
I think we’re back to libidos folks – just as I was mentioning in the story that I wrote recently.
I am now suggesting that Madame de Touvel did not die of a broken heart because the Vicomte rejected her. She died of a broken heart because she could not manage her desires.
She died of an expectation and a hope.
This man had come along, awakening her from a sexual hibernation, had declared his passionate and in my opinion, his absolute and genuine affection for her, and had then deliberately buggered off, warping and manipulating her mind, and knowing that he was doing so.
Through him, she had found a desire for sex that was almost painful when it was unattainable. Through him, she had found a taste for life that she did not know existed.
Now one could argue, quite rightly, that she shouldn’t have been so damned dependant, and that she should have used this newfound desire for life more effectively.
But one can understand and even empathise with her position on this.
It wasn’t very pleasant of the Vicomte to declare his absolute passion for the woman one week and then either feign or genuinely offer her indifference the next. Maybe he had a sudden fit of cold feet, feeling that what he had said was too honest for him to deal with let alone her, but that does not excuse what he did next.
What this man had given her, and then possibly unbeknowingly robbed her of was a path in life that she did not know had existed for her. She had been married to a much older man with little interest in her or sex. She had been utterly devoted to and indoctrinated by the beliefs of the church. Her insular and insulated life offered her no escape for thoughts or feelings and all of a sudden, she saw a new route.
Sadly for her, she chose to consider this route only with him in mind. When that was clearly not within his expectation or desire or ability, then she could not cope.
Her death was brought on by an absolute helplessness of ever being able to travel along the route that she knew was the right one for her. Due to a misguided and hopeless belief in love, she and indeed the viewers, assumed that her heart was broken by a man who spurred her love.
It really wasn’t and isn’t that simple.
Yet again, we have an example of the gross expectations we humans place upon one another without the ability to communicate effectively in either maintaining relationships or running away from them.
As for my friend, she’s not going to die of a broken heart. This man is not her soul-mate, whatever she may currently think, and because of that he will not break her heart. And even if he was her soul-mate, then she is shrewd enough to fall down, pick herself up and move forward.
Basically, she just likes the good fuck that he gives her.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
And talking of good fucks……
I realised that with all my pontificating about monogamy and relationships recently, I have seriously neglected talking about orgasms and fucks in recent postings.
I will make amends shortly. I’m not sure how I am going to make amends but I will think on and hopefully post something soon.
I think perhaps though, it will be based around an arousal that takes place from time to time which elevates me to a state of total ecstasy. I want to shortly explain what happens to me when I incontrollably spurt my fuck juices all over the place and for many prolonged seconds. I want to explain how fucking good it feels to have orgasm after orgasm, still emitting such quantities of liquid that physiologically seem impossible.
Men and women out there, I will explain what sadly still seems to be ignored or acknowledged; that women can fill buckets if they are fucking in the right way.
Perhaps that is what actually killed Madame de Tourvel. She’d had a sopping wet orgasm for the first time in her life, and nobody had bothered to explain how it happened, how it could happen again and if all else failed, how she could DIY.
Actor Matt Damon has come out and said something about marriage.
“It’s a ridiculous idea” says the man. “Because it’s crazy – to spend your life with one person and not be totally driven crazy.”
Matt Damon is happily married, has no apparent intention of leaving his wife and two daughters and explains unreservedly that his wife is the best thing that has ever happened to him. And yet he still declares that marriage is unworkable, ridiculous and conceptually insane.
Well done, Mr. Damon. You have started something but who is going to take this statement to a logical debate? Who is there out there who is going to question it further, concluding one way or the other about its purpose, its stability as the mainstay of family life and sexual fulfilment?
I’m not sure that I am that person but I would like to have a stab at setting a debate of sorts.
I think that Matt Damon is saying something rather important.
Those who choose to get married do so with the notion that they have found a life partner that they would like to spend the rest of their lives with. They have come to the conclusion that they do not desire or want another partner and that this is how they want to live their life.
Or do they?
Is this the absolute reason why people choose to get married?
Are there not other factors in play?
Do people get married because it is the thing to do, the expectation rather than what they actually want?
A friend of mine recently told me that he got married because everyone else was doing so. It wasn’t that he felt he was going to miss the boat. He just felt that he was expected to find a wife, marry her, have children and live happily ever after.
At the time when his friends were getting married, he had been in a relationship for a couple of years. It appeared that the next stage of endorsement for the relationship was the matrimony. He married his girlfriend, not because she was “the one” but because she happened to be around at the time.
Another friend of mine also recently told me that he got married because he wanted to have children. To do so out of wedlock would not have been right. He did the expected, got married with full pomp and ceremony and duly fathered two delightful children.
Another friend got married because he believed in the dream. He loved his partner. He thought that his life was secure and stable and that he would never want to feel sexual or emotional intimacy with another woman. He loved his woman completely and he wanted to tell the world that this was his chosen woman.
None of these friends are still with their wives.
Friend number one tried really hard to maintain the relationship but the truth of the matter was that he never really had that intimacy and affinity with his wife, even when they were dating.
Friend number two had thought that he was doing the right thing. He thought that he could maintain a relationship for life but there was something lacking that made him look elsewhere, despite the fact that he loved his wife and desperately wanted to be there for his children.
Friend number three did love his wife too. He had married her for all the supposed correct reasons, i.e. he loved her, wanted to share all of his passions with her.
He changed.
He didn’t turn into a monster. He didn’t lose all of his moral grounding. He didn’t change in a negative way. He simply changed.
The man who married at the age of 28 was not the same man who divorced at the age of 42. They were incomparable people yet were the same person. The 28 year old had grown. That is all, and because of this, he had outgrown what he deemed to be an outmoded existence that did not fulfil him.
Each one of my friends has, in their own way, understood the craziness of the concept of marriage.
It hasn’t worked for any of them, and just like Matt Damon suggested would be the case for him, none of them has rushed back into another marriage. None of them wants to get remarried. In fact, none of these three even live with their current partners of fuck buddies.
It is absolutely right to consider the absurdity of expecting that a couple of people who constantly live together do not have their moments of distress with one another. There has to be times when life is not as positive as it once was but that is not to say that one disagreement or discretion means that the relationship is doomed to termination.
The same could equally be said of couples who do not live together. A relationship cannot be on a permanent high. There has to be times when the connection is slightly tempered by other factors, however hard that is to accept.
Ultimately, the trick is being able to talk about it and not pretend that there is nothing wrong.
If only people would be honest with one another about the state of their relationship and how they feel, it would make life so much easier to manage. It may be painful to acknowledge that your partner is not attracted to you, either on a temporary or permanent basis, but it is far easier to intelligently manage this than be confronted by an intuition that is twisting and turning a range of notions and ideas in your head.
This is precisely what is happening to a friend currently.
Maybe Matt Damon is only half right. Let’s replace the word ‘marriage’ with ‘relationship’. Does the actual ceremony take away from the fact that as human beings we have a difficulty in sustaining long-term partnerships?
If we know that marriages or relationships are ridiculous and that spending a life time with one partner is bound to bring about times when you want to throttle someone, why on earth do we continue to place this type of relationship on a pedestal, providing generation after generation with an unrealistic, unattainable expectation? It is not fair!
Having said all of the above, it doesn’t mean to say that it is unworkable.
For the three friends that I previously mentioned, I have three more where their marriages work impeccably. For the three friends I have mentioned previously, I have three more that have marriages that rock to and fro yet exist in one form or another without provocation or angst.
For the three friends who have walked away from their marriages determined to remain single, I have three more who have found intimacy and love with others. Just because one marriage or even two or three relationships do not work, it doesn’t mean to say that a monogamous relationship will never work. Nothing is or should be set in stone.
Matt Damon recognises the ludicrous expectations of marriage yet is prepared to have a go at it because, for him and for his wife, that is what they have chosen to expect.
But why do we never consider the alternatives?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Bigamy
Here’s another question.
Why is it illegal to be a bigamist yet you cannot get sent to prison for having an extra-marital relationship?
I was thinking about this the other day whilst driving through suburbia, full of semi-detached houses with the nuclear family of mum, dad and 2.4 children residing in these havens of potential unreality.
As I drove down a road with hundreds of houses lining either side of the street, I wondered how many of the residents were truly monogamous. When I am talking about monogamy here, I am thinking about those who have not had a sexual kiss, fuck or fondle with another person other than their partner. Obviously, I assume that everyone has had a mind fuck about having sex with someone else, even it is the cliché of a grope with George Clooney or a pondering of what really lies beneath Kylie Minogue’s gold lame hot pants.
Why is bigamy illegal? Is it because it is morally corrupt? In which case, as I said, why are those of us who fuck around not being sent to either a prison or hospital to pay repentance for our sins or to be cured of our over-indulgent libido?
Is bigamy illegal because there are some monetary implications in it? I don’t think so.
Is bigamy illegal to prevent dishonesty and protect innocent human beings from being abused in some way? Possibly but that still doesn’t explain why additional sexual relationships are acceptable, at least in the eyes of the law.
Quite frankly, going back to Mr. Damon, I cannot understand why anyone would want to get married twice. I certainly wouldn’t want to get married again, and I cannot see why someone would want to marry two people other than to confirm some sort of parity in affection between the two people in his or her life. And isn’t that bizarre in itself? As I have said before, I adore being told that I am wanted and needed. I adore the genuine affirmation that comes when a connection between two people is so right but why on earth would I need another marriage to do that?
I want to hear words and I want the affection and intimacy demonstrated in real things, not a piece of paper that allegedly ties one person to another.
But then, I’m not sure that anyone should be tied to another human being at all – unless you fancy a little bondage of course.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Breaking Hearts
A friend spoke to me about her lover. She was explaining that he had told her he was frightened of “breaking her heart”. He explained how he did not want her to leave her husband, not because he didn’t love her but because he couldn’t really cope with that sort of pressure.
He wanted to maintain his freedom at all costs but he also had commitments to his children and to the mothers of his children that meant he just couldn’t give the type of commitment that he thought my friend required.
He said that he thought her desires and needs would ultimately lead to him breaking her heart as he would undoubtedly reject her at some point.
On one hand, one has to admire his honesty. On another hand – what an egotistical prat! Who on earth does he think he is to presume that he has the power to make or break this woman? Does she not have a mind of her own?
Some months ago, I was given a timely reminder that I was responsible for my happiness; no-one else. It was spelled out to me quite clearly. It was something that I should consider absolutely.
It was the right thing to say.
My happiness is of my own making. Naturally, some people contribute to that but ultimately it is me that chooses to either be happy or not.
So what does that all say about broken hearts? Bloody stupid phrase, by the way!
Realistically, the only person who can break your heart is – you!
Others might put a dirty great big spanner in the works but it is up to you how you manage this and how you move forward. Just as with any mental illness, being in love is something that has to be dealt with by the person foolish enough to fall into such unrealistic states.
But of course, it is not quite that straight forward. If not responsibility, there has to be some consideration from others who contribute to your state of wellbeing. A society totally focused on the passion and requirements of the individual without any consideration for others is not a positive place to be. Doing good for and by others has to be a societal pleasure!
All of this made me think about a film I once saw starring John Malkovich and Michelle Pfeiffer.
If you have never seen this movie, then do so. It is an intriguing look at the dimensions of relationships, power, greed, love, expectations, societal norms and so forth.
Here is the summary from www.imdb.com (another must for those who are interested in films).
Set in France around 1760, the Marquise de Merteuil needs a favour from her ex-lover, Vicomte de Valmont. One of the Marquise de Merteuil's ex-lovers, Gercourt, is betrothed to a young, virtuous, woman called Cecile de Volanges. The Marquise would like Valmont to seduce Cecile before her wedding day, thus humiliating Gercourt. Meanwhile, Valmont has a conquest of his own in mind: Madame de Tourvel, a beautiful, married, and God fearing woman. The Marquise doesn't think that Valmont can seduce Mme de Tourvel. She tells him that if he can provide written proof of a sexual encounter with Mme de Tourvel, she will offer him a reward: one last night with her. Valmont, however, will find himself falling in love with Mme de Tourvel, and facing the deadly jealousy of the Marquise de Merteuil. All along, Cecile de Volanges is used as a pawn in this game of sexual conquest and scorned love.
Malkovich (Vicomte de Valmont) goes about getting the beautiful Pfeiffer to fall in love with him.
Spoiler alert for those who do not wish to know what happens.
She does fall in love with him, to the point of utter despair when she cannot see him and when he tells her that he no longer loves her, or possibly that he never loved her in the first place.
And yet, on returning to the Marquis he says, “I ended by falling on my knees and pledging her eternal love. And do you know that, at that time, and for several hours afterwards, I actually meant it.” (Ho, ho – how true! Or no ho-ho’s at all. How utterly sad that he couldn’t admit to his love lasting a darn sight longer than several hours).
Madame de Touvel’s heart does get broken, irretrievably.
When I first watched this film, I thought this a little far fetched. How could anyone suffer physical ailment because of a lack of love? Could someone really die of a broken heart? Could this woman really be that pathetic?
I have since softened my approach to her and her demise.
I still think it is impossible to believe in other people breaking your heart. As I stated previously, is it not within each of us to be responsible for our own happiness? Of course this is the case. A broken hearted person manages the heart from within; using the body, the mind and the soul to either further damage or recuperate. The perpetrator has not done the damage. They have merely instigated it.
But poor Michelle, I couldn’t get out of my mind. For years and years, this character has sat uncomfortably on my mind.
I think we’re back to libidos folks – just as I was mentioning in the story that I wrote recently.
I am now suggesting that Madame de Touvel did not die of a broken heart because the Vicomte rejected her. She died of a broken heart because she could not manage her desires.
She died of an expectation and a hope.
This man had come along, awakening her from a sexual hibernation, had declared his passionate and in my opinion, his absolute and genuine affection for her, and had then deliberately buggered off, warping and manipulating her mind, and knowing that he was doing so.
Through him, she had found a desire for sex that was almost painful when it was unattainable. Through him, she had found a taste for life that she did not know existed.
Now one could argue, quite rightly, that she shouldn’t have been so damned dependant, and that she should have used this newfound desire for life more effectively.
But one can understand and even empathise with her position on this.
It wasn’t very pleasant of the Vicomte to declare his absolute passion for the woman one week and then either feign or genuinely offer her indifference the next. Maybe he had a sudden fit of cold feet, feeling that what he had said was too honest for him to deal with let alone her, but that does not excuse what he did next.
What this man had given her, and then possibly unbeknowingly robbed her of was a path in life that she did not know had existed for her. She had been married to a much older man with little interest in her or sex. She had been utterly devoted to and indoctrinated by the beliefs of the church. Her insular and insulated life offered her no escape for thoughts or feelings and all of a sudden, she saw a new route.
Sadly for her, she chose to consider this route only with him in mind. When that was clearly not within his expectation or desire or ability, then she could not cope.
Her death was brought on by an absolute helplessness of ever being able to travel along the route that she knew was the right one for her. Due to a misguided and hopeless belief in love, she and indeed the viewers, assumed that her heart was broken by a man who spurred her love.
It really wasn’t and isn’t that simple.
Yet again, we have an example of the gross expectations we humans place upon one another without the ability to communicate effectively in either maintaining relationships or running away from them.
As for my friend, she’s not going to die of a broken heart. This man is not her soul-mate, whatever she may currently think, and because of that he will not break her heart. And even if he was her soul-mate, then she is shrewd enough to fall down, pick herself up and move forward.
Basically, she just likes the good fuck that he gives her.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
And talking of good fucks……
I realised that with all my pontificating about monogamy and relationships recently, I have seriously neglected talking about orgasms and fucks in recent postings.
I will make amends shortly. I’m not sure how I am going to make amends but I will think on and hopefully post something soon.
I think perhaps though, it will be based around an arousal that takes place from time to time which elevates me to a state of total ecstasy. I want to shortly explain what happens to me when I incontrollably spurt my fuck juices all over the place and for many prolonged seconds. I want to explain how fucking good it feels to have orgasm after orgasm, still emitting such quantities of liquid that physiologically seem impossible.
Men and women out there, I will explain what sadly still seems to be ignored or acknowledged; that women can fill buckets if they are fucking in the right way.
Perhaps that is what actually killed Madame de Tourvel. She’d had a sopping wet orgasm for the first time in her life, and nobody had bothered to explain how it happened, how it could happen again and if all else failed, how she could DIY.
Sunday 14 March 2010
More on Monogamy and Infidelity
Big issues sometimes need little steps, which is why I am content that the Guardian group newspapers are continuing the theme started last week on infidelity.
