Intimacy, Fidelity, and Story-telling

S-E-X

Have I got your attention now?

Trigger warning: this essay discusses my personal attitudes towards spirituality, sexuality, and the intersection between the two. If this is a fraught issue for you or would be too much information, please be advised.

Sexuality is one of the great joys of being an incarnate being. I was going to say, "of being human", but research into our primate cousins shows that other animals engage in non-reproductive sexual behaviors (both opposite- and same-sex) to create relationships, establish hierarchies, cement alliances, and apparently for the sheer joy and pleasure of the experience.

I became engaged in a discussion of sexual intimacy and fidelity in the comments to the post You must remember this at the new Slacktivist website.

Specifically, the question was whether it made a physical relationship in some way more "special" if the only person one ever shared certain acts -- including kisses -- with was one's monogamous life partner.

I don't want to repeat all the back and forth, but this, I think, summarizes the argument I was trying to make:

The *act* cannot be divorced from the *context* -- that a kiss is only special and meaningful if it is something with another person, and who that person is not only MATTERS, it is what actually defines the kiss.

...

My spouse is a person I have been in that kind of unique relationship with -- unique because we are both unique, constantly changing, so at every moment our relationship is slightly different and "first time". Similarly, my high school hopeless crush is the only person I've been in THAT relationship with; my high school satisfied crush the same; the friend who I "experimented" with one night, before both saying, "Nah, that didn't work," and going back to friendship, the same; the passionate college fling, the same; the drunken college hookup after the disastrous SAE [fraternity] party, the same; etc. etc. etc.

To each of them I could honestly and truthfully say, "You are the only person I have ever kissed LIKE THIS", because the "LIKE THIS" was dependent on who each of them (and I *with them*) was and is.

Other commenters challenged this position, saying that it is easy to make such a claim about relationships in the past. But what about now? Could I hold to this abstract ideal if I found my spouse having a sexual relationship with someone else? Would I accept as a legitimate defense,

"I wasn't having sex with that woman! Not in the sense that I have sex with you! Those are completely different things, because you are two completely different people!" Maybe you would accept that rationale, but I submit that hardly anyone else would.

And you know what? That' s a pretty fair response, and it made me think. About intimacy, and fidelity, and what it means to me.

(Again, let me stress that this is my own personal understanding, and not meant to be considered either normative or prescriptive. My thoughts in this context of necessity come from a heterosexual monogamous point of view, but I don't think there is anything inherently inapplicable to a same-sex or committed polyamorous relationship.)

I feel uncomfortable with the possibility of offering TMI, or potentially violating the privacy of others. Suffice it to say that friends and colleagues have more than once questioned why I don't feel jealous about spouse's activities. More than surprised, they seem somehow offended at my lack of suspicion. They marvel at my shrug of "It's really not something I think much about", as if it were testament to a laudable (but pitifully naive) "trust" in spouse's ability to "resist natural temptation."

Let me hasten to note that I have zero reason to think spouse has in fact engaged in any extramarital affairs, although he -- like I -- has possibly passed the strict boundaries some would set. He is a more tactile person than I, and we both express affection in cuddling, hugs, and kisses. None of the people involved think of such interaction in a sexual manner, but I suppose it could count as infidelity of a sort.

But that really isn't the point.

Digression (but not really, I'm going somewhere with this):

I have more than once said that, more than any traditional worship, liturgy, or doctrine of Grace, I understand the interaction between human and Divine as Story. Creation is the grand Story God continually tells, in which the Divine Word spins our individual narratives into existence. In return, the Sacred Breath gives us voice to tell our stories back to our Creator, to each other, through text and picture and melody and movement, through scientific investigation and creative exploration, through our sharing and caring with and for and through one another, the unending intricate dance of our interactions with our world, our brothers and sisters, and ourselves.

One of the crucial things about my personal understanding of stories is that they only exist in a relationship. A story without a teller is shapeless noise. A story without a hearer is empty of meaning. Stories are created in the transcendent space where the mind and will and heart of the two meet -- which is why every story is unique, even when the teller's words or images are the same; the character and circumstances of the hearer is always slightly different and new. Creating a story in this way is possibly the most intimate act that two can participate in, even if storyteller is unaware or long dead by the time the story is heard.

