Two Quickies

Posted by: Dan Savage
Topic: Missing Ed, Responding to Greg and Amiira

I'm a little under-the-weather today, which is why my post is so late and will be brief--well, brief for me. Two quick Friday items...

First, I wanna say how much I'm missing Ed Young right now. I'm sure we could get into a fabulous argument about disgraced Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idablow). He'd say something about how this is what you get when you tolerate sexual sin, and I'd point out that Craig was about as intolerant of sexual sin—well, other people's sexual sin—as a man can possibly be. Spectacular crack-ups like Craigs are what you get when you create or buy into a culture that tells gay men and lesbians that Jesus hates 'em and that it's better to live a closeted life than to live openly and honestly and with some integrity.

Second, a quick response to Greg and Amiira Behrendt... who responded today to me and Wendy...

I’m being sincere when I say. “What the hell is a marriage then if you have to cheat to stay in it?” I’m not directing this at Dan because I’m sure many people believe that, what I’m saying is I believe that it’s all totally avoidable if you have the capacity to be honest with yourself and your partner from the get go.

What kind of marriage is it? Why a dysfunctional one, of course, a marriage that's messy and unsatisfactory and complicated... and may still be worth preserving anyway. Yes, cheating is evil—but so is divorce and splitting up. There are times when cheating is the lesser evil. Not everyone is in a financial position to split up over sex. There may be kids involved. Should a couple together 30 or 40 years just pack it in because one person decides that he or she (it's usually she, though) isn't interested in sex anymore? Would it really be better for the couple—emotionally, financially—and their children and grandchildren if the husband tore apart their home, ended their marriage, and destroyed their finances?

I'm sorry, but I'm going to stick to my guns here: there are times when cheating, while evil, is the lesser evil. And marriages with a "do what you need to do" understanding are more common than many seem willing to acknowledge. I would hope that Greg and Amiira aren't there after seven years together; my boyfriend and I aren't there after 13 years together. But if you check back with us at 37 and 43 years—and if we're in a position to be honest about it—we might be there then.

Comments

[Greg]

Bravo Dan! In a world where most things are easier said than done, Dan does a great job of telling us the things that are easier done than said.

It's easy for people in great relationships to say "I'll never cheat, my partner and I will do everything we can and break up if necessary but I'll never cheat." Dan has a good point though... it really is much easier (in the short term at least) to cheat than to break up or divorce. Sure, guilt may come back to haunt the cheater later, but weigh that versus the massive financial, emotional, and other assorted messes that come from divorce and cheating does appear to offer a less devastating alternative.

Cheating still sucks of course, I'm not advocating it. Obviously, if cheating is going on, there's something f'd up in the relationship. Nevertheless, Dan just told us what many of us already know is true but just don't like to admit. Real life is rarely as nice as we'd idealize it to be.

[Blondegirl]

I too agree with Dan. I know of one such couple. After having a baby, the wife announced that she was done with sex, forever and ever, amen. That was it...there was no discussion, and she told him that if he wanted to ever see his kid, he had to accept the situation. From what he told me (I never spoke to her about it...) she had never really liked sex, and even though he tried and tried (and I know what he tried, because I was the one giving him advice)to please her, she couldn't loosen up or enjoy it. I am sure he did everything he could, but what can be done?? Some people, men as well as women, just don't like sex.

So she left him with 3 choices: stay and be celibate forever; divorce and loose his child; or stay, and cheat.

He chose to get a lover, and it really did save his marriage. As far as I know (I'm not in close contact with them anymore) they are still together, and still happy.

[K]

Dan, I greatly appreciate your comments. It isn't alway the woman, though. I decided after 30+ years of marriage, and no sex for years that it wasn't worth working on any more, even with family and financial issues. I never considered cheating during that time I stayed with him. It just would have made things more messy for me. My feeling is if you have exhaused all possible avenues of reconciliation and there is still no resolution, get out and live your own life. There is nothing worth staying for if there is no communication and no intimacy and the other person doesn't care either way! Life is too short to remain in a bad relationship, married or not, cheating or not.

[Oren Amitay]

First Dan, Senator Craig's situation is just one more beautiful, classic example of "Reaction Formation," as was the case with Ted Haggerty and so many other homophobes or homo-negative individuals.

I also agree with your stance, as I discussed in your other thread on the topic. Of course, as a psychologist who works with couples as well as individuals in troubled relationships, I do not normally advocate cheating. However, my experiences have taught me, if nothing else, that these kinds of situations are not usually black and white; in many cases there ARE reasons to stay in a (perhaps temporarily) sex-less marriage while satisfying your sexual needs with someone else.

As you've said, Dan, children and financial issues often preclude leaving the marriage. And as much controversy as there is, ample research demonstrates that divorce DOES usually have a strong negative impact on the kids. The exception is when the relationship is "poisonous" and it inevitably permeates the kids' lives as well. In such cases, I agree with people who advocate leaving, as long as the couple has truly tried to address the issues (see below), or if one person absolutely refuses to do so.

But if the "only" problem is a lack of sex drive on one person's part, yet the couple otherwise gets along amicably and are able to raise their kids together well, then one has to question whether breaking up would really be in their best interest.

However, in line with what Wendy has said, I would never suggest anything like that until I knew the couple had truly tried their very best to resolve the issues that may be leading to their lack of sex (or other problems in the relationship). Talking about it once or twice, surprising the partner with flowers or dinner occasionally, and other minor interventions does NOT count as TRULY trying to resolve the issue.

On a final and unrelated note, I'm surprised to see "blondegirl" back. Please check Wendy's thread, "blondegirl." I've left a few messages for you...

[Dope]

Infidelity is always wrong. It says so in the Bible, which is God's word.

[Dope]

Cheating may sometimes be the lesser evil, but it's always evil.

[James]

Everyone wants to rationalize away the hurt that they do to others based on his or her problems. Serious problems in a marriage are allowed to create bitterness and resentment towards each other. Sexual dysfunction within marriage is not sensitively handled with decisive measures. Cheating and / or divorce are the solution. The cycle continues and leaves everyone hurt, bitter and in pain. Taking responsibility for the problems within your marriage and doing whatever it takes to solve them is the only solution that is not self destructive.

Moral Relativism breeds this kind of "narcissistic laziness", unwillingness to take responsibility, and unwillingness to take charge of the problems within a marriage. Good point, bad conclusion with this one.