As last week’s article was in the Observer and this week’s in the weekend Guardian, I’m wondering if the editors talk to one another, such is the familiarity of theme.
However, there were differences; some of which I would like to comment on.
Big issues sometimes need little steps even if the little steps aren’t quite accurate, even if they misinform or are contrary to what some would consider as an enlightened, thoughtful approach. It’s useful to have the mere mention of the words ‘infidelity’ and ‘monogamy’ in an article so that people can begin to question their own values set against such emotive notions.
Of course there’s a ‘however’ though because I have a few issues with the writer of this particular article.
Julie Powell is an American author who had an affair.
She met with an old flame from college days. The sparks of sexuality were still there and they had a relationship.
She calls it an affair but I think, from my definition, it was a relationship.
She explains that at first it was the mere fun of it, the excitement and passion, the naughtiness, the horniness but then she realised that she was, oh dearie me, “in love”.
The article continues to progress through Powell’s reparations package, how she now understands love with her husband even more, that infidelity is fine as it can bring a couple closer together and that really we are moreorless back to square one; monogamy rules ok!
I’m actually beginning to think that using infidelity as some sort of mechanism for improving another relationship or marriage is, quite frankly, about as shallow as you can get. Admittedly, people might not enter into an affair with that in mind but some do. Not only that, for those of us who do not enter into affairs with any ulterior motives, it is demeaning and erroneous to suggest that there is a singular causal factor or a multiple of satisfactory outcomes that are so straight forward and even matter of fact.
There is the notion that those who commit adultery have some basic options. Either they patch up the marriage and pat each other on the back for coming through this tough time, or they walk away from the marriage, bitter and twisted by the deceit and the guilt.
There is no third way.
Come to think of it, there probably isn’t!
Only nothing is that straight forward, and nothing should be seen as that simplistic.
In some ways, I actually admire this woman for speaking out.
If more people were honest about infidelity then maybe, it would bring further discussions about the reality of monogamy as a slightly flawed existence (in its cultural norm and rules that currently exist).
Julie Powell raises some interesting points, and mentions some aspects of her relationship with ‘D’ that resonate entirely with this particular reader, but there is also a smugness that befits the born-again Christian that I can barely stomach.
Take this little phrase – “I’d never deny the hurt my actions caused, to my husband, to me, maybe even (who knows?) to my lover. But the fact is that as we stood amid the rubble, Eric and I looked at one another and saw things we hadn't seen before. That hurt, but it also made us realise that everything had collapsed for reasons we'd been ignoring, and that we valued what remained enough to try to build a new home for it………….And here Eric and I stand now, on a far shore, closer than we were before, and stronger. So, no. To those who want endless punishment, who want me in my scarlet A, I cannot comply. I cannot say that I regret.”
So, she got married, had an affair, went through a pretty tumultuous time when her husband found out. They split up, they got back together and because of all of that, coming though it with the help of counselling, it was all worthwhile because they are stronger as a couple than ever before.
Fine. Good for them.
But it still doesn’t answer the unrealistic expectations of monogamy on people and indeed society.
More of that later.
I can just see this couple going around the great US of A, smugly telling their story in a sort of “I kissed a girl but I’m ok now” kinda way. What does Powell mean when she says her actions caused “maybe (hurt) even (who knows) to my lover?”
Did she not stop to find out if he was a little upset? Did she actually think about this person’s feelings at all as she rushed on the bandwagon of condemnation of infidelity for anything other than a gluepot mechanism for marriage?
Isn’t that all rather dismissive?
Following on from my previous writing, did she actually really love this ‘D’ or had she simply discovered or rediscovered her libido? Did she mistake the fucking good sex that she was having for love? From what she has written, there doesn’t seem to be the foundations of anything else that suggests a deep intimacy with her lover.
Maybe it is my turn to be smug now but there is a huge difference between having sex with someone where you find your stagnating libido and having a meaningful relationship with someone that incorporates all aspects of sexuality and togetherness, that combines mind, body, soul – spirituality, feelings, passions.
If you have the latter, then the walking away from it, the dismissiveness of the ‘affair’, the returning to a previous life is probably not on the cards.
Sometimes another relationship is life-changing. Sometimes there is no turning back, and in some ways there shouldn’t be a turning back.
Sometimes, the affair is a recognition of a person who has been entrapped in another existence; a soul who has never been enabled to be the person that they really are. Such realisations mean that repairing the initial relationship is not even a consideration. It is not feasible because the person having the affair has moved on, has become another person or has found himself or herself as the person that he or she was meant to be.
NB readers, please read that passage carefully for in our world of monogamy and coupledom, it is easy to misread that last phrase. They have found themselves as another person, not found another person. Very important difference!
I’m not sure that if you have had the sort of spiritual, sexual, emotional growth and togetherness that I have experienced in another relationship that you can realistically ‘return’ or even use new experiences within the initial marriage. Some would clearly disagree, and maybe I am wrong but there is no point in dwelling on this.
Time to move on.
I don’t know who this Andrew G Marshall is but he’s clearly got something going for him because the Guardian/Observer has now quoted him twice in consecutive weekends!
His theory is based on the fact that couples who have to suffer the trauma of indiscretion are often the closest of couples. The notion is that in order to prevent being as hurt as you were, you will work extremely hard on the relationship and therefore get the rewards and benefits of such a relationship that would have been there had you worked hard on it in the first place.
That is, that if you had been attentive and loving in the first place, there would not have been an affair at all.
Me doth protest!
Firstly, this is assuming that people have extra, additional relationships because there is something wrong with their marriage or their primary relationship.
Sometimes this might be the case. Sometimes, someone will enter into a relationship with another not even realising the flaws in their marriage until they have experienced a range of fabulous moments with their lover. Sometimes, they will never realise this as a reason for entering into an affair because it isn’t the reason!
Not everyone has an affair for a reason. Some people have an affair for a multiplicity of reasons. Some reasons evolve as the affair progresses but not all people have an affair because there is something wrong in their initial relationship.
Secondly, this is assuming that monogamy is the ‘be all and end all’ of relationships, and that it is something that we should all aspire to.
Some people don’t actually want monogamy. Some people find it intimidating, strangling, suppressive, inconceivable, unattainable.
Thirdly, I am still not sure that I like this contrived notion of ‘working’ at a relationship. If something is really in need of such hard work, is it actually viable?
And following on from that point, fourthly, there seems to be no understanding of the notion of fluctuation, of flowing, of the fact that there are no constants and nor should there be.
Ideally, one would like to think that there is constancy in relationships because when you are at the heart of one, when you feel that you cannot possibly feel more connected to a person than this absolute totality of oneness, then the horror of it disappearing is inconceivable and abhorrent.
Sadly, life is not so kind as to work in a way that connects people together in perpetual bliss.
Can I say this now for it is extremely important?
This is not to say that it cannot work. People can be locked together if there is reason, give, take, respect, understanding, honesty, appreciation that we change etc.
It does not have to be stagnation. The lock doesn’t have to be stifling.
But this sort of living, as far as I am concerned (and it is a very personal stance) requires a completely different interpretation of monogamy.
I could be monogamous. I have the capacity to be monogamous. In some ways, it possibly is an aspiration. I’m just not convinced that I can be monogamous with my current partner, the reason being that I do not get enough now from the relationship.
At the beginning of the article, Powell states that “At the centre of our relationship was a deep understanding. That we knew each other so well seemed proof of a love superior in all ways to all others. If you had told me that I was capable of doing anything that could erode the faith of this most loyal of men, I'd never have believed you.”
Was there? Was there really?
If there was such a deep sense of understanding, then how come she had an affair without telling her husband? If they knew each other so intimately how come it needed a search on the internet rather than an intuition from the soul to know that he was being ‘cheated’ on?
I know that I am being simplistic but really, can we ever know someone that much? Do we have the capacity as human beings to be that honest? Or do we get guarded by a misguided empathy where we make assumptions about what the other person wants or doesn’t want to know?
I could be monogamous if there was no expectation from either party of total sexual fidelity.
I could be monogamous if my partner and I were honest about our feelings for one another and for other people. It may not be easy to have to cope with destructive emotions and your responses to them but it might be easier than to deal with total loss.
I could be monogamous if I felt that there was a connection that went beyond the ephemeral, that went deep to the soul, to the heart, to the mind – that scorched a bond that however frequently you tried to ignore its significance kept pulling you back to the scary and sometimes intimidating realisation that this form of monogamy could work!
So I return once more to the old, old story – or so it seems at the moment, of the reality of monogamy and the hopeless either/or solutions that our society seems to kick up without considering a third or fourth or fifth way.
Take this paragraph if you will.
“In the midst of this moral hysteria, a series of books have been published suggesting that we have lost sight of what it means to make a marriage work: that an affair need not signal the end of love. At the extreme end of this is French psychologist Maryse Vaillant, whose recent book suggests that infidelity is not only unavoidable, but can be beneficial to relationships; that the "pact of fidelity is not natural but cultural". But somewhere in the middle sit figures such as London-based marital therapist Andrew G Marshall, whose book How Can I Ever Trust You Again?, published earlier this year, examines how couples can recover from adultery.”
I’ve read and re-read this paragraph desperately trying to find one end of the spectrum to the other. Ironically, I may actually be conditioned to looking for an either/or!
At the “extreme end” we have the notion that infidelity is beneficial and unavoidable.
“Somewhere in the middle” we have the notion that, when you continue to read the summary of Marshall’s work, that infidelity could be beneficial for couples
At another “extreme”, we have the notion that we have lost sight of how to make a marriage work.
At a similar “extreme”, we have the notion that an affair need not signal the end of love.
Excuse me for being pedantic, but aren’t these all one and the same, bar a few slight differences?
And the similarity that should really be borne out of this is communication.
If people are brave enough to talk then the marriage or the relationship is not lost. If people are brave enough to say that they are attracted to another, then all is not lost. If people are brave enough to admit to wanting sex with another, then that could very well happen. If people are brave enough to use this deep sexuality within their relationship; describing their libido to their partner, explaining how looking at other women turns them on, inviting them to participate in the infidelity, then the world might be a happier place.
If all we have on offer is the ‘extreme’ of unavoidable infidelity with a middle ground of unavoidable infidelity then who the hell are we all kidding here?
Monogamy, in its current form, is not working.
Monogamy with real honesty, trust, love and consideration is viable but it is going to take a huge cultural shift to recognise it as so.
The penultimate comment that I want to make is relative to what Powell calls the “mob mentality” in regard to infidelity. She explains how she was demonised by the writing of her book; how her friend who was also having an affair suggested that “it was like we were contagious”.
People are pretty crap when it comes to infidelity. They seem to recoil into this Victorian, moralistic stance that bears no resemblance to reality. It really is rather like the Tories of the Back to Basics campaign who were espousing fidelity, marriage and unattainable idolatry of the monogamous relationship right at the same time as they were riding their cocks up the nearest bizarre person who would be remotely interested in a Conservative MP.
It seems that she was right when you look at some of the comments on CIF
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/mar/13/john-terry-ashley-cole-tiger-woods-me
They are revolting!
There are some supportive comments but in the main, they are condemning this woman for having an affair, further condemning her for speaking out about it, and highly condemning her for having no regrets about the affair; all of this without really knowing the circumstances in which this affair was played out.
Assumption after assumption- that is what our society does rather too well.
People feel in the smugness (I know I’ve used that word too frequently but it really is the right one) of coupledom that they are righteous in their choice of how to live. I would go further on this to say that they are smug in their cultural norm to the point that they are damning and revolting to those of us who step out. Look at how our press demonised the President of South Africa because of his polygamous lifestyle? It was racist and sick, quite frankly.
What right has anyone got to say what it right or wrong for another human being?
I am sickened by the lack of intelligence in this world sometimes.
Nobody wants to have an affair to hurt or demean another person. Why and how could anyone make that assumption with that gross either/or mentality?
If relationships were truly intelligent in the first place, there would be no place in this world for defamatory terminology in statements such as ‘having an affair’.
People would merely be ‘enjoying another relationship’.
Yes, I know – a bit too simplistic, a bit too revolutionary, a bit too ignorant of destructive emotions.
My point is that if people were a little more concerned about a holistic approach to life, a fundamental belief in the self rather than the ultimate being coupledom then we all might be more content.
And finally, for I am sure the reader is probably exhausted by my whinges, I return to another quote from this article.
Once there was a world of arranged unions and marriage as politics and finance; now, in a world of sexual independence, relative gender equality and an increasingly frayed social fabric, we have marriage as intimacy. "It's a double bind," Kipnis says. "Adultery is more of an issue now, because we are closer."
Adultery is more of an issue now, because we are closer, because we ‘chose’ our partners, because we have sexual independence, because marriage is an intimacy!
I simply do not understand this.
Where do people get off on coming out with simplistic statements without having any real consideration for what they are saying?
By whose definition are marriages closer?
By whose definition does that marriage remain close?
By whose definition are the people that entered into that marriage the same people ten, twenty or thirty years on?
By whose definition are we sexually independent?
By whose definition is there gender equality?
Adultery is more of an issue now because we haven’t got the fallback of saying that it was an arranged marriage. Adultery is more of an issue now because we chose our partner, therefore we have to stick to that choice.
And the greatest of these is the idea that once chosen, this apparently makes us close, just in the mere fact that we once had a choice in the matter.
We do not have sexual independence. If we did monogamy in its current form would not exist. We do not have gender equality otherwise there would be an understanding of female sexuality, of ejaculation, of cum. We do not have a notion that people, relationships, even love can change. It is not set in stone, in one place. Life moves on. Without life moving, we would never learn – about others, about ourselves, about life, about feelings. Life moves.
In my previous blog I was telling a story; explaining how it is possible that I was not ‘in love’ with an ex boyfriend and that in actual fact I had simply loved having my libido belatedly turn up.
I wanted to explain that story to younger people, particularly those who felt bereft in love.
There’s plenty more fish in the sea because often the fish are there just for the fuck.
One cock is as good as the next.
I know that is not the whole story and the reason being is that life is not as simplistic as it just being about one stand alone issue, however, it is important to recognise sexuality as different from love. Young people should know that they might just mistake real intimacy for real sexual desire.
They might see one person as their soul mate without realising that they actually crave the sex.
This is an important message.
But so is this.
Monogamy has to change in order for us to function as fully actualised human beings. It is viable but only with extreme honesty. It is viable but only with a distinct variant on its current definition.
We have so bloody far to go with sexuality, with love, with life, with understanding our emotions and our feelings, hell, with even realising that there is a difference between thinking and feeling!
This article yet again demonstrates that we are trying to live in a state that places unnatural expectations upon us, as individuals and society. We place the band of gold around the finger not as a symbol of eternal love but as a chastity belt; restricting, strangling, owning.
We seek to define ourselves and our relationships against the expectation of the masses, forgetting and losing the individual within.
The ironic thing about this article is that she decries helpless angst at the masses and their norms of condemnation whilst glibly returning to those norms of expectation in going for the ‘happy ever after’ with the singular model – just as expected. It’s like the “it was all a dream” ending of “The Wizard of Oz” and millions of subsequent unimaginative stories.
Maybe we should be considering telling our children that there are other ways to live life. Maybe in that way, they would not be struggling to conform to an outdated mode of living either.
Maybe this is a message that needs to get across to young and old pretty quickly; that expectations of permanence might need to be shattered, that understanding of monogamy might need to be redefined, that it is perfectly feasible to have a monogamous relationship that also includes fucking other people.
As last week’s article was in the Observer and this week’s in the weekend Guardian, I’m wondering if the editors talk to one another, such is the familiarity of theme.
However, there were differences; some of which I would like to comment on.
Big issues sometimes need little steps even if the little steps aren’t quite accurate, even if they misinform or are contrary to what some would consider as an enlightened, thoughtful approach. It’s useful to have the mere mention of the words ‘infidelity’ and ‘monogamy’ in an article so that people can begin to question their own values set against such emotive notions.
Of course there’s a ‘however’ though because I have a few issues with the writer of this particular article.
Julie Powell is an American author who had an affair.
She met with an old flame from college days. The sparks of sexuality were still there and they had a relationship.
She calls it an affair but I think, from my definition, it was a relationship.
She explains that at first it was the mere fun of it, the excitement and passion, the naughtiness, the horniness but then she realised that she was, oh dearie me, “in love”.
The article continues to progress through Powell’s reparations package, how she now understands love with her husband even more, that infidelity is fine as it can bring a couple closer together and that really we are moreorless back to square one; monogamy rules ok!