And a marriage -- or any similar committed relationship -- is a special version of this kind of story. It is a story that two people create together, taking turns as teller and listener, or simultaneously creating and witnessing together. It can be a glorious story, in which the creators shape a narrative arc of support and sacrifice and shared joy, making themselves and each other more than they would be alone. It can be a fiery, passionate story, a quiet, gentle story, or even one that is frankly a little dull (even to the tellers). It can even be a tragic story, alas, twisted and cruel and destructive.

This story is told in words, of course -- both explicit ("To have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part") and implicit ("Sweetheart, could you reach that down for me? Thanks!") It's told in images, iconic snapshots of a whole character or plot development (me in those velvety blue feathers, him in that ghastly leather jacket with the fringe). It's told through actions, gestures as tiny as carrying a grocery bag, as dramatic as carrying over a threshhold, as life-changing as carrying a baby.

And yes, it's told through sexual intimacy. Every committed reader of the romance genre knows that a well-written, intense, sensual sex scene -- using "sex scene" in the broadest sense , from a brief restrained brush of lips to a ten- page graphic description of barely plausible gymnastic exploits -- can express developments of plot, of character, of conflict and communication and connection, in ways that no other action can.

In sexual intimacy, we use our bodies to tell the most fundamental and primal elements of our story together: "I am here." "You are here." "You please me." "I want to please you." "I recognize you, acknowledge you, accept you, trust you." "We have become one flesh, naked and unashamed."

Does "fidelity" mean that this story must be restricted to only one teller, one listener?

I love to share stories. I live to share stories. Mostly as a committed listener / reader, privileged to shape through my mind, my prejudices and desires and experiences, the stories others tell. Frequently as a conduit -- the greatest joy of my profession is to connect the right reader to the right author, so that a new story can be created. But also sometimes as a writer, whether spinning fictions out of ambient myth, or shaping facts into meaningful narrative.

Most of the latter stories I tell only to myself. They are still too fragile, cobbled together out of dreams and duct tape, to bear the weight of outside expectations. Some I give to interested companions, who return my vulnerability with the transformative grace of reading, criticizing, editing, cultivating them into stories of substance and purpose. A very few I cautiously launch into the wild, trusting them to find their own readers and maintain their own creation.

I don't give my stories to my spouse.

Not that he isn't welcome to read them, of course, if he wanted. But after decades of selecting books for his interests and tastes (and honestly, knowing what another will like to read is perhaps one of the most intimate kinds of knowledge a person can have), I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't enjoy them. He wouldn't dislike them; but they're the wrong stories for him. And he trusts my judgment on this matter.

By not sharing those particular stories with spouse, I am showing fidelity to the greater story of our relationship. I am investing in his integrity as a character in that story, placing my faith in him to remain true to man I know. By sharing them with others, I also challenging myself as a character within that story, providing room for growth and depth and honesty to the narrative arc I see for myself.

So to go back to the original challenge: would I feel betrayed if spouse were to have a sexual relationship with another person?

Well... it's complicated. (You knew that was coming.) It wouldn't be the act that would matter. It would be the story he would be telling to this hypothetical other.

Was the story untrue? Hurtful to the teller and the hearer? False to the character I always thought I knew? Did it introduce a cheap tangent, a jarring interruption, into the story we tell each other? "Choices have consequences", I always tell my children, and such a choice would be likely to have destructive implications.

But it wouldn't have to. This story could introduce a whole new narrative arc. It could be an enhancement of his character and mine. It could be an honest and truthful (if painful) unfolding of one story's end, and another story's beginning. Just because I don't like a story, don't want to hear it, doesn't mean that it is a shoddy story; it could just be the wrong story for me.

So, in the end, I guess I would say that fidelity doesn't cling to which body parts we press against who. Those are the tools we use, the paper and pencil. Nor does it belong to the deeds themselves, the alphabet and grammar and style.

Fidelity resides in the commitment to the story itself. And the only true betrayal is the failure of craft: to refuse to tell it as it needs to be told.

