http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/10/11/sl-letter-of-the-day-nonmonogamous-blues Comments On: SL Letter of the Day: Nonmonogamous Blues by Dan Savage en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Sat, 25 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Sat, 25 May 2013 18:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
@70, One risk with an affair is that it might end abruptly AND with the man's wife and kids thinking he is evil incarnate. (Whatever you and I think about him.) By letting his spouse understand the reality of his experience (he wants variety, or more sex, or this particular other woman, or whatever), he has a better chance of being able to maintain a lifelong friendship with his wife/ex-wife and with his kids. Though for some people my risk assessment may be wrong. I'm sure there are some wives who would think their husband even worse for trying to open the marriage (Pervert!), than for having human failings and cheating. If Celestia's boyfriend honestly thinks his relationship with his wife & family will recover better from the discovery of an affair than from him openly asking for non-monogamy, then his choice is reasonable.

I'd still advise Celestia to stick with condoms, though.
Posted by EricaP]]> Sat, 20 Oct 2012 15:53:34 -0700 The Stranger
Nobody can be sure a marriage will really be happy -- and yet people keep trying. (Add long list of important things in life that are not sure things -- career choices, education, etc. -- yet we go on and do them anyway).

I don't see evil intent in Celestia. Assuming her boyfriend is sincere (if he isn't, it's a different situation), I don't see evil intent in him either. If the result is an improved quality of life for everyone (including the children, who benefit from having a less stressed-out father), it is a win-win situation.

To say that it might end abruptly is to saying nothing more than could be said about pretty much anything else. Yes, it could. The risk may even be relatively high. But so it is with many a good thing in life.
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:24:13 -0700 The Stranger
Basically, he is making the choice of staying despite suffering through a sexless marriage and despite his wife's opinion that this shouldn't be important to him, because he loves her, and his family. I've suggested books (actually online blogs) similar to the ones you mentioned, but his wife won't have it. It's one topic they have trouble discussing.

The results, from where I sit, are not pretty. But it's his choice to make, not mine. I did encourage him to divorce; I don't anymore, because he won't. I think he's waiting for his own libido to decrease, so that it will be less of a problem.

It is, I repeat, his choice. But seeing him suffer does make me sad.

Posted by ankylosaur]]> Thu, 18 Oct 2012 03:17:48 -0700 The Stranger
I agree that Celestia is serving as a pressure relief valve on a difficult marriage. (not going to speculate on whether the husband is lying to her about conditions in the marriage.) Letting that pressure and resentment build up could well destroy the marriage sooner than it otherwise would go. If everyone in the marriage is happier as a result of their affair -- less resentment, more attentive husband, et cetera -- it is a win-win.

And I also agree that if the wife should ever find out, there will almost certainly be hell to pay in terms of divorce, strife in the household, ruptured relationships all around. It's a huge, huge risk.


Posted by avast2006]]> Thu, 18 Oct 2012 01:13:13 -0700 The Stranger
Authenticity.

Human interaction is full of situations where you -edit/allow misconceptions/don't disclose- because the full truth serves no purpose and would hurt those involved.

Perhaps "coming out" might be an equivilent. In some situatons, the cost of being out would be devastating. And in those cases, there is no shame in being in the closet to certain folk. There is a certain amount of energy spent in the deception though.

I for one, would rather spend my energy working torwards other goals.


Posted by shoeshine]]> Thu, 18 Oct 2012 00:23:28 -0700 The Stranger
If LLS will do neither, and refuses to acknowledge the pain or doesn't mind that you're in pain, then you end up at divorce. But in that case, you haven't thrown anything away. Surely you don't want to grow old with this person who doesn't treat you humanely...


Posted by EricaP]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:21:05 -0700 The Stranger
To me, this demonstrated that not only was he unfulfilled, but he had approached her about this"

@30: He should be approaching her for divorce.
Posted by continue back-patting about your "service"]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:19:21 -0700 The Stranger Posted by you're setting yourself up for failure otherwise]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:09:29 -0700 The Stranger Posted by EricaP]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:08:53 -0700 The Stranger
I think the factor of the existence of kids complicates it. As a non-custodial father, (shared legal custody), my decision wouldn't be separable from that relationship with the kids. I do see my kids on one of those schedules, but it isn't enough. More often now, physical custody is being shared, but I couldn't afford a lawyer. She could through her parents. I lost a lot in the arrangement.

I wasn't in the situation of cheating vs. honesty, but if that were the only factor, with the knowledge I have now, I'd rather be in a cheating relationship and see my kids and still have influence on their lives. That isn't way is portrayed above, but perhaps I have shared a scenario that adds to the complexity.


Posted by geoz]]> Tue, 16 Oct 2012 07:08:58 -0700 The Stranger

Posted by EricaP]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:29:24 -0700 The Stranger
The beauty of a human being with an exquisite brain is that we can choose to defy our nature, which is inherently greedy, selfish, and thoughtlessly cruel. We can make decisions that help others a lot even if it hurts us a little. We can take a path that leads to less harm, and make the world a better place even if it is in the small way of causing less heartache for other humans. And that is what we should try to do, and of course it's difficult and doesn't always work out, which is why we live in world that is often quite sad.