I’m actually beginning to think that using infidelity as some sort of mechanism for improving another relationship or marriage is, quite frankly, about as shallow as you can get. Admittedly, people might not enter into an affair with that in mind but some do. Not only that, for those of us who do not enter into affairs with any ulterior motives, it is demeaning and erroneous to suggest that there is a singular causal factor or a multiple of satisfactory outcomes that are so straight forward and even matter of fact.
There is the notion that those who commit adultery have some basic options. Either they patch up the marriage and pat each other on the back for coming through this tough time, or they walk away from the marriage, bitter and twisted by the deceit and the guilt.
There is no third way.
Come to think of it, there probably isn’t!
Only nothing is that straight forward, and nothing should be seen as that simplistic.
In some ways, I actually admire this woman for speaking out.
If more people were honest about infidelity then maybe, it would bring further discussions about the reality of monogamy as a slightly flawed existence (in its cultural norm and rules that currently exist).
Julie Powell raises some interesting points, and mentions some aspects of her relationship with ‘D’ that resonate entirely with this particular reader, but there is also a smugness that befits the born-again Christian that I can barely stomach.
Take this little phrase – “I’d never deny the hurt my actions caused, to my husband, to me, maybe even (who knows?) to my lover. But the fact is that as we stood amid the rubble, Eric and I looked at one another and saw things we hadn't seen before. That hurt, but it also made us realise that everything had collapsed for reasons we'd been ignoring, and that we valued what remained enough to try to build a new home for it………….And here Eric and I stand now, on a far shore, closer than we were before, and stronger. So, no. To those who want endless punishment, who want me in my scarlet A, I cannot comply. I cannot say that I regret.”
So, she got married, had an affair, went through a pretty tumultuous time when her husband found out. They split up, they got back together and because of all of that, coming though it with the help of counselling, it was all worthwhile because they are stronger as a couple than ever before.
Fine. Good for them.
But it still doesn’t answer the unrealistic expectations of monogamy on people and indeed society.
More of that later.
I can just see this couple going around the great US of A, smugly telling their story in a sort of “I kissed a girl but I’m ok now” kinda way. What does Powell mean when she says her actions caused “maybe (hurt) even (who knows) to my lover?”
Did she not stop to find out if he was a little upset? Did she actually think about this person’s feelings at all as she rushed on the bandwagon of condemnation of infidelity for anything other than a gluepot mechanism for marriage?
Isn’t that all rather dismissive?
Following on from my previous writing, did she actually really love this ‘D’ or had she simply discovered or rediscovered her libido? Did she mistake the fucking good sex that she was having for love? From what she has written, there doesn’t seem to be the foundations of anything else that suggests a deep intimacy with her lover.
Maybe it is my turn to be smug now but there is a huge difference between having sex with someone where you find your stagnating libido and having a meaningful relationship with someone that incorporates all aspects of sexuality and togetherness, that combines mind, body, soul – spirituality, feelings, passions.
If you have the latter, then the walking away from it, the dismissiveness of the ‘affair’, the returning to a previous life is probably not on the cards.
Sometimes another relationship is life-changing. Sometimes there is no turning back, and in some ways there shouldn’t be a turning back.
Sometimes, the affair is a recognition of a person who has been entrapped in another existence; a soul who has never been enabled to be the person that they really are. Such realisations mean that repairing the initial relationship is not even a consideration. It is not feasible because the person having the affair has moved on, has become another person or has found himself or herself as the person that he or she was meant to be.
NB readers, please read that passage carefully for in our world of monogamy and coupledom, it is easy to misread that last phrase. They have found themselves as another person, not found another person. Very important difference!
I’m not sure that if you have had the sort of spiritual, sexual, emotional growth and togetherness that I have experienced in another relationship that you can realistically ‘return’ or even use new experiences within the initial marriage. Some would clearly disagree, and maybe I am wrong but there is no point in dwelling on this.
Time to move on.
I don’t know who this Andrew G Marshall is but he’s clearly got something going for him because the Guardian/Observer has now quoted him twice in consecutive weekends!
His theory is based on the fact that couples who have to suffer the trauma of indiscretion are often the closest of couples. The notion is that in order to prevent being as hurt as you were, you will work extremely hard on the relationship and therefore get the rewards and benefits of such a relationship that would have been there had you worked hard on it in the first place.
That is, that if you had been attentive and loving in the first place, there would not have been an affair at all.
Me doth protest!
Firstly, this is assuming that people have extra, additional relationships because there is something wrong with their marriage or their primary relationship.
Sometimes this might be the case. Sometimes, someone will enter into a relationship with another not even realising the flaws in their marriage until they have experienced a range of fabulous moments with their lover. Sometimes, they will never realise this as a reason for entering into an affair because it isn’t the reason!
Not everyone has an affair for a reason. Some people have an affair for a multiplicity of reasons. Some reasons evolve as the affair progresses but not all people have an affair because there is something wrong in their initial relationship.
Secondly, this is assuming that monogamy is the ‘be all and end all’ of relationships, and that it is something that we should all aspire to.
Some people don’t actually want monogamy. Some people find it intimidating, strangling, suppressive, inconceivable, unattainable.
Thirdly, I am still not sure that I like this contrived notion of ‘working’ at a relationship. If something is really in need of such hard work, is it actually viable?
And following on from that point, fourthly, there seems to be no understanding of the notion of fluctuation, of flowing, of the fact that there are no constants and nor should there be.
Ideally, one would like to think that there is constancy in relationships because when you are at the heart of one, when you feel that you cannot possibly feel more connected to a person than this absolute totality of oneness, then the horror of it disappearing is inconceivable and abhorrent.
Sadly, life is not so kind as to work in a way that connects people together in perpetual bliss.
Can I say this now for it is extremely important?
This is not to say that it cannot work. People can be locked together if there is reason, give, take, respect, understanding, honesty, appreciation that we change etc.
It does not have to be stagnation. The lock doesn’t have to be stifling.
But this sort of living, as far as I am concerned (and it is a very personal stance) requires a completely different interpretation of monogamy.
I could be monogamous. I have the capacity to be monogamous. In some ways, it possibly is an aspiration. I’m just not convinced that I can be monogamous with my current partner, the reason being that I do not get enough now from the relationship.
At the beginning of the article, Powell states that “At the centre of our relationship was a deep understanding. That we knew each other so well seemed proof of a love superior in all ways to all others. If you had told me that I was capable of doing anything that could erode the faith of this most loyal of men, I'd never have believed you.”
Was there? Was there really?
If there was such a deep sense of understanding, then how come she had an affair without telling her husband? If they knew each other so intimately how come it needed a search on the internet rather than an intuition from the soul to know that he was being ‘cheated’ on?
I know that I am being simplistic but really, can we ever know someone that much? Do we have the capacity as human beings to be that honest? Or do we get guarded by a misguided empathy where we make assumptions about what the other person wants or doesn’t want to know?
I could be monogamous if there was no expectation from either party of total sexual fidelity.
I could be monogamous if my partner and I were honest about our feelings for one another and for other people. It may not be easy to have to cope with destructive emotions and your responses to them but it might be easier than to deal with total loss.
I could be monogamous if I felt that there was a connection that went beyond the ephemeral, that went deep to the soul, to the heart, to the mind – that scorched a bond that however frequently you tried to ignore its significance kept pulling you back to the scary and sometimes intimidating realisation that this form of monogamy could work!
So I return once more to the old, old story – or so it seems at the moment, of the reality of monogamy and the hopeless either/or solutions that our society seems to kick up without considering a third or fourth or fifth way.
Take this paragraph if you will.
“In the midst of this moral hysteria, a series of books have been published suggesting that we have lost sight of what it means to make a marriage work: that an affair need not signal the end of love. At the extreme end of this is French psychologist Maryse Vaillant, whose recent book suggests that infidelity is not only unavoidable, but can be beneficial to relationships; that the "pact of fidelity is not natural but cultural". But somewhere in the middle sit figures such as London-based marital therapist Andrew G Marshall, whose book How Can I Ever Trust You Again?, published earlier this year, examines how couples can recover from adultery.”
I’ve read and re-read this paragraph desperately trying to find one end of the spectrum to the other. Ironically, I may actually be conditioned to looking for an either/or!
At the “extreme end” we have the notion that infidelity is beneficial and unavoidable.
“Somewhere in the middle” we have the notion that, when you continue to read the summary of Marshall’s work, that infidelity could be beneficial for couples
At another “extreme”, we have the notion that we have lost sight of how to make a marriage work.
At a similar “extreme”, we have the notion that an affair need not signal the end of love.
Excuse me for being pedantic, but aren’t these all one and the same, bar a few slight differences?
And the similarity that should really be borne out of this is communication.
If people are brave enough to talk then the marriage or the relationship is not lost. If people are brave enough to say that they are attracted to another, then all is not lost. If people are brave enough to admit to wanting sex with another, then that could very well happen. If people are brave enough to use this deep sexuality within their relationship; describing their libido to their partner, explaining how looking at other women turns them on, inviting them to participate in the infidelity, then the world might be a happier place.
If all we have on offer is the ‘extreme’ of unavoidable infidelity with a middle ground of unavoidable infidelity then who the hell are we all kidding here?
Monogamy, in its current form, is not working.
Monogamy with real honesty, trust, love and consideration is viable but it is going to take a huge cultural shift to recognise it as so.
The penultimate comment that I want to make is relative to what Powell calls the “mob mentality” in regard to infidelity. She explains how she was demonised by the writing of her book; how her friend who was also having an affair suggested that “it was like we were contagious”.
People are pretty crap when it comes to infidelity. They seem to recoil into this Victorian, moralistic stance that bears no resemblance to reality. It really is rather like the Tories of the Back to Basics campaign who were espousing fidelity, marriage and unattainable idolatry of the monogamous relationship right at the same time as they were riding their cocks up the nearest bizarre person who would be remotely interested in a Conservative MP.
It seems that she was right when you look at some of the comments on CIF
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/mar/13/john-terry-ashley-cole-tiger-woods-me
They are revolting!
There are some supportive comments but in the main, they are condemning this woman for having an affair, further condemning her for speaking out about it, and highly condemning her for having no regrets about the affair; all of this without really knowing the circumstances in which this affair was played out.
Assumption after assumption- that is what our society does rather too well.
People feel in the smugness (I know I’ve used that word too frequently but it really is the right one) of coupledom that they are righteous in their choice of how to live. I would go further on this to say that they are smug in their cultural norm to the point that they are damning and revolting to those of us who step out. Look at how our press demonised the President of South Africa because of his polygamous lifestyle? It was racist and sick, quite frankly.
What right has anyone got to say what it right or wrong for another human being?
I am sickened by the lack of intelligence in this world sometimes.
Nobody wants to have an affair to hurt or demean another person. Why and how could anyone make that assumption with that gross either/or mentality?
If relationships were truly intelligent in the first place, there would be no place in this world for defamatory terminology in statements such as ‘having an affair’.
People would merely be ‘enjoying another relationship’.
Yes, I know – a bit too simplistic, a bit too revolutionary, a bit too ignorant of destructive emotions.
My point is that if people were a little more concerned about a holistic approach to life, a fundamental belief in the self rather than the ultimate being coupledom then we all might be more content.
And finally, for I am sure the reader is probably exhausted by my whinges, I return to another quote from this article.
Once there was a world of arranged unions and marriage as politics and finance; now, in a world of sexual independence, relative gender equality and an increasingly frayed social fabric, we have marriage as intimacy. "It's a double bind," Kipnis says. "Adultery is more of an issue now, because we are closer."
Adultery is more of an issue now, because we are closer, because we ‘chose’ our partners, because we have sexual independence, because marriage is an intimacy!
I simply do not understand this.
Where do people get off on coming out with simplistic statements without having any real consideration for what they are saying?
By whose definition are marriages closer?
By whose definition does that marriage remain close?
By whose definition are the people that entered into that marriage the same people ten, twenty or thirty years on?
By whose definition are we sexually independent?
By whose definition is there gender equality?
Adultery is more of an issue now because we haven’t got the fallback of saying that it was an arranged marriage. Adultery is more of an issue now because we chose our partner, therefore we have to stick to that choice.
And the greatest of these is the idea that once chosen, this apparently makes us close, just in the mere fact that we once had a choice in the matter.
We do not have sexual independence. If we did monogamy in its current form would not exist. We do not have gender equality otherwise there would be an understanding of female sexuality, of ejaculation, of cum. We do not have a notion that people, relationships, even love can change. It is not set in stone, in one place. Life moves on. Without life moving, we would never learn – about others, about ourselves, about life, about feelings. Life moves.
In my previous blog I was telling a story; explaining how it is possible that I was not ‘in love’ with an ex boyfriend and that in actual fact I had simply loved having my libido belatedly turn up.
I wanted to explain that story to younger people, particularly those who felt bereft in love.
There’s plenty more fish in the sea because often the fish are there just for the fuck.
One cock is as good as the next.
I know that is not the whole story and the reason being is that life is not as simplistic as it just being about one stand alone issue, however, it is important to recognise sexuality as different from love. Young people should know that they might just mistake real intimacy for real sexual desire.
They might see one person as their soul mate without realising that they actually crave the sex.
This is an important message.
But so is this.
Monogamy has to change in order for us to function as fully actualised human beings. It is viable but only with extreme honesty. It is viable but only with a distinct variant on its current definition.
We have so bloody far to go with sexuality, with love, with life, with understanding our emotions and our feelings, hell, with even realising that there is a difference between thinking and feeling!
This article yet again demonstrates that we are trying to live in a state that places unnatural expectations upon us, as individuals and society. We place the band of gold around the finger not as a symbol of eternal love but as a chastity belt; restricting, strangling, owning.
We seek to define ourselves and our relationships against the expectation of the masses, forgetting and losing the individual within.
The ironic thing about this article is that she decries helpless angst at the masses and their norms of condemnation whilst glibly returning to those norms of expectation in going for the ‘happy ever after’ with the singular model – just as expected. It’s like the “it was all a dream” ending of “The Wizard of Oz” and millions of subsequent unimaginative stories.
Maybe we should be considering telling our children that there are other ways to live life. Maybe in that way, they would not be struggling to conform to an outdated mode of living either.
Maybe this is a message that needs to get across to young and old pretty quickly; that expectations of permanence might need to be shattered, that understanding of monogamy might need to be redefined, that it is perfectly feasible to have a monogamous relationship that also includes fucking other people.
Saturday 13 March 2010
Libidinous stories and thoughts
The Story
It wasn’t as if Eamonn was the love of her life.
He was a bully. He was inconsiderate. He never thought about her needs, only his own.
It was only her naïve and helpless idiocy that kept this unachievable relationship in tact; this dream of total togetherness, of “happy ever after”.
But she knew that there were so many flaws to the relationship that a long term commitment would have been suffocating and wrong on every level possible.
If Caroline had even for one minute really looked at the whole situation objectively, she would have turned away from him, from the situation, retracted herself and never looked back.
Only she wasn’t that clever. She wasn’t that mature. She wasn’t that sensible.
She wasn’t even in love anymore. That had disappeared almost two years before.
She was just plain frightened; frightened of loneliness, frightened of feelings, frightened of him.
Despite all of this, despite the fact that she knew that this separation was the right thing to do, she felt an emptiness that she couldn’t begin to explain.
She felt bereft at the same time as relief.
She felt deep sadness at the same time as an overwhelming sense of relief.
She felt caged by her grief at the same time as feeling complete, and slightly bewildering, liberty.
When she looked at herself, she realised that she had been in a committed relationship since she was fifteen. Although, on paper that looks a little stupid. How could a fifteen year old be in a committed relationship? - but she had been.
She’d had a year long relationship, followed by a two year relationship followed by another two year relationship.
Blimey, she was a mini-serial monogamist. She had always moved from one relationship to the next with a serious blurring of dates between commencement and conclusion.
And all of a sudden, she was alone. And she had never experienced this feeling in her adult life before. No wonder she felt so fucked up. No wonder she could never shake away that feeling of scared emptiness .
She climbed aboard and plonked the heavy bag down as she clung onto the slippery pole of the double decker bus as it bumbled its way to her work.
Along the way, she thought.
It’s been a fortnight now. It will be okay. Think positive.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Clichéd glances. Eyes connecting. Awareness rising. Temptation. Titillation. Libido?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
He smiles. She responds. He dares to allow his eyes to wander. She acknowledges. A short hello is spoken. He turns and zooms away.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Attraction is so interesting because there is almost an instantaneous feeling sometimes and yet simultaneously, the attraction grows and grows. Some people mistake this instantaneous feeling for love at first sight. Is it?