--hapax
____________________________________________________________________________

 

The Slacktiverse is a community blog. Content reflects the individual opinions of the contributors. We welcome disagreement in the comment threads, and invite anyone who wishes to present an alternative interpretation of a situation to write and submit a post.

Comments

[Kristy]

This... this is absolutely beautiful.

Speaking as someone who has never quite "gotten" the concept of either fidelity or jealousy, I thought this was a very interesting take on the entire idea. I like the thought that people are, in essence, creating a story with each other through their relationships. (And, like you, I've had people think I'm insane for not being jealous nor much concerned about "cheating," and it was nice to hear someone else with a similar, though not identical, viewpoint!) I think for the next few weeks I'm going to be thinking about my relationships (platonic and otherwise) in terms of what kind of story is being created...

[Jason]

Kind of on topic:

This struck a chord with something I'm kind of struggling with internally.

I grew up in a home where I was taught any sex at all outside of marriage was sinful and immoral. This was ingrained in me. Any television program or movie that I watched that featured any character having sex with someone that was not their spouse would garner some sort of comment from my mother.

I no longer believe this. I feel it is important to take every measure possible to have safe sex and prevent unwanted pregnancies and for me personally, its important to have some sort of commitment to someone I would sleep with.

I have some very good friends who recently have become engaged who have been living together for about a year and a half. My mom of course disapproves of this. I was talking to them and they said that their parents disapproved of it at first too.

I have been spending a lot of time looking at profiles on OKCupid lately. I want a relationship like the couple I mentioned above have, very much. When I visit them, I see what I would like out of my own life. I am fairly certain that the only women that are still around that have my parents' view of marriage are conservative fundamentalist types that I would not at all be compatible with.

If I start dating someone and we decide to become sexually active on any level, I am afraid it is going to cause familial discord. I don't know how I could hide it either. My parents live very close by. It seems like they could easily discover an overnight visit.

Also all this abstinence only talk has made quite a bit more terrified of unwanted pregnancy than I think is probably necessary.

Any advice on how to deal with all this? Its been concerning me lately. I think trying to adhere to my parents' old fashioned sexual mores is part of why I hardly dated in my 20's. Women who are both completely abstinent and also people I'd actually want to spend time with probably don't exist. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[Laiima]

@hapax, that was lovely and moving, and also thought-provoking. Count me in as another who rarely feels jealousy. Spouse is not physically affectionate with friends, but he is a photographer who often spends time with scantily-clad beautiful young women. I don't worry that he is tempted because he says he isn't.

I love the idea of a relationship being about Story, which evolves moment to moment.

I've had many relationships, romantic and otherwise, that I wanted to evolve differently than they did, but of course you can't make that happen unilaterally. So they ended, and I've tried to learn from them what to do differently, what to *want* differently, how to expect more for myself and from others. We coevolve with our relationships.

[Nick Kiddle]

I was having a strange conversation with my fiancee the other night. I was slightly embarrassed about the fact that I haven't announced our engagement[1] on a football forum where I'm a regular poster. My biggest worry is that I often talk about lasses I'm meeting for drinks on matchdays, and that might cause awkward questions. My fiancee nodded sympathetically and said she didn't expect me to out myself as poly in a potentially unfriendly forum.

That came as a surprise to me, because I hadn't thought of going out for a drink as a necessarily poly activity. I've always considered it to be just innocent socialising, and none of the monogamous relationships I've been in have ever had issues around that. Is the prevailing assumption that alcohol consumption will lead irrevocably to sex, or are there people who think just drinking and chatting all evening is an intimacy too far?

[1] Wait, I haven't announced our engagement formally here either. My girlfriend and I are now engaged, and plan to get married at some point possibly next summer, depending how long it takes to find a jurisdiction that will marry us.

[Jason]

Congrats Nick.

I have never heard of going out for a drink being anything than innocent socializing.

