He says in a weak voice "There's something I must confess."
"Shhhh" said the wife, "There's nothing to confess. Everything is all right."
"No" the husband replied, "I must die in peace. I had sex with your sister, your best friend, her best friend and your best friend's mom!"
"I know," she whispered, "That's why I poisoned you, now close your eyes"
Dark but funny, right?
*************************
I heard an interview yesterday with a discussion about whether fidelity should always mean sexual fidelity, or whether it was more about honesty and faithfulness to some oath or promise or vow.
I think fidelity has both meanings. And isn't that interesting? That it could mean both of those things, separately?
The vow/honesty lady was suggesting that a relationship could and should be renegotiated every so often. Great idea, though I'm not sure it's feasible or easy. And I do think that our society believes that fidelity is about sexual monogamy, don't you?
The monogamy guy announced that 80% of the population believed that sexual fidelity was very important. Um, okay, maybe but... lots of people cheat, right?
The vow lady said that maybe relationships would last longer if they could be renegotiated? If you could say to your partner or 5 or 15 years, "I still love you, and still want to live in this house with you and the kids, but I need some of this in my life too."
The implication there is that needs and desires change over time.
The sexual monogamy guy was hard line about it. No, no renegotiating and no outside interests. Those things would lead inexorably to random other guys in the house, molesting your kids. And to either the swinging culture of the 70s or a muslin version of poly where women had no power. And generally to all kinds of evil.
The vow lady didn't have many good examples of how it could work. Most of her research was based on gay American men in the fairly recent past. Not enough real data there to prove much of anything.
But it's not about proving is it? It's more about food for thought, and wondering whether it's time to try something new.
I leaned more toward the argument of renegotiating. Though... golly... it would be complicated wouldn't it?
I don't have a convenient reference, but I remember reading the Celts had different marriages for different purposes.
ReplyDeleteSome involved cohabitation, some didn't. Some were for limited duration, then they returned to their blood relations. Some were purely for producing offspring.
The idea of "permanent" relationships I find much more complicated--and odd that we really practice temporary marriage too, via divorce.
Serial monogamy, that's my thing. i didn't know it was going to be, but as it's turned out, it has been. i might be done now though.
ReplyDeletei think fidelity is much deeper and more complex than just not having sex with anyone other than your spouse. "Faithfulness to a person, cause, or belief, demonstrated by continuing loyalty and support. " - from the Wikipedia.
i think some people are faithful to another person or to the idea of "forever and ever," and that's all good. i think i try to be faithful to my idea of who i'm called to be - if that makes any sense.
Lots of food for thought, Sin. Thanks!
aisha
Great post sin, and close to my heart / situation. I think that if we had renegotiated our position with each other, hubby and i would be in a different place now. It would only work though if both parties want the same thing and there in lies the problem. Monogamy as a cultural norm is how we get the divorce rate we get and the lack of longevity of relationships. Really interesting - i'll have to think about this some more :)
ReplyDelete