Caroline had noticed Adam before. She’d probably noticed him on her first day at work. He was just one of those people who stood out; tall, blond, cocksure, confident and gregarious; bit of prat really.
He was the person that everyone wanted to know, everyone wanted to talk to. Eyes followed him across the room, into the canteen. In the bar, people gathered around him.
Adam knew all of this and he loved it!
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
He was always surrounded by very beautiful women. His best friend at work was this stunning dark haired deliciousness called Amanda. Without even knowing it, Caroline was attracted to Amanda.
At the time, she thought it was just a calling of friendship. The two women collided into communication by accident. Maybe, in retrospect, they were both attracted to one another, and whilst both were concentrating on their attraction to Adam, they were denying the reality of the sexual stimulation and the growing desire they felt for one another.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Christmas bashes.
Caroline wasn’t that bothered about going, despite the fact that Adam had asked her earlier in the day if she was coming along.
Only she was bothered about going because she had been stimulated to go by the attraction for this man.
Intuition was working. She felt that something was happening yet she couldn’t quite grasp what it was.
She walked tentatively into the room. Colin sprang to life and got her a drink.
Rosemary, her friend, and her sipped their cocktails quietly as they watched the first dancers of the evening.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
He walked alone onto the dance floor, looked up, smiled, mimicked a dance shuffle as a mimed invitation and beckoned her over.
She’d only been there for about twenty minutes. It was a little early for dancing, and there was poor Colin, clearly excited that she had accepted a drink from him, clearly gagging for a fuck with her.
Slight guilt at leaving Colin like this, she wandered across to Adam, who took her in his arms immediately.
Her strapless dress allowed his fingers to glide across her shoulders and straight onto naked skin.
For both of them, that was incredibly sensuous.
He wooed her with exactly the right words – she looked beautiful, he’d been worried about her over the last couple of weeks – a friend of a friend had told him about her split with Eamonn. The man must have been an idiot not to recognise the perfection of a woman he’d had in his life.
At the end of the first song, she moved to go but he held her resolutely and determined. She stayed and as he kissed her with such intense passion, her legs buckled, her heart plundered and she was his! She really was living in some sort of cliché.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Sex with Eamonn had become very samey. It was a routine and a ritual rather than responsive or warm. It was quick and meaningless. He’d never succeeded in making her cum in two years of fucking. She’d been frustrated. He’d been irritated.
Interestingly, he’d assumed it was her problem not his. He couldn’t do anything about her lack of libido. He had no role in being able to make a cumless woman climax.
She thought that this was just how it was. She had no great feeling between her legs. She wasn’t really that bothered by sex at all.
She wasn’t even sure that she had a libido. That night, she knew that there was something happening to her but at that time, she couldn’t have explained what. It was more than just a physical feeling. It was intense.
She wasn’t quite so stupid at that point to think she had fallen in love again but she couldn’t explain this combination of the physical, the sexual and what it was all doing to her head.
She was deeply attracted to him but it was more than that. She wanted to fuck him, and this had never happened to her before in her life.
She suddenly had an absolute urgency to be fucked.
Throughout the evening, he had held her. They had mingled with others with his hand firmly clasped around hers. He’d introduced her as his new woman. Such an assumption! but a correct one.
They danced the last dance and it was pretty obvious by the size of his erection that he needed a fuck as much as she did.
He gathered her into him so that she could feel his cock through his formal dinner suit, and as the singer mentioned making love, he repeated the words into her mouth, breathing deeply and urgently.
“Let’s go!” he whispered.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
They almost ran to the car and probably would have done so had it not been for the sheet ice between them and their getaway vehicle.
They clambered in, each thinking of nothing other than the fuck they were about to receive.
He lit two cigarettes, passing one to her, and they sat in contemplative silence for the rest of the journey home.
He walked around to help her out of the car. She had four inch heels and the road was a death trap of ice.
They went straight into his bedroom.
He swept the dress from her body. He undressed himself. She was painfully aware of how naïve and inexperienced she was. He told her he didn’t care.
Contraceptives were just about negotiated but in the haze of madness and urgency it was a miracle that this had happened. He spilled his spunk into an awaiting dressing gown when the time was right
He got her naked body under the duvet and smothered her with kisses. He slid his cock straight in. No foreplay, no fondles, just straight in.
It was fucking sensational. He didn’t cum after twenty seconds. He lovingly, carefully manipulated his body around so that her insides were sensitised by the movement. He looked down as he drew in and out of her, encouraging her to do the same. He fell with delight onto her tiny body, as she simply lay back and took what was coming.
She was deeply excited by this man, and once the penetration had taken place, they fell asleep together, wrapped around one another, warm, together, fucked up, loved up.
Half way through the night, he turned around and kissed her. He traced his hands over her body. She moved hers over his upper torso though was not sure whether to reach for his cock or not.
He slid his fingers into her cunt, which was clearly receptive to such a move. He dived further under the covers to taste her for himself. She loved that too.
He returned his face to hers, kissed her lightly as his cock soared into her pussy, delighting and moistening her once more.
They fell asleep again.
Awaking the next day, he pulled her on top of him and pushed his cock into her before she had chance to awaken properly.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Poor Caroline.
She hadn’t got a cat in hell’s chance of surviving this emotionally.
She was completely fucked out and she wanted more. She could have stayed in that bed all day being fucked senseless.
For the very first time in her life, she had allowed her libido to triumph over reason, because at that point in her life she hadn’t understood they were inextricably linked. She was so embarrassingly sexually naïve that there was no way that she could possibly have a one-night stand or fuck a new bloke on the first night, but here she was doing precisely that.
She was attracted to him. She’d actually been attracted to him before her break up with Eamonn but it hadn’t triggered a sexual response. It hadn’t awoken her libido.
She wasn’t sure that she had ever had a libido operating whilst she was with Eamonn. If it had, then it was on few and far between occasions.
Now she had a libido so inflated that she didn’t know how to handle it. She also had a boyfriend so hot and horny that it actually intimidated her, such were her insecurities in her own sexual prowess.
How was she ever going to be sexy and hot when she had a history of lying on her back, opening her legs and get a seeing to?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Still dressed in her fineries of evening wear she arrived back to the flat and plonked herself down at the kitchen table.
“Can you get drunk on sex?” she asked.
Eruptions of laughter ensued………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Caroline and Adam had a horny, hot relationship for a few months. They had sex at inopportune moments, like the time when everyone in the house was gathered for a Christmas meal, and Adam nudged her under the table, grabbed her hand and said, “Let’s fuck!”
It was rather obvious to all gathered what they were doing when they left the table before the end of the meal, and even more obvious when they returned to the table after their rather robust quickie.
She didn’t survive it emotionally. Adam became the scapegoat for her previous disasters.
(And suddenly, in writing this, she has seen the light!)
She fell in love with Adam, pathetically. She couldn’t cope with the loss of this godlike man who she had placed on some hopeless pedestal.
She was emotionally needy and she had discovered a need for sex but it was to no avail. He wasn’t really into her. She was too sexually inexperienced and squirmed at any suggestions of anything.
A couple of year later, they fucked again, just for the hell of it, on a couple of occasions.
They’d become decent friends by now and were free (ish) to do what they wanted.
A group of people had been out for a drink. It was all pleasant. There were no innuendos or flashing eyes. Nothing.
At the end of the evening, Adam asked her if she wanted a lift home. She accepted, expecting nothing. Once they were in the car, he drove her silently back to his place. She’d known he would.
They sat and had a drink and some toast and then got into bed.
They didn’t have sex. They just fell asleep but in the middle of the night, just as they had on their first night together, they fucked.
That’s all it was. Just a fuck. Quite a good one actually. One of the few she remembers from her youth when she had an orgasm.
It had been some time since she’d had an orgasm from penetrative sex, and it felt right.
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
The Verdict
It really was the weirdest thing.
Whilst I was writing this, it hit me like a lightening bolt! And if there are any young women reading this then please consider this carefully.
“Caroline” was besotted with “Adam”. As I said earlier, in truth, he was a bit of a tosser. He fancied himself far more than any woman he fucked but she had done the whole, stupid and wholly futile “falling in love” thing.
Having had years of abuse and disinterest from a man whose only sexual excitement came from considering his own needs, Caroline was now stimulated by a man who knew how to fuck her.
Eamonn had been very sexually needy. He needed to fuck Caroline regularly but he needed it for him. It was never really about her at all, even though he got pissed off (yes, really) that she couldn’t cum. Is it any wonder that her libido was non-existent and would revert to dormancy later in her life? It wasn’t the greatest of baptisms.
Whereas all of a sudden, she’d had her libido invigorated and enlivened. When she saw Adam, she had an actual physical sensation between her legs, in her heart. She had mistaken this for being “in love” when in actual fact, it was just her libido working in tandem with the attraction that she held for the man.
Is this what being “in love” is? Is it merely the physical of the libido and the imagination of the attraction working together to create an unreal and unsustainable situation?
Now for the lightening bolt!
Caroline wasn’t in love with Adam. She had found her libido. For the very first time in her life, she had discovered a slight insight into her own sexuality. Compared with now, it was insignificant but at that point, it was life giving.
She didn’t need Adam. She needed sex.
At the time, she thought that the depression that ensued was somehow some suppressed disappointment in the outcome of her relationship with Eamonn. She eventually reasoned that her pining wasn’t really for Adam. He was merely a scapegoat.
In the months after her split with Adam, she became very ill. She lost her joie de vivre. She stopped eating. She became painfully thin and her libido once more disappeared into the ether.
Is there a possibility that what had actually happened was that she had experienced the very real need for sex? When she suddenly realised that she wasn’t going to have sex, it felt as though her world had caved in. She didn’t want Adam. She wanted the feeling that he gave her. To put it bluntly, she wanted his cock in her cunt. She liked feeling libidinous.
Not only that, she had made the grave mistake of thinking that her libido was completely tied up with one person. She had convinced herself that sexual feelings were merely feelings for someone.
It would take her years to realise that the libido was separate from attraction and was separate from love.
However, when libido and attraction and love all collided into an experience that ensured the “utmost uninhibited depths of hearts, souls and spirit” – well, that is a sexual experience worth worrying about!
The point I am trying to make is that we should be explicit with our young people that there is a vast difference between the perfectly normal libidinous feeling and the attraction that we feel for a certain person. If we can make people understand the difference, then we could all be a little more realistic about relationships, particularly those that we experience in our youth.
And we might stop falling in love. Has anyone wondered why the phrase uses the word “falling”?
They can and do work together in a relationship but there may be times when the libido is working alone, irrespective of any emotional attachment or physical attraction.
Guess what, that is why people enjoy porn. It is their way of doing something positive about the very natural and positive aspect of their sexuality, i.e. their libido, especially if they do not have the opportunity to have sex with someone (even better if they can enjoy expressing their libido in this way with their sexual partner).
Caroline was depressed because she had found sex. She had discovered her libido and it was far too rapidly taken from her, as far as she was concerned. She hadn’t discovered dildos at that time. If only she had, she may not have ended up the emotionally fucked up person that she did.
She could have given herself a good seeing to which, at the very least, could have dealt with her sexual needs.
Finally, in saying all of this, I am not denying the genuine loss that people feel when they come out of a relationship. There is the intimacy of touch that is only partly conditioned by libido. There is genuine affection in some attraction and the loss of a special relationship can be devastating but if people woke up to the importance of sex then it bizarrely might ease the pain of break up to admit that they may be missing this as much as the person who gave it.
It wasn’t as if Eamonn was the love of her life.
He was a bully. He was inconsiderate. He never thought about her needs, only his own.
It was only her naïve and helpless idiocy that kept this unachievable relationship in tact; this dream of total togetherness, of “happy ever after”.
But she knew that there were so many flaws to the relationship that a long term commitment would have been suffocating and wrong on every level possible.
If Caroline had even for one minute really looked at the whole situation objectively, she would have turned away from him, from the situation, retracted herself and never looked back.
Only she wasn’t that clever. She wasn’t that mature. She wasn’t that sensible.
She wasn’t even in love anymore. That had disappeared almost two years before.
She was just plain frightened; frightened of loneliness, frightened of feelings, frightened of him.
Despite all of this, despite the fact that she knew that this separation was the right thing to do, she felt an emptiness that she couldn’t begin to explain.
She felt bereft at the same time as relief.
She felt deep sadness at the same time as an overwhelming sense of relief.
She felt caged by her grief at the same time as feeling complete, and slightly bewildering, liberty.
When she looked at herself, she realised that she had been in a committed relationship since she was fifteen. Although, on paper that looks a little stupid. How could a fifteen year old be in a committed relationship? - but she had been.
She’d had a year long relationship, followed by a two year relationship followed by another two year relationship.
Blimey, she was a mini-serial monogamist. She had always moved from one relationship to the next with a serious blurring of dates between commencement and conclusion.
And all of a sudden, she was alone. And she had never experienced this feeling in her adult life before. No wonder she felt so fucked up. No wonder she could never shake away that feeling of scared emptiness .
She climbed aboard and plonked the heavy bag down as she clung onto the slippery pole of the double decker bus as it bumbled its way to her work.
Along the way, she thought.
It’s been a fortnight now. It will be okay. Think positive.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
Clichéd glances. Eyes connecting. Awareness rising. Temptation. Titillation. Libido?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
He smiles. She responds. He dares to allow his eyes to wander. She acknowledges. A short hello is spoken. He turns and zooms away.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Attraction is so interesting because there is almost an instantaneous feeling sometimes and yet simultaneously, the attraction grows and grows. Some people mistake this instantaneous feeling for love at first sight. Is it?
Caroline had noticed Adam before. She’d probably noticed him on her first day at work. He was just one of those people who stood out; tall, blond, cocksure, confident and gregarious; bit of prat really.
He was the person that everyone wanted to know, everyone wanted to talk to. Eyes followed him across the room, into the canteen. In the bar, people gathered around him.
Adam knew all of this and he loved it!
………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
He was always surrounded by very beautiful women. His best friend at work was this stunning dark haired deliciousness called Amanda. Without even knowing it, Caroline was attracted to Amanda.
At the time, she thought it was just a calling of friendship. The two women collided into communication by accident. Maybe, in retrospect, they were both attracted to one another, and whilst both were concentrating on their attraction to Adam, they were denying the reality of the sexual stimulation and the growing desire they felt for one another.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Christmas bashes.
Caroline wasn’t that bothered about going, despite the fact that Adam had asked her earlier in the day if she was coming along.
Only she was bothered about going because she had been stimulated to go by the attraction for this man.
Intuition was working. She felt that something was happening yet she couldn’t quite grasp what it was.
She walked tentatively into the room. Colin sprang to life and got her a drink.
Rosemary, her friend, and her sipped their cocktails quietly as they watched the first dancers of the evening.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
He walked alone onto the dance floor, looked up, smiled, mimicked a dance shuffle as a mimed invitation and beckoned her over.
She’d only been there for about twenty minutes. It was a little early for dancing, and there was poor Colin, clearly excited that she had accepted a drink from him, clearly gagging for a fuck with her.
Slight guilt at leaving Colin like this, she wandered across to Adam, who took her in his arms immediately.
Her strapless dress allowed his fingers to glide across her shoulders and straight onto naked skin.
For both of them, that was incredibly sensuous.
He wooed her with exactly the right words – she looked beautiful, he’d been worried about her over the last couple of weeks – a friend of a friend had told him about her split with Eamonn. The man must have been an idiot not to recognise the perfection of a woman he’d had in his life.
At the end of the first song, she moved to go but he held her resolutely and determined. She stayed and as he kissed her with such intense passion, her legs buckled, her heart plundered and she was his! She really was living in some sort of cliché.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Sex with Eamonn had become very samey. It was a routine and a ritual rather than responsive or warm. It was quick and meaningless. He’d never succeeded in making her cum in two years of fucking. She’d been frustrated. He’d been irritated.
Interestingly, he’d assumed it was her problem not his. He couldn’t do anything about her lack of libido. He had no role in being able to make a cumless woman climax.
She thought that this was just how it was. She had no great feeling between her legs. She wasn’t really that bothered by sex at all.
She wasn’t even sure that she had a libido. That night, she knew that there was something happening to her but at that time, she couldn’t have explained what. It was more than just a physical feeling. It was intense.