For me, the real problem is when people deny or ignore that they have such a choice, and act proud of their laziness in just going with their initial selfish impulses. Do you think I don't want to conveniently lie sometimes or leave a restaurant without paying or drive drunk?

Some think bad behavior is okay because it's human nature. That is false. It is understandable, I get it, but it's not okay. We must choose to do better.
Posted by mtnlion]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 21:16:42 -0700 The Stranger
Knowing you are fallible and forgiving yourself your failures is not the same as choosing the easier option for the sake of your own comfort or convenience. Do you do your best to live with integrity, or do you make excuses for yourself? Do you hurt someone else because you are hurting?

Posted by secretagent]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 16:03:28 -0700 The Stranger
Many people who are treated terribly at work do start pilfering. It's not right, but it's human and common.
Posted by EricaP]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:26:23 -0700 The Stranger
I'm saying this as someone who fully believes that sexual satisfaction is a right, and that a lack of it is a completely legitimate reason to divorce. They are equals, though and have equal rights to their own needs - his for sex, hers for honesty/fidelity.

The correlary here to me is like asking for a raise. You deserve the raise - you've worked for the company for 5 years, you've gone above and beyond, inflation is up, etc. Perhaps they even agreed to give you the raise and then did not. However, if you don't get the raise, that is not then your excuse to start embezzling. And Celestia, in her complicity, is the same as that bookkeeper, noting your embezzlement, looking the other way. Obviously not a perfect comparison, but worthwhile, I think
Posted by secretagent]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:18:42 -0700 The Stranger Posted by EricaP]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:06:36 -0700 The Stranger
I understand the concept of "if no one dated a cheater, there'd be no cheaters," but I think Celestia is doing very little wrong. In fact, I think she's a best case scenario for this guy and his family. Let's assume he was going to find sex somewhere (and as countless priests/congressmen/pastors have proven, men tend to find the sex they want no matter the consequences) then Celestia is perfect as someone who won't be a "home wrecker" because she doesn't want a serious relationship. It may not be "win-win" but it's at least "win-kinda-win-at-least-for-now".


Posted by YUUUUUUUP]]> Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:31:02 -0700 The Stranger
Also, I do find outright (and ongoing) deception to be wrong and I guess that's non-negotiable for me. The giant lie the husband continues to live denies his wife the truth about her marriage and her life. And the truth is everything.

Maybe "heartless" is a bit harsh, but her phrasing just struck me as deeply selfish and deluded. I consider how it would feel to be the wife, reading that, as a total stranger unabashedly proclaims she's doing something to better her marriage by sleeping with her husband. It would be an absurd claim to read from the wife's perspective; she would not be grateful, although it seems that Celestia thinks she deserves some kind of praise. It's like listening to someone brag about how they approved someone for a loan they'll never pay off. ("They're so happy right now with their lovely new home, and I get lots of money too.")

And yes, there's a lot I don't know, but I can't really imagine what I could know that would make me any more approving of this. For every reason that might make it okay, I feel it can be refuted with a better solution than this. Interestingly, I don't usually judge people for much larger offenses. At work, my job is to treat with positive regard no matter their choices, and I don't struggle with that. I think it's the smugness and nonchalance, paired with the fact that many people on Slog often seem to want to let others off the hook for cheating.
Posted by mtnlion]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 15:00:40 -0700 The Stranger
If he still feels passionately in love with his wife, can you suggest to your friend that he read the work of David Schnarch, particularly Passionate Marriage (1997) and Intimacy & Desire (2011)? Or these interviews, at least:
http://www.sheknows.com/love-and-sex/art…

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/inti…
Posted by EricaP]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:45:30 -0700 The Stranger Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:20:15 -0700 The Stranger
@37's point is that it is not necessarily wrong to trust people. If indeed there is a good reason why her boyfriend is lying to his wife -- and a sexless marriage, depending on the situation, may well be a good reason (see other columns by Dan) -- then she may well be right in trusting him.

Americans tend to be strong on the "once a liar always a liar" rule, often ignoring important events from their own lives. I say Celestia may be right about her boyfriend -- and if so, then her situation is not bad at all.

And if he is a liar and is just manipulating Celestia... then it is not her fault, just as it wouldn't be her fault if a faithful monogamous boyfriend were also manipulating her. @37 is indeed right: that would be the boyfriend's fault, not hers.
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:16:55 -0700 The Stranger
You assume Celestia behaved poorly, but I frankly don't see why. She found -- apparently -- a win-win situation in which everybody is happier now than it was before. (Assuming that everything is as she says -- but we usually do pay this courtesy to anybody who describes his/her situation here.)

