My Liberal Identity:
You are a Reality-Based Intellectualist, also known as the liberal elite. You are a proud member of what’s known as the reality-based community, where science, reason, and non-Jesus-based thought reign supreme.
Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com
Questioning Sacred Cows
On Alternet, in the article "Is Cheating Ever OK", the author addresses the question:
If one partner refuses to have sex, does the other have the right to seek it elsewhere?
My response to this article follows below:
Perhaps the question should be "Should monogamy always be an unquestioned part of every intimate relationship", rather than, "Is 'cheating' ever OK?"
While monogamy isn't natural for human beings in general, some people have an easier time being monogamous than others. The intensity of libido, of sex drive, varies widely among people. Monogamy is, perhaps, easier among those with roughly matching sex drives, and easiest among those with moderate to low libidos, where variety and/or novelty isn't high on their list of sexual needs. With a couple where both partners have relatively low libidos, a sexual dry spell would not necessarily make them want to look elsewhere for sexual gratification. Monogamy tends to work well for such people.
But for those of us with moderately high to very high libidos and/or where variety and novelty is important, monogamy is akin to the restrictor plates that NASCAR uses at superspeedways to limit how fast the cars can go. That is, there's a lot of power (sex drive) being thwarted to keep it within socially accepted limits.
If you've got a couple with mismatched libidos, as described here, you've got a recipe for frustration for the one with the higher libido. Such couples may be well-matched otherwise, but the expectation of strict monogamy in such instances can ruin what was otherwise a good marriage.
Likewise, there are instances where one partner becomes chronically ill or disabled and is no longer able to have sex. Is it fair to expect the healthy partner to satisfied with "just cuddling" for the rest of their lives?
Another related sacred cow is that many people believe that sex and love must always go together; that the only "proper" reason to have sex is as a way to express love for one's partner. But in reality, people have sex for many different reasons in addition to love: to fill a physical need similar to eating, sleeping and so on, a stress reliever, they're horny, etc. I'm of the opinion that as long as sex is between consenting adult partners, there is no one "proper" justification for sex.
In addition to questioning the assumption that all intimate relationships must always be monogamous, no matter what, we need to question the assumption that the only proper reason to have sex is to express love for one's partner. Perhaps then, couples with mismatched libidos or those with a disabled partner who are otherwise happily married, could continue to be happily married without one partner being sexually frustrated.
Your thoughts?
Your response seems to me basically an elaboration on what the author of
the alternet post suggests about "In a perfect world, everyone would spell
out their sexual desires and expectations -- their Yeses and Nos and
Maybes, their Must Haves and No Fucking Ways and Only If You Get Me Drunk
And Buy Me Diamondses -- early on in their relationships." That is to say,
you're calling for people to be self-aware and open and upfront. With that
in mind, I absolutely agree with and applaud what you're saying. People
should know themselves and communicate that knowledge openly.
John is a wise newly-wed, indeed. "Cheating" is dishonest. I don't think
there's room for dishonesty in a relationship, especially not at that
level. I don't think monogamy is for everyone, but I do think you have to
be honest. Like John said, a flat-out cut-off in sex indicates something
else.