She wasn’t quite so stupid at that point to think she had fallen in love again but she couldn’t explain this combination of the physical, the sexual and what it was all doing to her head.
She was deeply attracted to him but it was more than that. She wanted to fuck him, and this had never happened to her before in her life.
She suddenly had an absolute urgency to be fucked.
Throughout the evening, he had held her. They had mingled with others with his hand firmly clasped around hers. He’d introduced her as his new woman. Such an assumption! but a correct one.
They danced the last dance and it was pretty obvious by the size of his erection that he needed a fuck as much as she did.
He gathered her into him so that she could feel his cock through his formal dinner suit, and as the singer mentioned making love, he repeated the words into her mouth, breathing deeply and urgently.
“Let’s go!” he whispered.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
They almost ran to the car and probably would have done so had it not been for the sheet ice between them and their getaway vehicle.
They clambered in, each thinking of nothing other than the fuck they were about to receive.
He lit two cigarettes, passing one to her, and they sat in contemplative silence for the rest of the journey home.
He walked around to help her out of the car. She had four inch heels and the road was a death trap of ice.
They went straight into his bedroom.
He swept the dress from her body. He undressed himself. She was painfully aware of how naïve and inexperienced she was. He told her he didn’t care.
Contraceptives were just about negotiated but in the haze of madness and urgency it was a miracle that this had happened. He spilled his spunk into an awaiting dressing gown when the time was right
He got her naked body under the duvet and smothered her with kisses. He slid his cock straight in. No foreplay, no fondles, just straight in.
It was fucking sensational. He didn’t cum after twenty seconds. He lovingly, carefully manipulated his body around so that her insides were sensitised by the movement. He looked down as he drew in and out of her, encouraging her to do the same. He fell with delight onto her tiny body, as she simply lay back and took what was coming.
She was deeply excited by this man, and once the penetration had taken place, they fell asleep together, wrapped around one another, warm, together, fucked up, loved up.
Half way through the night, he turned around and kissed her. He traced his hands over her body. She moved hers over his upper torso though was not sure whether to reach for his cock or not.
He slid his fingers into her cunt, which was clearly receptive to such a move. He dived further under the covers to taste her for himself. She loved that too.
He returned his face to hers, kissed her lightly as his cock soared into her pussy, delighting and moistening her once more.
They fell asleep again.
Awaking the next day, he pulled her on top of him and pushed his cock into her before she had chance to awaken properly.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Poor Caroline.
She hadn’t got a cat in hell’s chance of surviving this emotionally.
She was completely fucked out and she wanted more. She could have stayed in that bed all day being fucked senseless.
For the very first time in her life, she had allowed her libido to triumph over reason, because at that point in her life she hadn’t understood they were inextricably linked. She was so embarrassingly sexually naïve that there was no way that she could possibly have a one-night stand or fuck a new bloke on the first night, but here she was doing precisely that.
She was attracted to him. She’d actually been attracted to him before her break up with Eamonn but it hadn’t triggered a sexual response. It hadn’t awoken her libido.
She wasn’t sure that she had ever had a libido operating whilst she was with Eamonn. If it had, then it was on few and far between occasions.
Now she had a libido so inflated that she didn’t know how to handle it. She also had a boyfriend so hot and horny that it actually intimidated her, such were her insecurities in her own sexual prowess.
How was she ever going to be sexy and hot when she had a history of lying on her back, opening her legs and get a seeing to?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Still dressed in her fineries of evening wear she arrived back to the flat and plonked herself down at the kitchen table.
“Can you get drunk on sex?” she asked.
Eruptions of laughter ensued………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Caroline and Adam had a horny, hot relationship for a few months. They had sex at inopportune moments, like the time when everyone in the house was gathered for a Christmas meal, and Adam nudged her under the table, grabbed her hand and said, “Let’s fuck!”
It was rather obvious to all gathered what they were doing when they left the table before the end of the meal, and even more obvious when they returned to the table after their rather robust quickie.
She didn’t survive it emotionally. Adam became the scapegoat for her previous disasters.
(And suddenly, in writing this, she has seen the light!)
She fell in love with Adam, pathetically. She couldn’t cope with the loss of this godlike man who she had placed on some hopeless pedestal.
She was emotionally needy and she had discovered a need for sex but it was to no avail. He wasn’t really into her. She was too sexually inexperienced and squirmed at any suggestions of anything.
A couple of year later, they fucked again, just for the hell of it, on a couple of occasions.
They’d become decent friends by now and were free (ish) to do what they wanted.
A group of people had been out for a drink. It was all pleasant. There were no innuendos or flashing eyes. Nothing.
At the end of the evening, Adam asked her if she wanted a lift home. She accepted, expecting nothing. Once they were in the car, he drove her silently back to his place. She’d known he would.
They sat and had a drink and some toast and then got into bed.
They didn’t have sex. They just fell asleep but in the middle of the night, just as they had on their first night together, they fucked.
That’s all it was. Just a fuck. Quite a good one actually. One of the few she remembers from her youth when she had an orgasm.
It had been some time since she’d had an orgasm from penetrative sex, and it felt right.
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
The Verdict
It really was the weirdest thing.
Whilst I was writing this, it hit me like a lightening bolt! And if there are any young women reading this then please consider this carefully.
“Caroline” was besotted with “Adam”. As I said earlier, in truth, he was a bit of a tosser. He fancied himself far more than any woman he fucked but she had done the whole, stupid and wholly futile “falling in love” thing.
Having had years of abuse and disinterest from a man whose only sexual excitement came from considering his own needs, Caroline was now stimulated by a man who knew how to fuck her.
Eamonn had been very sexually needy. He needed to fuck Caroline regularly but he needed it for him. It was never really about her at all, even though he got pissed off (yes, really) that she couldn’t cum. Is it any wonder that her libido was non-existent and would revert to dormancy later in her life? It wasn’t the greatest of baptisms.
Whereas all of a sudden, she’d had her libido invigorated and enlivened. When she saw Adam, she had an actual physical sensation between her legs, in her heart. She had mistaken this for being “in love” when in actual fact, it was just her libido working in tandem with the attraction that she held for the man.
Is this what being “in love” is? Is it merely the physical of the libido and the imagination of the attraction working together to create an unreal and unsustainable situation?
Now for the lightening bolt!
Caroline wasn’t in love with Adam. She had found her libido. For the very first time in her life, she had discovered a slight insight into her own sexuality. Compared with now, it was insignificant but at that point, it was life giving.
She didn’t need Adam. She needed sex.
At the time, she thought that the depression that ensued was somehow some suppressed disappointment in the outcome of her relationship with Eamonn. She eventually reasoned that her pining wasn’t really for Adam. He was merely a scapegoat.
In the months after her split with Adam, she became very ill. She lost her joie de vivre. She stopped eating. She became painfully thin and her libido once more disappeared into the ether.
Is there a possibility that what had actually happened was that she had experienced the very real need for sex? When she suddenly realised that she wasn’t going to have sex, it felt as though her world had caved in. She didn’t want Adam. She wanted the feeling that he gave her. To put it bluntly, she wanted his cock in her cunt. She liked feeling libidinous.
Not only that, she had made the grave mistake of thinking that her libido was completely tied up with one person. She had convinced herself that sexual feelings were merely feelings for someone.
It would take her years to realise that the libido was separate from attraction and was separate from love.
However, when libido and attraction and love all collided into an experience that ensured the “utmost uninhibited depths of hearts, souls and spirit” – well, that is a sexual experience worth worrying about!
The point I am trying to make is that we should be explicit with our young people that there is a vast difference between the perfectly normal libidinous feeling and the attraction that we feel for a certain person. If we can make people understand the difference, then we could all be a little more realistic about relationships, particularly those that we experience in our youth.
And we might stop falling in love. Has anyone wondered why the phrase uses the word “falling”?
They can and do work together in a relationship but there may be times when the libido is working alone, irrespective of any emotional attachment or physical attraction.
Guess what, that is why people enjoy porn. It is their way of doing something positive about the very natural and positive aspect of their sexuality, i.e. their libido, especially if they do not have the opportunity to have sex with someone (even better if they can enjoy expressing their libido in this way with their sexual partner).
Caroline was depressed because she had found sex. She had discovered her libido and it was far too rapidly taken from her, as far as she was concerned. She hadn’t discovered dildos at that time. If only she had, she may not have ended up the emotionally fucked up person that she did.
She could have given herself a good seeing to which, at the very least, could have dealt with her sexual needs.
Finally, in saying all of this, I am not denying the genuine loss that people feel when they come out of a relationship. There is the intimacy of touch that is only partly conditioned by libido. There is genuine affection in some attraction and the loss of a special relationship can be devastating but if people woke up to the importance of sex then it bizarrely might ease the pain of break up to admit that they may be missing this as much as the person who gave it.
Friday 12 March 2010
Libido and Attraction
I’m struggling today with my sexuality. Not in the sense that I don’t know which way I want to swing, so to speak. It’s not as if I would want to fuck the first person who wanted me because I wouldn’t. In actual fact, I am actually struggling with my libido today. I’m actually beginning to wonder whether I have any, which in itself is rather ironic because at the same time as my libido is depressed, I am also desperate for a fuck, but a fuck from a particular source.
Blimey, that sounds somewhat cold and calculated. It’s not meant that way. There’s far more to it than that. I don’t just want the fuck. I want everything that goes with it.
I just find it strange that my libido can be so low and yet my need and desire for one person be so exaggerated.
Maybe there’s hope for the old libido yet. Or is that a completely separate issue?
In considering this, I am wondering how my libido has functioned in the past. I’m not sure that I have been very conscious of it sometimes. Certainly my youthful sexual experiences were somewhat lacking compared with the excitement and stimulation that I now have, but they were not all hopeless losses, and clearly my own libido had some role to play in whether the whole experience was enjoyable or not.
But I am interested in this issue about libido and attraction. I think there is a strong possibility that libido and attraction, particularly for one person, may not even be working on the same plane.
Libido is very much to do with the physical. Attraction is often far more to do with the mind, with an individual passion although physical appearance also has something to do with it. The attraction for another can stimulate and drive the libido. Libido can possibly drive attraction if you are desperate for a fuck. I think there’s that idea about rose tinted glasses, or alcohol induced vision.
Anyway, they are clearly not the same thing and yet sometimes they are mistakenly considered as such.
So how well is my libido functioning at present? Will it only be rejuvenated by one source, one person or should I get onto some porn sites and see whether there’s some dormant libido left in the old girl. Trouble is, I’m not sure I can be bothered.
As for attraction, well, I’m still attracted!
And how well has my libido functioned in the past?
In order for me to clarify in my own mind this separation between libido and attraction, I feel as though I need to write. Nothing like it really for trying to organise your thoughts, even if you don’t come to any particular conclusion at the end of it.
So I thought I would write a story about my libido and attraction from the past, to see if the two were, in that time, inextricably linked or whether one drove the other and how that happened.
There will be a series of short stories, based on my sexual experiences, written both as a journey into this libido/attraction thought but also to see how my sexuality grew and how it also journeyed into barren years of seeming nothingness.
Anyone who hasn’t experienced that cannot really understand what it was like, and what it is like now to experience something of the wonderment of sex.
The stories are fictional, based on some facts. Names, places, situations may have changed but essentially they are true people and I am going to take the role of the female in all of them.
As they are yet unwritten, I do not know what is going to spill out, but the thoughts of the women in the stories will essentially be mine, either as a regression or from the viewpoint of a woman who knows and understands and feels and thinks so positively about the need and desire for sexual fulfilment.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Stories tomorrow……
Blimey, that sounds somewhat cold and calculated. It’s not meant that way. There’s far more to it than that. I don’t just want the fuck. I want everything that goes with it.
I just find it strange that my libido can be so low and yet my need and desire for one person be so exaggerated.
Maybe there’s hope for the old libido yet. Or is that a completely separate issue?
In considering this, I am wondering how my libido has functioned in the past. I’m not sure that I have been very conscious of it sometimes. Certainly my youthful sexual experiences were somewhat lacking compared with the excitement and stimulation that I now have, but they were not all hopeless losses, and clearly my own libido had some role to play in whether the whole experience was enjoyable or not.
But I am interested in this issue about libido and attraction. I think there is a strong possibility that libido and attraction, particularly for one person, may not even be working on the same plane.
Libido is very much to do with the physical. Attraction is often far more to do with the mind, with an individual passion although physical appearance also has something to do with it. The attraction for another can stimulate and drive the libido. Libido can possibly drive attraction if you are desperate for a fuck. I think there’s that idea about rose tinted glasses, or alcohol induced vision.
Anyway, they are clearly not the same thing and yet sometimes they are mistakenly considered as such.
So how well is my libido functioning at present? Will it only be rejuvenated by one source, one person or should I get onto some porn sites and see whether there’s some dormant libido left in the old girl. Trouble is, I’m not sure I can be bothered.
As for attraction, well, I’m still attracted!
And how well has my libido functioned in the past?
In order for me to clarify in my own mind this separation between libido and attraction, I feel as though I need to write. Nothing like it really for trying to organise your thoughts, even if you don’t come to any particular conclusion at the end of it.
So I thought I would write a story about my libido and attraction from the past, to see if the two were, in that time, inextricably linked or whether one drove the other and how that happened.
There will be a series of short stories, based on my sexual experiences, written both as a journey into this libido/attraction thought but also to see how my sexuality grew and how it also journeyed into barren years of seeming nothingness.
Anyone who hasn’t experienced that cannot really understand what it was like, and what it is like now to experience something of the wonderment of sex.
The stories are fictional, based on some facts. Names, places, situations may have changed but essentially they are true people and I am going to take the role of the female in all of them.
As they are yet unwritten, I do not know what is going to spill out, but the thoughts of the women in the stories will essentially be mine, either as a regression or from the viewpoint of a woman who knows and understands and feels and thinks so positively about the need and desire for sexual fulfilment.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Stories tomorrow……
Monday 8 March 2010
International Women's Day
Today is International Women’s Day.
Should we have an International Women’s Day? Is it something that we should do or does it reiterate the division of gender and further mark the huge difference between men and women? Does it even perpetuate the gender divide?
In some ways, I’m not sure that I do want an International Women’s Day and before I have to cope with the wrath of a million feminists (I should be so lucky that there are that many readers), there is a reason for such a statement.
I wish that there was no need to highlight the plight of women across the world. I wish that there had never been a time when women felt subservient to men. I wish that people would value women for being women and men for being men, and that neither gender was seen as superior in any way other than the obvious ones of physicality that, for all Billy Jean and Martina’s efforts, is clearly insurmountable.
However hard we try and pretend the opposite, men and women are different, and I think we ought to celebrate the fact. Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus. Though I think there are some men that are far more akin to Venus and many woman who truly have greater warrior inclinations. Nothing is quite that simple.
I wish it would not be seen as politically incorrect to suggest an International Men’s Day because actually, I would quite like to celebrate the joy of men. I like men. I like having sex with men. I like their sexual organs. I like feasting my eyes on them and feeling the effects of such voyeurism on and in my own body.
I like talking to men. I like being hugged by men. I like their manliness all around me. I like the fact that they are essentially quite different from me.
I wish that International Women’s Day could be daring and challenge our view on female sexuality. Maybe this is happening somewhere in the world.
Mainly though, I am glad that there is an International Women’s Day. Even if we were in a world of total equality, which we are clearly not, then there should still be such a day to celebrate womanhood and to remind us of the struggles that our ancestors had in being recognized and worthy civilians, and support those women who still struggle for recognition around the world today.
An election is looming and I still get stupidly annoyed by women who do not exercise their right to vote. It is a privilege that was not there for our predecessors, however clichéd it may sound.
Now, I know I am in danger of sounding flippant but I do want to return to the idea of female sexuality and International Women’s Day.
Surely this should be the absolute platform for standing up there and screaming very ardently and passionately that there is still far too much to do in relation to the acceptance of female sexuality and the right to be a sexual being?
Women around the world are still being victimized, are still being abused for the very fact that they are women. That is an abhorrence and will always continue to be a central theme for International Women’s Day. However, there are other female causes that need a voice too, and there will always be a need for such advocation of women’s rights until there is acceptance of total equity.
So here are a few thoughts that I would like the organizers of International Women’s Day to consider in the future.
1. That there should be an absolute acceptance of the G-Spot – Can you really believe that in the 21st century there is still the debate about its existence. For all of those doubting Thomases or indeed Thomasina’s, I would happily demonstrate this to you if necessary.