In that sense, I don't think I'm rushing to defend her. I'm simply assuming that her description of the situation is correct. If indeed that is the case, then I stand by what I said to her. You describe her part in her story as "heartless", but frankly I don't see that. She wanted to make sure her boyfriend was in a bad situation in his marriage before going ahead -- how is this heartless? Again assuming everything is as she said, and that her boyfriend isn't lying -- he tried to talk to his wife, and didn't get what he needed. Now he does, and his relationship with his wife improved -- and Celestia describes it as a plus. It doesn't seem to me that she is simply ignoring the wife and the kids. Do you really think this is heartless? You say it looks bad; I don't think so. To me, it looks neutral.

(Disclosure: I have a friend who is trapped in a sexless marriage with a wife who does not want to communicate on the topic. She thinks he "shouldn't want it so much". He doesn't want to divorce because he does love her, despite the lack of sex; he would be shattered if he divorced her. And there's the children. The result is not pretty to watch.)

Your comment on people in general boils down to one (quite good) rule: please don't hurt others. As a corollary, please avoid situations in which you may hurt others. I agree with that rule; in fact, I will go as far as saying that everybody here in this thread agrees with it -- Celestia included.

But if there is one thing that life has taught me -- and I've been through a number of rather uncommon situations because of my work (I do fieldwork among indigenous groups in the Amazon basin) -- it is that life throws at you situations in which ready-made rules break down. Flexibility and the vision that rules, even moral-ethical rules, are guides rather than unbreakable laws is, by my experience, a better guide to reality.

I'm not a Christian, but I like the idea of not throwing the first stone. If you see something and it just seems starkly wrong, you may still be wrong about that -- we're not perfect, we don't know everything. Here's my addendum to your moral rule: do your best not to be in situations in which you may hurt others, but also think about what to do if you see yourself in one of them, because sometimes it is not your choice. As for other people, if you can't avoid judging them, try to understand them as best as you can before doing so.
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:06:48 -0700 The Stranger
You're right, I didn't give Celestia the benefit of the doubt because she gave me no reason to do so. When people behave poorly, I do not rush to make excuses for them, especially when their tone indicates they feel no remorse.

I understand the world is full of people who make bad decisions, hurt those they claim to love, or simply fail to uphold their end of the bargain (I'm including the wife in this one, too). I am not naive to this. But that's my entire comment on this issue: people should avoid doing these things because they cause pain in relationships and families and make each other's lives worse. This is basic. It's not too late for Celestia or the husband to make new choices.

We should strive to be good, and Celestia's cool description of her part in this is heartless. The way she talks about it is wrong. It respects nothing of his wife or children outside of what she conveniently perceives as "good for them all" because our consciences must do tricks so we feel okay about some of the things we do.

I am voicing that I find her actions to be cruel and against what I would call moral. She is not required to care about my opinion, nor are you, but she took the liberty of laying out her side of the story and it simply looks bad. I'm still open to hearing more details about why this behavior is acceptable, but nobody's really offered me anything. I am flexible on morality in lots of cases, but sometimes you see something and it just seems starkly wrong. This is one of them. The couple should divorce.
Posted by mtnlion]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 11:28:06 -0700 The Stranger et al. are simply pointing out what the worst-case scenario could be. I think at least EricaP (who tends to be reasonable) will agree that not all cases are the worst-case scenario, and for all we know you may be in exactly the situation you described -- having an affair that is making you, your man, and his wife happier.

God knows that this is possible, and Dan has already established a number of cases in his column to the effect that it does happen. I personally know a couple in which the man was indeed deprived of sex by his wife, and who suffered visibly because of this.

Yes, there are bad people out there, and your man might be one of them. Yes, it is possible to create fake accounts to try to manipulate people.

But then again, he might not be a bad man. I believe the chances that he is being sincere are probably better than the chances that he went through all the trouble that EricaP's imagination attributed to him. We can't be sure, of course. But there's such a thing as being too careful in life. You might also let a very good thing slip by just because you didn't make the leap of faith and trusted him.

Keep your eyes open, but don't wear your worst-case-scenario glasses. After all, it is possible that at least some of the people who defend the worst case scenario here simply had bad experiences and are projecting them on your case.
Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 09:46:44 -0700 The Stranger waarvan, German wovon, etc.), and reconstructible to proto-Germanic. I'm sorry you have negative feelings for such a nice feature of the grammar of your language.

Americans tend to have strong feelings about lies -- which you call 'dishonesty' and 'betrayal'. Not entering too deeply into the philosophical details, I'll just direct you to the many things Dan has written in his blog about situations in which cheating may be justified.

Indeed people should stand by their word. But life being the way it is, this is not always possible, or even reasonable or decent. I'm sorry that the world is this way -- I wish it weren't --, but it is.

I agree the husband and wife should communicate. If at all possible, this is the best solution. Alas, this is not always possible--regardless of the best intentions of all concerned.

But what I do find more than a tad arrogant is your assumption -- not to repeat the word "preconception" -- that Celestia's case has to be the worst case scenario. You choose not to entertain the possibility that their situation may be less obvious and clear-cut than the ones you're thinking about. That is your prerrogative, but you do have to accept the fact that you may be wrong.

Posted by ankylosaur]]> Sun, 14 Oct 2012 09:37:04 -0700 The Stranger