2. Along the same lines, there should be an absolute acceptance of female orgasms. They are not a myth. We are not all blessed with the acting capabilities of Meg Ryan and her ilk. Yes, we can be cunning enough to fake it if necessary but the female orgasm is a real, and fucking wonderful thing that should be an entitlement for all women. Can you imagine a world without the male orgasm or an acceptance of its functionality and purpose? No, of course not. Without male orgasms we wouldn’t actually be here. So let’s see the emotional and spiritual needs of the female orgasm with the same importance and vitality of the functional and pragmatic purpose of the male one. Just because one has practicality for existence doesn’t negate the importance of the other.
3. More on female sexuality. There should be an absolute acceptance of the female orgasm. I am fed up of apologizing for my juiciness. Luckily I don’t have to apologise to my lover. He rather likes being soaked in my juices. He loves to see my fuck juices running all over his balls and soaking the sheets beneath. He loves to celebrate my juiciness by rubbing it all over the two of us. Even if it was urine, he would not be squeamish or stupid about it but the simple fact of the matter is that it is not urine. It is clearly something entirely different. When I said that I want to stop apologizing for my juiciness I meant generally. There are still far too many people who think I am pissing over my lover and this has got to stop. This myth around female ejaculation has to stop NOW!
4. There should be an absolute acceptance that women have as much right to think about sex as much as a man does. There is the notion that sex is still a man’s domain. They are the ones who are allowed to have naughty thoughts. They are the ones that can watch porn without anyone really batting an eyelid these days. They are the ones who can be overtly sexual without having a tirade of vulgar names associated with their obvious sexuality. You don’t get men being called tarts or whores or hussies or anything like it. Sexual revolution is required before these words are eradicated in such derogatory terms.
5. And talking of terminology, there should be an absolute acceptance of words like vulva and labia. These are beautiful parts of the body. They are vital to my being. They’re pretty vital to my lover’s being as he adores to look at them, stroke them, lick them, separate them so that he can slide gloriously into me. Can you imagine if we did not have appropriate words for the male organs? Can you imagine not having a functional word such as penis or willy let alone the coarser version of cock or dick? Vagina – I mean, vagina doesn’t even relate to the areas of the body that we are trying to talk about for goodness sake
6. And whilst we are on the subject of body parts, there should be an absolute acceptance of the functionality of the clitoris. Let’s stop shying away from its existence. Let’s remind people that it is there and it requires stimulation. And if it is stimulated properly, it can give the most intense pleasure known to woman. Stop pretending that is not important just because it has no significance for procreation. Sex is not just about procreation? When was the last time you had sex to procreate?
7. There should be an absolute acceptance that female masturbation is as important and as natural as male wanking. Just because our bodily parts are shoved inside rather than on show does not mean they are less significant. They can still be aroused. You just have to go a little deeper into yourself to do so. The effect of masturbation is the same for women as it is for men, including the ejaculation and climax. I adore to feel myself to orgasm, especially if I am being encouraged to do so by an adorable man sitting there with his cock in hand watching me do it. There’s very little that is more exciting.
8. There should be an absolute acceptance of sexual equality. By this I mean there should be an absolute understanding that there is equal desire, equal passion, equal need between the sexes.
I could go on for hours and hours.
Dear readers, please feel free to add to this pledge on International Women’s Day.
No flippancy intended.
I am completely convinced that until we get full acceptance and appreciation of these and many more absolutes, we will never have the type of gender equality that we are still fighting for.
Sexual equality, sexual understanding could be the key to the lock that we haven’t really tried yet.
It’s worth considering at the very least.
Should we have an International Women’s Day? Is it something that we should do or does it reiterate the division of gender and further mark the huge difference between men and women? Does it even perpetuate the gender divide?
In some ways, I’m not sure that I do want an International Women’s Day and before I have to cope with the wrath of a million feminists (I should be so lucky that there are that many readers), there is a reason for such a statement.
I wish that there was no need to highlight the plight of women across the world. I wish that there had never been a time when women felt subservient to men. I wish that people would value women for being women and men for being men, and that neither gender was seen as superior in any way other than the obvious ones of physicality that, for all Billy Jean and Martina’s efforts, is clearly insurmountable.
However hard we try and pretend the opposite, men and women are different, and I think we ought to celebrate the fact. Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus. Though I think there are some men that are far more akin to Venus and many woman who truly have greater warrior inclinations. Nothing is quite that simple.
I wish it would not be seen as politically incorrect to suggest an International Men’s Day because actually, I would quite like to celebrate the joy of men. I like men. I like having sex with men. I like their sexual organs. I like feasting my eyes on them and feeling the effects of such voyeurism on and in my own body.
I like talking to men. I like being hugged by men. I like their manliness all around me. I like the fact that they are essentially quite different from me.
I wish that International Women’s Day could be daring and challenge our view on female sexuality. Maybe this is happening somewhere in the world.
Mainly though, I am glad that there is an International Women’s Day. Even if we were in a world of total equality, which we are clearly not, then there should still be such a day to celebrate womanhood and to remind us of the struggles that our ancestors had in being recognized and worthy civilians, and support those women who still struggle for recognition around the world today.
An election is looming and I still get stupidly annoyed by women who do not exercise their right to vote. It is a privilege that was not there for our predecessors, however clichéd it may sound.
Now, I know I am in danger of sounding flippant but I do want to return to the idea of female sexuality and International Women’s Day.
Surely this should be the absolute platform for standing up there and screaming very ardently and passionately that there is still far too much to do in relation to the acceptance of female sexuality and the right to be a sexual being?
Women around the world are still being victimized, are still being abused for the very fact that they are women. That is an abhorrence and will always continue to be a central theme for International Women’s Day. However, there are other female causes that need a voice too, and there will always be a need for such advocation of women’s rights until there is acceptance of total equity.
So here are a few thoughts that I would like the organizers of International Women’s Day to consider in the future.
1. That there should be an absolute acceptance of the G-Spot – Can you really believe that in the 21st century there is still the debate about its existence. For all of those doubting Thomases or indeed Thomasina’s, I would happily demonstrate this to you if necessary.
2. Along the same lines, there should be an absolute acceptance of female orgasms. They are not a myth. We are not all blessed with the acting capabilities of Meg Ryan and her ilk. Yes, we can be cunning enough to fake it if necessary but the female orgasm is a real, and fucking wonderful thing that should be an entitlement for all women. Can you imagine a world without the male orgasm or an acceptance of its functionality and purpose? No, of course not. Without male orgasms we wouldn’t actually be here. So let’s see the emotional and spiritual needs of the female orgasm with the same importance and vitality of the functional and pragmatic purpose of the male one. Just because one has practicality for existence doesn’t negate the importance of the other.
3. More on female sexuality. There should be an absolute acceptance of the female orgasm. I am fed up of apologizing for my juiciness. Luckily I don’t have to apologise to my lover. He rather likes being soaked in my juices. He loves to see my fuck juices running all over his balls and soaking the sheets beneath. He loves to celebrate my juiciness by rubbing it all over the two of us. Even if it was urine, he would not be squeamish or stupid about it but the simple fact of the matter is that it is not urine. It is clearly something entirely different. When I said that I want to stop apologizing for my juiciness I meant generally. There are still far too many people who think I am pissing over my lover and this has got to stop. This myth around female ejaculation has to stop NOW!
4. There should be an absolute acceptance that women have as much right to think about sex as much as a man does. There is the notion that sex is still a man’s domain. They are the ones who are allowed to have naughty thoughts. They are the ones that can watch porn without anyone really batting an eyelid these days. They are the ones who can be overtly sexual without having a tirade of vulgar names associated with their obvious sexuality. You don’t get men being called tarts or whores or hussies or anything like it. Sexual revolution is required before these words are eradicated in such derogatory terms.
5. And talking of terminology, there should be an absolute acceptance of words like vulva and labia. These are beautiful parts of the body. They are vital to my being. They’re pretty vital to my lover’s being as he adores to look at them, stroke them, lick them, separate them so that he can slide gloriously into me. Can you imagine if we did not have appropriate words for the male organs? Can you imagine not having a functional word such as penis or willy let alone the coarser version of cock or dick? Vagina – I mean, vagina doesn’t even relate to the areas of the body that we are trying to talk about for goodness sake
6. And whilst we are on the subject of body parts, there should be an absolute acceptance of the functionality of the clitoris. Let’s stop shying away from its existence. Let’s remind people that it is there and it requires stimulation. And if it is stimulated properly, it can give the most intense pleasure known to woman. Stop pretending that is not important just because it has no significance for procreation. Sex is not just about procreation? When was the last time you had sex to procreate?
7. There should be an absolute acceptance that female masturbation is as important and as natural as male wanking. Just because our bodily parts are shoved inside rather than on show does not mean they are less significant. They can still be aroused. You just have to go a little deeper into yourself to do so. The effect of masturbation is the same for women as it is for men, including the ejaculation and climax. I adore to feel myself to orgasm, especially if I am being encouraged to do so by an adorable man sitting there with his cock in hand watching me do it. There’s very little that is more exciting.
8. There should be an absolute acceptance of sexual equality. By this I mean there should be an absolute understanding that there is equal desire, equal passion, equal need between the sexes.
I could go on for hours and hours.
Dear readers, please feel free to add to this pledge on International Women’s Day.
No flippancy intended.
I am completely convinced that until we get full acceptance and appreciation of these and many more absolutes, we will never have the type of gender equality that we are still fighting for.
Sexual equality, sexual understanding could be the key to the lock that we haven’t really tried yet.
It’s worth considering at the very least.
Serious thoughts on Infidelity
I am a whore, an adulteress, a hussy, an unfaithful tramp who has no qualms about cheating on her partner.
I am, what was the phrase?…… oh yes, a fucking cunt, shouted at me whilst he was indeed fucking my cunt.
I am a thoughtless, heartless, unfeeling disgrace.
I am an inconsiderate risk taker who does not really give a damn about anyone else but herself and her earthy need for a good seeing to.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
As I have said before in other pieces of writing on this subject, I don’t really consider myself to be any of the above, and it appears that I am not alone.
There was an excellent article in the newspaper yesterday, written by Polly Vernon on Infidelity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2010/mar/07/polly-vernon-infidelity-betrayal-help-relationships
The article reiterates the fact that as a species, we continue to be “attached” to the idea of monogamy whilst in reality, we find if difficult and in some cases impossible to actually adhere to this unfeasibly, unrealistic state.
I always find it interesting to read such articles for both personal and anthropological reasons.
Initially, I read such articles aiming to grab some kind of vindication for my own chosen lifestyle. There is a certain amount of comfort in knowing that I am not the only one who finds monogamy a complicated and unworkable concept. I read such articles and words bounce out of the pages that resonate absolutely.
As an amateur sociologist and a person who is interested in how society responds to sex, such articles take on another meaning too.
In essence, it is clear from these newspaper articles that there are a considerable amount of people out there who are not exactly forthcoming with the truth. There are ways of living to which we have not yet customized our minds to let alone actually living them.
There are also people living with the burden of guilt that clearly needs to be lifted so that they can live a fulfilled and purposeful life.
And sometimes I get quite angry about it all.
I’m not entirely sure how I am going to tackle this piece of writing so I think the best way is to concentrate on paraphrasing the article and making comments as I re-read through, similar to the previous posting.
I will be mixing both thoughts on what this means to me personally and what I feel it says about the sexual or the sexually unenlightened world in which we live.
Alternatively, I will just ramble on in my own sweet way and the reader will either bear with me or bog off!
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Apart from the ubiquitous mention of John Terry, Ashley Cole and Tiger Woods, the article kicks off with a range of scenarios of infidelity collected by the author.
1. There is the man who talks to his colleague via instant messaging in a suggestive and flirty manner
2. There is the woman who has reconnected with an old friend via Facebook and is deciding whether to meet up with her old flame after receiving an array of sexy emails
3. There is the man who got in touch with his ex partner, having found her on Twitter. She responded and the implication is that the conversation is a little fruity, despite the fact that she is pregnant by another man.
4. There is the woman who thinks that kissing is not a sign of unfaithfulness if both participants are in another relationship
5. There is a woman who thinks that infidelity is fine if it is with a famous person
6. There is a man who wants to leave his long-term partner because he has finally met his soul-mate. They haven’t had sex yet.
7. There is a man who has stopped having sex with his bit on the side but is still in a relationship that is “an intensely, emotional engagement” and conducted entirely by text
8. There is a woman who is having glorious sex with a younger man. This is not the first time she has had an affair (Hell, that bloody word again!)
9. There is the man who is actively looking for a mistress. He likes living in this way
All of the aforementioned people are in committed relationships of one sort or another. Some are married, some are not. All have a story to tell. Some would argue that only three of the people have actually been unfaithful. It is only the last three that have had penetrative sex. Others would say that each and every one of these characters has fallen off the monogamy wagon because they have either thought or indulged in some sexual activity, even if it is only via fingers bouncing over a keyboard.
(As the article says, there are far more ways of being unfaithful these days. A few years ago, Twitter and Facebook didn’t even exist! Consequently, though, there are more ways of being discovered too).
The nine scenarios are interesting in themselves, for although they cover some corners, they do not cover all.
How about some more?
• There’s the man who is in a deeply emotional relationship with one woman, whilst getting his sexual excitement from another.
• There’s the woman who remains faithful in body but has an incredibly sexualized fantasy world in her mind
• There’s the man who goes out every Friday with friends from work and usually finds someone to screw
• There’s the woman who has loved a man all her life, knowing that he is unattainable and has been waiting for the moment where she finally catches his eye. Her marriage means nothing compared to the desire to be with this long time love
• There’s the man who is deeply involved with a woman whom he loves but he is resolutely believes that he can have sex with other women without it taking anything away from his primary relationship
• There’s the woman who finds herself loving two men in exact and equal amounts and just wishes she could have both
• There’s the man who thinks about women at work all the time. He imagines them undressed, fucking him on the stairs, in the lift, anywhere but he wouldn’t ever contemplate actually doing it
• There’s the woman who has realized that she is deeply attracted to other women; something entirely new for her and she is desperate to explore the wonders of another woman’s body
I could go on and on and on, and in all of these scenarios, there is nothing really close to the situation I find myself in although there could be some amalgamations of scenarios that are true at this point in time or have been in the past.
If there are so many scenarios, if there are so many people that in some way connect with some of these, then who the hell are we kidding as far as the concept of faithfulness?
What sort of messages are we giving to our future generations too?
How the hell can we move on, develop, evolve without upsetting the social order?
Ms Vernon, the author of the piece continues.
And yet we're still incredibly reverent about, and attached to, the ideal of monogamy. Both the major political parties are attempting to enshrine monogamy in pro-family policy; both made monogamy a cornerstone of their election campaigns. En masse we are critical of other people and their infidelities. We're fantastically sanctimonious regarding celebrity transgressions. We were glad that John Terry was stripped of his captaincy; delighted that Tiger Woods lost his endorsement deals as a consequence of his alleged infidelities; overjoyed that Cheryl gave Ashley the boot. We condemn the unfaithful publicly and gossip about them privately. We condemn ourselves when we transgress; we lose ourselves to guilt and suffer identity crises: how could we do this? This isn't who we are!
Why are we living this dichotomy? Why do we support the idea of monogamy so heartily while not managing to be monogamous? Why do we persist in having affairs, persist in believing in monogamy, when we're not comfortable with or especially capable of either?
What a powerful couple of paragraphs! I don’t think I can add anything to this other than explain to the reader how much I personally connect with this.
I didn’t condemn John Terry and didn’t feel the need for him to be robbed of the captaincy of his country; not for sexual discretion anyway. I’ve no idea what decisions have been made in that particular household. I find the whole idea of the astronomical amounts in endorsements paid to the likes of Tiger Woods obscene. That, to me, is far more of a concern than whether he has been slipping his cock into a dozen or twenty dozen nubile and sexy women. That is far more of an indictment on society too for that matter. As for Ashley Cole, well, he’s a bit of a wanker so I have no thoughts on this either other than alarm at the puritanical response to the situation from the red-top newspapers who cannot see the irony of their hypocrisy as they blindly fall over their pathetic attempts at morality.
I do however, have concerns about people criticizing others for having extra-marital relationships when they do not know the situations. I do concern myself with the blame that people impose upon themselves for essentially following their instinctual wit into situations that they should not feel guilty about.
We do indeed live with this dichotomy.
As I said at the beginning of this piece, I am an adulteress. I am unfaithful but there is not one person in this world who could possibly apportion blame to me without considering the factors involved. My story, as I said, is a complicated one. It doesn’t seem to comply with any of the scenarios mentioned. I doubt it is unique but sometimes, when you read these stories, if feels so.
Polly Vernon then goes onto discuss the conversation that she has with Esther Perel, a middle-aged woman who has a self-styled “voice on erotic intelligence – a sexologist”.
Erotic intelligence eh? I think that one deserves a blog all of its own.
Here is another quote that I would like to consider.
“Eroticism comes not from closeness, not from intimacy, but from precisely the opposite. From distance, from moments of jealousy, from a constant awareness that you do not own your partner no matter how long you've been together; that other people fancy them, that they always have the potential to sleep with someone else”.
I wholly disagree with the first sentence. Eroticism can come from a non-attachment but it is all the better for being very much part of an intimate relationship. Eroticism is dependent on the individual interpretation of an image or a piece of writing but if that individual interpretation is shared then the eroticism can be multiplied too.
As for the second part of this quote, I would agree. You certainly cannot know your partner completely, though once more, with an intense intimacy and a complete honesty, you can know them pretty darn well.
It blows my mind to consider that other people would not find my sexual partner attractive. He is an exceptionally attractive man. Guess what? That is why I want to fuck him all the time, well, one of the reasons anyway. To deny the fact that others may be aroused by him is denying both mine and his sexuality. People don’t metamorphosise into a monster when they become involved in a relationship. They don’t lose their sexuality. They don’t stop being attractive and they do not stop being attracted to others. When will we learn this simple yet complicated fact of life?
Perel continues.
Infidelity, she says, is one of the great recurring themes of the human experience. "And we are not monogamous! We are not! Monogamy is human, but human beings are not monogamous! By nature! Historically we have always been unfaithful – and always condemned infidelity. For a glimmer of passion, or whatever, people have been willing to risk everything. Women more so than men."
I like that phrase – human beings are not monogamous by nature. It is interesting that she sees that women are far riskier than men in the infidelity stakes. She continues to say that female infidelity is a sign of social evolution and that the power dynamism of gender is shifting.
Back to the economy, I reckon! The reason that women have been less faithless in the past could be to do with the financial reliance on a partner. Without the need and dependability of financial stability, I have a feeling there would be a completely different response to monogamy.
How far we have travelled and yet how thwarted our journey has been and continues to be.
"The men and women I work with invest more in love and happiness than ever before, yet in a cruel twist of fate it is this very model of love and sex that's behind the exponential rise of infidelity and divorce. Fascination and disillusion stare at each other." Says Perel.
I find this statement fascinating.
Are those of us who commit adultery obsessed and driven by a search for love and happiness? Does this search, if indeed it is, simply create a disillusion?
The more and more I read of this article, I realize what an incredibly fortunate soul I am, or maybe that is my delusion.
I never went in search of love or happiness or sex. I was quite content with what I had, even if the latter was insignificant or even non-existent. I did become fascinated but I don’t think I had illusions. I expected nothing and gained everything. Disillusion could, of course, be just around the corner.
Honesty and trust could, of course, ensure that disillusion is prevented.
"The standard ideas that affairs deplete intimacy, that affairs deplete the marriage, they are always harmful – I say: this is one possibility. But there are others. Affairs also are enormously enlivening. Re-eroticising. They balance the marriage. People who have affairs don't always want to leave the marriage. Sometimes, often, they are looking for a way to stay!"
"When you have an affair, this is rebellion! This is not a mild act! We have affairs to beat back the sense of deadness. We have affairs not because we are looking for another person, but because we are looking for another version of ourselves. It's not our partner we seek to leave with the affair, it's ourselves. It's what I've become that I don't like. It's how I've truncated myself. That there are parts of me that I have been so out of touch with, for decades… And of course, we live twice as long. We are different with different people."
Why the bolder print? This one hit home. I am not going to explain that here other than to say that Ms. Perel has made a very important and significant statement here.
Many ‘affairs’ happen because people are trying to find something of themselves rather than the idea that they are running away from what they have. For some, having a relationship outside their committed one enhances the primary relationship, brings back the excitement. It gives them balance. It nurtures a sense of wellbeing that can considerably improve the marriage or the long term commitment. Other times it does the opposite. Other times again, it can do both.
Whatever else, Perel says, we do not have affairs simply because we are bad by nature; or deceptive, or selfish, or cruel. "It's not just about right, and wrong, and moral. Particularly in America and in the UK, this is what we say about affairs. It's wrong. We talk about cheater. Philanderer. Liar. Narcissist. If it's not all those condemning words, then it goes to pathology. Borderline personality disorder. Childhood trauma. Addiction. We hide behind moral condemnation, or pathologising. This is not helpful, and not true. If it is true, then there are a lot of us suffering with childhood trauma and borderline personality disorders, and we have been suffering from them throughout history! We need to start to understand infidelity in terms of the complexities of life today. We need to think in terms of the failed ambitions of love."
Right up until the last sentence, I was happy with this paragraph, though on re-reading, I am beginning to understand what she is saying.
If, as Vernon and Perel are suggesting, infidelity is far more commonplace than we would like to think, then surely it cannot be evil or a pathological disorder? Yes, we need to consider infidelity in terms of the complexities of the now, but what exactly is all of this about “failed ambitions of love”?
Maybe it has something to do with an unrealistic notion of what love actually is.
Love is not about deprivation. Love is not about being untrue to oneself. Love is so complex a concept that it is almost ephemeral and yet equally eternally unintelligible.
I keep on saying this phrase over and over in my mind. “Infidelity has something to do with failed ambitions of love”. Does this mean that we are unfaithful because we have high expectations of what love actually is? Does this mean that those who are unfaithful are constantly seeking the pinnacle of a loving attachment? Does this mean that we are never capable of finding that ultimate loving relationship and that it is a completely unattainable and futile aspiration?
It sounds to me as though we are pretty harsh to ourselves and one another if this is the case.
Yet there is a counter argument. There are those who do remain faithful. Maybe they are the abnormal ones. Maybe they are the dishonest ones but for now let us assume that there is complete faithfulness in some relationships. Have they managed to achieve the ultimate ambition of love?
And there are those who have deep affection for one another, who acknowledge one another’s sexuality, have decided that infidelity cannot exist between them because infidelity in itself suggests an ownership of another human being. Maybe it is these people that have actually achieved the pinnacle of a loving relationship – one that accepts that we are individuals, one that appreciates the sexuality of the people involved, one that is honest and frank enough to admit to wanting or having sexual relationships with other people.
Isn’t that the ultimate aim fulfilled? If this was achieved, then articles such as this would not need to be written because there would be no such thing as infidelity!
But then again, I am just a dreamer!
Perel thinks we have to work toward renegotiating our ideas of monogamy. We need to see it as an exclusive emotional commitment, but not an arrangement that necessarily denotes sexual exclusivity.
Ah, yes – now we are coming onto something that is extremely interesting. Emotions, attachment, non-attachment, exclusivity.
In essence, this statement is possibly a good one. If people can assume that a primary relationship is about an exclusive emotional attachment rather than a sexual one, then infidelity is excusable. It is less significant. This makes sense…….. unless, of course, the emotional commitment is severed too.
There is an assumption that affairs take place, even by Perel, because we are trying to seek some unachievable image of love. We can fuck around happily because we have this notion of being “in love” in its giddy, unrealistic and glorious way.
Only some people have additional relationships that go way beyond the physical and the sexual. What of them, I wonder? Can you have two “exclusive emotional attachments”? Two and exclusive don’t go together by the law of physics!
"Free love didn't believe in the old model. Free love wanted to throw the old model out. Free love saw it as reactionary, as constraining, bourgeois. The new model is an attempt to reconcile our needs for commitment and our need for freedom. Our needs as part of an individualistic society, which talks about individual fulfilment and personal happiness and more is better, and our need for secure attachment and a stable family." She points out that, while we often talk critically about the idea of "having our cake and eating it" with reference to affairs, in every other aspect of our lives – in work, in our homes, in our social lives, in our experiences of the world, in our constant quest to improve ourselves and our quality of life – we are encouraged to have as much as we possibly can of everything.
I don’t really want to add anything to this paragraph other than to highlight it as significant.
Commitment and freedom have been seen for many decades, even centuries, as mutually exclusive. You cannot have one if you are seeking the other. Perel is suggesting here that you possibly can have both if one redefines the interpretation of fidelity. Furthermore, I think she is advocating the view that there is a constant drive for fulfillment and that in every other aspect of our lives, we are encouraged to have “the best”. What is wrong with wanting your cake and eating it, as long as it is not to the detriment of others?
And then the article has its penultimate statement with the one small crux, the sting in the tail.
What of jealousy? Ah yes, the green-eyed monster, the passionate envy that is so irrefutably destructive.
As a life-long sufferer, I am intrigued to hear and see what Esther Perel says on the subject.
"Aha!" Perel says, and she laughs…………….."And, of course, the view is that jealousy is a negative emotion, it's a primitive emotion…………..Jealousy goes hand in hand with passion. Is jealousy intrinsic to love? Yes! It's an indicator. If you cheat on me, am I just pissed because it's a sloppy thing to do? Or am I jealous, jealous that you had with someone else what I want to have with you, or what we used to have that was special? Because that's a very different thing! I don't know that you can have romantic love that doesn't involve jealousy. The question is: how much? And what do you do with it?"
More bold highlighting!
Jealousy is a destructive emotion. It is there, subliminal or overt. It can cripple and ruin the most intimate of relationships. By loving someone, you feel passion. The passion is so intense and so wonderful that in your irrational moments, you want it to be constant, forever, eternal. You cannot imagine that love being transferred or duplicated elsewhere. To consider your man or woman being sexually involved with another makes you feel jealous. Love and all its glory comes with the negative.
Someone once said to me that if you choose to believe in God then you also choose to believe in the existence of the devil. Whilst I am not sure that I hold much belief in anything, I think there is a point to be made here.
If you accept all that is wonderful about the brilliance of intimacy, spiritually, sexually, the works, then you may have to accept that there is always the possibility of a down side. Natural highs are fine but they are not necessarily sustainable, they have the potential to damage if there is an expectation of constancy and there is always the feasibility of coming down.
The question is: how much? And what you do with it?
Absolutely, totally. This is unequivocal.
Jealousy is an emotion that is as destructive as you allow it to be.
So my man wants to fuck other women. He loves sex. He loves women. He wants to suck another woman’s tits. He wants to feel inside her pussy in all its feminine glory. He wants to kiss her and hold her. He wants to feel his way around her slender and warm body. He wants to give her the love I know he is capable of giving. He wants me to know how he is feeling. He wants to share his passion with me.
How much can I take? How much do I want to know? How much does anyone want to know?
If you had asked me these questions a few years ago, I would have said that the only thing I wanted was for him to want me. I could not even entertain the thought that he could possibly want to fuck anyone other than me. I could not contemplate that he wanted to fuck someone more than he wanted to fuck me. I saw only an either/or.
There are times that I still see this. There are times that I am literally petrified that he will find someone who means more to him than I do but there isn’t anything that I can do about this so why worry?
What do I do with it? Well, quite frankly, I take my jealousy by the horns and allow it to challenge me. I challenge it. I embrace it. It is part of me and I have to learn how to deal with it.
I want to know everything. I want to know his thoughts and his acts. In that way, I can cope with my envy.
The simple truth is that when he fucks someone else, I find that a challenge but the depth of our relationship goes way beyond this. He cannot be unfaithful to me because I do not own him and he does not own me. Our commitment to one another is there. It is implicit and him fucking another woman, just as me fucking another woman or man does not detract from the intimacy of our relationship.
Infidelity cannot take place.
And maybe this is a lesson for us all.
The article started with quotes from people who have not actually had sex with others but have certainly thought about it. They have dabbled in cybersex. They have fantasized or rationalized potential sexual ‘infidelity’.
If people were more honest and open about their sexuality, these happenings would not be seen as an indiscretion. They would merely be part of a loving relationship If people could be honest about the positives and the negatives of extra-maritial/relationship sex, then I think the world might, just might be a happier place but it is wholly dependent on trust, belief and the ability to manage that very destructive emotion.
Furthermore, this rapidly expanding field of infidelity is yet another reason for us to redefine monogamy. "Do we have to put monogamy on a spectrum? Do we need to think: what does monogamy mean to me? Does it mean no sex with other people? Does it mean not to look at other people? Does it mean not to fantasise about other people? Does it mean not to Facebook your exes? Not to text your friends? Where is the line going to be drawn? Monogamy today is no longer going to be assumed. It's going to have to be negotiated."
Perel's ideas on infidelity are infinitely more useful than anything else currently doing the rounds. They would, at the very least, shake up lazy wisdom on what it means to cheat and be cheated upon. They would provoke debate, move things on. I think they should be given clinical currency.
Here, here and here’s to more debate on the subject.
Wake up world and be a little more realistic about the profoundly stupid expectations we put upon one another. Wake up and realize that you can have the most perfect, intimate relationship that enables your partner to express themselves sexually, even emotionally, but that is probably the more challenging of the two.
I am, what was the phrase?…… oh yes, a fucking cunt, shouted at me whilst he was indeed fucking my cunt.
I am a thoughtless, heartless, unfeeling disgrace.
I am an inconsiderate risk taker who does not really give a damn about anyone else but herself and her earthy need for a good seeing to.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
As I have said before in other pieces of writing on this subject, I don’t really consider myself to be any of the above, and it appears that I am not alone.
There was an excellent article in the newspaper yesterday, written by Polly Vernon on Infidelity.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2010/mar/07/polly-vernon-infidelity-betrayal-help-relationships
The article reiterates the fact that as a species, we continue to be “attached” to the idea of monogamy whilst in reality, we find if difficult and in some cases impossible to actually adhere to this unfeasibly, unrealistic state.
I always find it interesting to read such articles for both personal and anthropological reasons.
Initially, I read such articles aiming to grab some kind of vindication for my own chosen lifestyle. There is a certain amount of comfort in knowing that I am not the only one who finds monogamy a complicated and unworkable concept. I read such articles and words bounce out of the pages that resonate absolutely.
As an amateur sociologist and a person who is interested in how society responds to sex, such articles take on another meaning too.
In essence, it is clear from these newspaper articles that there are a considerable amount of people out there who are not exactly forthcoming with the truth. There are ways of living to which we have not yet customized our minds to let alone actually living them.
There are also people living with the burden of guilt that clearly needs to be lifted so that they can live a fulfilled and purposeful life.
And sometimes I get quite angry about it all.
I’m not entirely sure how I am going to tackle this piece of writing so I think the best way is to concentrate on paraphrasing the article and making comments as I re-read through, similar to the previous posting.
I will be mixing both thoughts on what this means to me personally and what I feel it says about the sexual or the sexually unenlightened world in which we live.
Alternatively, I will just ramble on in my own sweet way and the reader will either bear with me or bog off!
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Apart from the ubiquitous mention of John Terry, Ashley Cole and Tiger Woods, the article kicks off with a range of scenarios of infidelity collected by the author.
1. There is the man who talks to his colleague via instant messaging in a suggestive and flirty manner
2. There is the woman who has reconnected with an old friend via Facebook and is deciding whether to meet up with her old flame after receiving an array of sexy emails
3. There is the man who got in touch with his ex partner, having found her on Twitter. She responded and the implication is that the conversation is a little fruity, despite the fact that she is pregnant by another man.
4. There is the woman who thinks that kissing is not a sign of unfaithfulness if both participants are in another relationship
5. There is a woman who thinks that infidelity is fine if it is with a famous person
6. There is a man who wants to leave his long-term partner because he has finally met his soul-mate. They haven’t had sex yet.
7. There is a man who has stopped having sex with his bit on the side but is still in a relationship that is “an intensely, emotional engagement” and conducted entirely by text
8. There is a woman who is having glorious sex with a younger man. This is not the first time she has had an affair (Hell, that bloody word again!)
9. There is the man who is actively looking for a mistress. He likes living in this way
All of the aforementioned people are in committed relationships of one sort or another. Some are married, some are not. All have a story to tell. Some would argue that only three of the people have actually been unfaithful. It is only the last three that have had penetrative sex. Others would say that each and every one of these characters has fallen off the monogamy wagon because they have either thought or indulged in some sexual activity, even if it is only via fingers bouncing over a keyboard.
(As the article says, there are far more ways of being unfaithful these days. A few years ago, Twitter and Facebook didn’t even exist! Consequently, though, there are more ways of being discovered too).
The nine scenarios are interesting in themselves, for although they cover some corners, they do not cover all.
How about some more?
• There’s the man who is in a deeply emotional relationship with one woman, whilst getting his sexual excitement from another.
• There’s the woman who remains faithful in body but has an incredibly sexualized fantasy world in her mind
• There’s the man who goes out every Friday with friends from work and usually finds someone to screw
• There’s the woman who has loved a man all her life, knowing that he is unattainable and has been waiting for the moment where she finally catches his eye. Her marriage means nothing compared to the desire to be with this long time love
• There’s the man who is deeply involved with a woman whom he loves but he is resolutely believes that he can have sex with other women without it taking anything away from his primary relationship
• There’s the woman who finds herself loving two men in exact and equal amounts and just wishes she could have both
• There’s the man who thinks about women at work all the time. He imagines them undressed, fucking him on the stairs, in the lift, anywhere but he wouldn’t ever contemplate actually doing it
• There’s the woman who has realized that she is deeply attracted to other women; something entirely new for her and she is desperate to explore the wonders of another woman’s body
I could go on and on and on, and in all of these scenarios, there is nothing really close to the situation I find myself in although there could be some amalgamations of scenarios that are true at this point in time or have been in the past.
If there are so many scenarios, if there are so many people that in some way connect with some of these, then who the hell are we kidding as far as the concept of faithfulness?
What sort of messages are we giving to our future generations too?
How the hell can we move on, develop, evolve without upsetting the social order?
Ms Vernon, the author of the piece continues.
And yet we're still incredibly reverent about, and attached to, the ideal of monogamy. Both the major political parties are attempting to enshrine monogamy in pro-family policy; both made monogamy a cornerstone of their election campaigns. En masse we are critical of other people and their infidelities. We're fantastically sanctimonious regarding celebrity transgressions. We were glad that John Terry was stripped of his captaincy; delighted that Tiger Woods lost his endorsement deals as a consequence of his alleged infidelities; overjoyed that Cheryl gave Ashley the boot. We condemn the unfaithful publicly and gossip about them privately. We condemn ourselves when we transgress; we lose ourselves to guilt and suffer identity crises: how could we do this? This isn't who we are!
Why are we living this dichotomy? Why do we support the idea of monogamy so heartily while not managing to be monogamous? Why do we persist in having affairs, persist in believing in monogamy, when we're not comfortable with or especially capable of either?
What a powerful couple of paragraphs! I don’t think I can add anything to this other than explain to the reader how much I personally connect with this.
I didn’t condemn John Terry and didn’t feel the need for him to be robbed of the captaincy of his country; not for sexual discretion anyway. I’ve no idea what decisions have been made in that particular household. I find the whole idea of the astronomical amounts in endorsements paid to the likes of Tiger Woods obscene. That, to me, is far more of a concern than whether he has been slipping his cock into a dozen or twenty dozen nubile and sexy women. That is far more of an indictment on society too for that matter. As for Ashley Cole, well, he’s a bit of a wanker so I have no thoughts on this either other than alarm at the puritanical response to the situation from the red-top newspapers who cannot see the irony of their hypocrisy as they blindly fall over their pathetic attempts at morality.
I do however, have concerns about people criticizing others for having extra-marital relationships when they do not know the situations. I do concern myself with the blame that people impose upon themselves for essentially following their instinctual wit into situations that they should not feel guilty about.
We do indeed live with this dichotomy.
As I said at the beginning of this piece, I am an adulteress. I am unfaithful but there is not one person in this world who could possibly apportion blame to me without considering the factors involved. My story, as I said, is a complicated one. It doesn’t seem to comply with any of the scenarios mentioned. I doubt it is unique but sometimes, when you read these stories, if feels so.
Polly Vernon then goes onto discuss the conversation that she has with Esther Perel, a middle-aged woman who has a self-styled “voice on erotic intelligence – a sexologist”.
Erotic intelligence eh? I think that one deserves a blog all of its own.
Here is another quote that I would like to consider.
“Eroticism comes not from closeness, not from intimacy, but from precisely the opposite. From distance, from moments of jealousy, from a constant awareness that you do not own your partner no matter how long you've been together; that other people fancy them, that they always have the potential to sleep with someone else”.
I wholly disagree with the first sentence. Eroticism can come from a non-attachment but it is all the better for being very much part of an intimate relationship. Eroticism is dependent on the individual interpretation of an image or a piece of writing but if that individual interpretation is shared then the eroticism can be multiplied too.
As for the second part of this quote, I would agree. You certainly cannot know your partner completely, though once more, with an intense intimacy and a complete honesty, you can know them pretty darn well.
It blows my mind to consider that other people would not find my sexual partner attractive. He is an exceptionally attractive man. Guess what? That is why I want to fuck him all the time, well, one of the reasons anyway. To deny the fact that others may be aroused by him is denying both mine and his sexuality. People don’t metamorphosise into a monster when they become involved in a relationship. They don’t lose their sexuality. They don’t stop being attractive and they do not stop being attracted to others. When will we learn this simple yet complicated fact of life?
Perel continues.
Infidelity, she says, is one of the great recurring themes of the human experience. "And we are not monogamous! We are not! Monogamy is human, but human beings are not monogamous! By nature! Historically we have always been unfaithful – and always condemned infidelity. For a glimmer of passion, or whatever, people have been willing to risk everything. Women more so than men."
I like that phrase – human beings are not monogamous by nature. It is interesting that she sees that women are far riskier than men in the infidelity stakes. She continues to say that female infidelity is a sign of social evolution and that the power dynamism of gender is shifting.
Back to the economy, I reckon! The reason that women have been less faithless in the past could be to do with the financial reliance on a partner. Without the need and dependability of financial stability, I have a feeling there would be a completely different response to monogamy.
How far we have travelled and yet how thwarted our journey has been and continues to be.
"The men and women I work with invest more in love and happiness than ever before, yet in a cruel twist of fate it is this very model of love and sex that's behind the exponential rise of infidelity and divorce. Fascination and disillusion stare at each other." Says Perel.
I find this statement fascinating.
Are those of us who commit adultery obsessed and driven by a search for love and happiness? Does this search, if indeed it is, simply create a disillusion?
The more and more I read of this article, I realize what an incredibly fortunate soul I am, or maybe that is my delusion.
I never went in search of love or happiness or sex. I was quite content with what I had, even if the latter was insignificant or even non-existent. I did become fascinated but I don’t think I had illusions. I expected nothing and gained everything. Disillusion could, of course, be just around the corner.
Honesty and trust could, of course, ensure that disillusion is prevented.
"The standard ideas that affairs deplete intimacy, that affairs deplete the marriage, they are always harmful – I say: this is one possibility. But there are others. Affairs also are enormously enlivening. Re-eroticising. They balance the marriage. People who have affairs don't always want to leave the marriage. Sometimes, often, they are looking for a way to stay!"
"When you have an affair, this is rebellion! This is not a mild act! We have affairs to beat back the sense of deadness. We have affairs not because we are looking for another person, but because we are looking for another version of ourselves. It's not our partner we seek to leave with the affair, it's ourselves. It's what I've become that I don't like. It's how I've truncated myself. That there are parts of me that I have been so out of touch with, for decades… And of course, we live twice as long. We are different with different people."
Why the bolder print? This one hit home. I am not going to explain that here other than to say that Ms. Perel has made a very important and significant statement here.
Many ‘affairs’ happen because people are trying to find something of themselves rather than the idea that they are running away from what they have. For some, having a relationship outside their committed one enhances the primary relationship, brings back the excitement. It gives them balance. It nurtures a sense of wellbeing that can considerably improve the marriage or the long term commitment. Other times it does the opposite. Other times again, it can do both.
Whatever else, Perel says, we do not have affairs simply because we are bad by nature; or deceptive, or selfish, or cruel. "It's not just about right, and wrong, and moral. Particularly in America and in the UK, this is what we say about affairs. It's wrong. We talk about cheater. Philanderer. Liar. Narcissist. If it's not all those condemning words, then it goes to pathology. Borderline personality disorder. Childhood trauma. Addiction. We hide behind moral condemnation, or pathologising. This is not helpful, and not true. If it is true, then there are a lot of us suffering with childhood trauma and borderline personality disorders, and we have been suffering from them throughout history! We need to start to understand infidelity in terms of the complexities of life today. We need to think in terms of the failed ambitions of love."
Right up until the last sentence, I was happy with this paragraph, though on re-reading, I am beginning to understand what she is saying.
If, as Vernon and Perel are suggesting, infidelity is far more commonplace than we would like to think, then surely it cannot be evil or a pathological disorder? Yes, we need to consider infidelity in terms of the complexities of the now, but what exactly is all of this about “failed ambitions of love”?
Maybe it has something to do with an unrealistic notion of what love actually is.
Love is not about deprivation. Love is not about being untrue to oneself. Love is so complex a concept that it is almost ephemeral and yet equally eternally unintelligible.
I keep on saying this phrase over and over in my mind. “Infidelity has something to do with failed ambitions of love”. Does this mean that we are unfaithful because we have high expectations of what love actually is? Does this mean that those who are unfaithful are constantly seeking the pinnacle of a loving attachment? Does this mean that we are never capable of finding that ultimate loving relationship and that it is a completely unattainable and futile aspiration?
It sounds to me as though we are pretty harsh to ourselves and one another if this is the case.
Yet there is a counter argument. There are those who do remain faithful. Maybe they are the abnormal ones. Maybe they are the dishonest ones but for now let us assume that there is complete faithfulness in some relationships. Have they managed to achieve the ultimate ambition of love?
And there are those who have deep affection for one another, who acknowledge one another’s sexuality, have decided that infidelity cannot exist between them because infidelity in itself suggests an ownership of another human being. Maybe it is these people that have actually achieved the pinnacle of a loving relationship – one that accepts that we are individuals, one that appreciates the sexuality of the people involved, one that is honest and frank enough to admit to wanting or having sexual relationships with other people.
Isn’t that the ultimate aim fulfilled? If this was achieved, then articles such as this would not need to be written because there would be no such thing as infidelity!
But then again, I am just a dreamer!
Perel thinks we have to work toward renegotiating our ideas of monogamy. We need to see it as an exclusive emotional commitment, but not an arrangement that necessarily denotes sexual exclusivity.
Ah, yes – now we are coming onto something that is extremely interesting. Emotions, attachment, non-attachment, exclusivity.
In essence, this statement is possibly a good one. If people can assume that a primary relationship is about an exclusive emotional attachment rather than a sexual one, then infidelity is excusable. It is less significant. This makes sense…….. unless, of course, the emotional commitment is severed too.
There is an assumption that affairs take place, even by Perel, because we are trying to seek some unachievable image of love. We can fuck around happily because we have this notion of being “in love” in its giddy, unrealistic and glorious way.
Only some people have additional relationships that go way beyond the physical and the sexual. What of them, I wonder? Can you have two “exclusive emotional attachments”? Two and exclusive don’t go together by the law of physics!
"Free love didn't believe in the old model. Free love wanted to throw the old model out. Free love saw it as reactionary, as constraining, bourgeois. The new model is an attempt to reconcile our needs for commitment and our need for freedom. Our needs as part of an individualistic society, which talks about individual fulfilment and personal happiness and more is better, and our need for secure attachment and a stable family." She points out that, while we often talk critically about the idea of "having our cake and eating it" with reference to affairs, in every other aspect of our lives – in work, in our homes, in our social lives, in our experiences of the world, in our constant quest to improve ourselves and our quality of life – we are encouraged to have as much as we possibly can of everything.
I don’t really want to add anything to this paragraph other than to highlight it as significant.
Commitment and freedom have been seen for many decades, even centuries, as mutually exclusive. You cannot have one if you are seeking the other. Perel is suggesting here that you possibly can have both if one redefines the interpretation of fidelity. Furthermore, I think she is advocating the view that there is a constant drive for fulfillment and that in every other aspect of our lives, we are encouraged to have “the best”. What is wrong with wanting your cake and eating it, as long as it is not to the detriment of others?
And then the article has its penultimate statement with the one small crux, the sting in the tail.
What of jealousy? Ah yes, the green-eyed monster, the passionate envy that is so irrefutably destructive.
As a life-long sufferer, I am intrigued to hear and see what Esther Perel says on the subject.
"Aha!" Perel says, and she laughs…………….."And, of course, the view is that jealousy is a negative emotion, it's a primitive emotion…………..Jealousy goes hand in hand with passion. Is jealousy intrinsic to love? Yes! It's an indicator. If you cheat on me, am I just pissed because it's a sloppy thing to do? Or am I jealous, jealous that you had with someone else what I want to have with you, or what we used to have that was special? Because that's a very different thing! I don't know that you can have romantic love that doesn't involve jealousy. The question is: how much? And what do you do with it?"
More bold highlighting!
Jealousy is a destructive emotion. It is there, subliminal or overt. It can cripple and ruin the most intimate of relationships. By loving someone, you feel passion. The passion is so intense and so wonderful that in your irrational moments, you want it to be constant, forever, eternal. You cannot imagine that love being transferred or duplicated elsewhere. To consider your man or woman being sexually involved with another makes you feel jealous. Love and all its glory comes with the negative.
Someone once said to me that if you choose to believe in God then you also choose to believe in the existence of the devil. Whilst I am not sure that I hold much belief in anything, I think there is a point to be made here.
If you accept all that is wonderful about the brilliance of intimacy, spiritually, sexually, the works, then you may have to accept that there is always the possibility of a down side. Natural highs are fine but they are not necessarily sustainable, they have the potential to damage if there is an expectation of constancy and there is always the feasibility of coming down.
The question is: how much? And what you do with it?
Absolutely, totally. This is unequivocal.
Jealousy is an emotion that is as destructive as you allow it to be.
So my man wants to fuck other women. He loves sex. He loves women. He wants to suck another woman’s tits. He wants to feel inside her pussy in all its feminine glory. He wants to kiss her and hold her. He wants to feel his way around her slender and warm body. He wants to give her the love I know he is capable of giving. He wants me to know how he is feeling. He wants to share his passion with me.
How much can I take? How much do I want to know? How much does anyone want to know?
If you had asked me these questions a few years ago, I would have said that the only thing I wanted was for him to want me. I could not even entertain the thought that he could possibly want to fuck anyone other than me. I could not contemplate that he wanted to fuck someone more than he wanted to fuck me. I saw only an either/or.
There are times that I still see this. There are times that I am literally petrified that he will find someone who means more to him than I do but there isn’t anything that I can do about this so why worry?
What do I do with it? Well, quite frankly, I take my jealousy by the horns and allow it to challenge me. I challenge it. I embrace it. It is part of me and I have to learn how to deal with it.
I want to know everything. I want to know his thoughts and his acts. In that way, I can cope with my envy.
The simple truth is that when he fucks someone else, I find that a challenge but the depth of our relationship goes way beyond this. He cannot be unfaithful to me because I do not own him and he does not own me. Our commitment to one another is there. It is implicit and him fucking another woman, just as me fucking another woman or man does not detract from the intimacy of our relationship.
Infidelity cannot take place.
And maybe this is a lesson for us all.
The article started with quotes from people who have not actually had sex with others but have certainly thought about it. They have dabbled in cybersex. They have fantasized or rationalized potential sexual ‘infidelity’.
If people were more honest and open about their sexuality, these happenings would not be seen as an indiscretion. They would merely be part of a loving relationship If people could be honest about the positives and the negatives of extra-maritial/relationship sex, then I think the world might, just might be a happier place but it is wholly dependent on trust, belief and the ability to manage that very destructive emotion.
Furthermore, this rapidly expanding field of infidelity is yet another reason for us to redefine monogamy. "Do we have to put monogamy on a spectrum? Do we need to think: what does monogamy mean to me? Does it mean no sex with other people? Does it mean not to look at other people? Does it mean not to fantasise about other people? Does it mean not to Facebook your exes? Not to text your friends? Where is the line going to be drawn? Monogamy today is no longer going to be assumed. It's going to have to be negotiated."
Perel's ideas on infidelity are infinitely more useful than anything else currently doing the rounds. They would, at the very least, shake up lazy wisdom on what it means to cheat and be cheated upon. They would provoke debate, move things on. I think they should be given clinical currency.
Here, here and here’s to more debate on the subject.
Wake up world and be a little more realistic about the profoundly stupid expectations we put upon one another. Wake up and realize that you can have the most perfect, intimate relationship that enables your partner to express themselves sexually, even emotionally, but that is probably the more challenging of the two.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)