[Will Wildman]

Jason - first, I'd recommend you not worry about it now when it's a practical non-issue. And in the long run, if it ever does become an issue, then it'll be an issue you can discuss with your partner, who will presumably have her own perspectives and preferences on how to approach conservative parents-of-partner. (If you didn't feel comfortable discussing the issue with her, then I wouldn't think you'd be comfortable enough to sleep together, either.)

If you really want some kind of grounding on how to handle parents' views, then talking to people like your recently-engaged friends seems like a good avenue. I'm betting there are slacktivites around who have been in similar scenarios.

Women who are both completely abstinent and also people I'd actually want to spend time with probably don't exist.

...Um? I'm guessing you mean 'romantically' there, but furthermore I think it's implied that you think so because they would also be conservative fundamentalists, which: also not the case. People might be abstinent for any number of reasons, so unless you're specifically looking for sex-outside-of-marriage, like a requirement (which I don't think you are?), then operating on this assumption can only harm you by encouraging you to skip over a potential match.

Mostly I just thought you might want to consider the implications of the sentence I quoted and double-check whether that actually expresses what you mean. I'm reasonably certain the 'I'm not interested if she won't put out' vibe is not what you mean, but that's because I know you better.

Also, since this thread has pretty much already Gone There, it's worth noting that there are kind of a lot of options for sex with extremely minimal risk of pregnancy even before you consider contraceptives. People are a creative lot that way.

[Will Wildman]

Yay Nick!

The whole meeting-for-drinks thing can go either way based on context, as I see it. It can be "Excuse me, Attractive Stranger, but would you like to get a drink and discover whether we have anything in common?" or it can be "Hey, let's get a drink after [Event] and [talk/commiserate] about how [brilliant/gag-worthy] it was."

[Jason]

Women who are both completely abstinent and also people I'd actually want to spend time with probably don't exist.

I actually would prefer to wait to be sexually active just so I don't have to deal with all of this shit. However if a woman would like to become sexually active before marriage, it would not be a dealbreaker. I have realized that in the past I filtered a lot of people out based on morality issues such as these and I think that its probably has something to do with why I'm still single.

I realize that abstinent individuals that aren't always conservative fundamentalists, but based on my online dating results, they do seem to be in the extreme majority.

I was implying several things that I didn't wish to imply. This post mainly struck a chord because I was just on OKCupid and encountered a woman's profile and she was like me in a lot of ways that are extremely important to me. She is however extremely liberal regarding sex and much more experienced than I am. I messaged her, because she seems like someone I'd get along with really well. It may not be an issue because chances are she'll either never write me back, or we'll go out on 1 and 2 dates and not really have it go anywhere.

....its just that if that's not the case, I am concerned that my lack of sexual experience and these family issues would be a problem. I've been actively trying to think of what things were previously dealbreakers for me that would not be today and the whole sex thing is one of them.

I guess I'm just discovering that I'm a very different person than I used to be a few years ago and some of my prejudices/assumptions are part of why my love life hasn't exactly um...existed.

I have no moral problems with contraceptives. My only concern with them is that they aren't always foolproof.

[Jason]

last post was directed towards Will.... sorry.

[Deird, who is not a figment of imagination (as far as she knows)]

I am fairly certain that the only women that are still around that have my parents' view of marriage are conservative fundamentalist types that I would not at all be compatible with.
...
Women who are both completely abstinent and also people I'd actually want to spend time with probably don't exist.

Um...

*waves*

Hi, Jason. I'm abstinent in a no-sex-outside-marriage context, and I am definitely not a conservative fundamentalist type.

I also know several women who are abstinent who you'd definitely want to hang out with were they not in a different country.

We do exist.

[Sixwing]

Yay, Nick! \o/

Hapax, this really touched a nerve for me; Story is such a powerful concept in my life. I had not thought of relationships - not just the romantic ones - as having independent stories, but I think you're right; they aren't adequately described as chapters in a given individual's story (or even linked chapters between however many individuals are involved). To really stretch a metaphor, I'm not even sure 'chapter' is appropriate, 'arc' may be more like it. But that's just me playing with words.

I tend to agree that spousal infidelity (which, actually, SixSpouse and I have sat down and discussed, in order to set boundaries) is... not as big a problem as most people want to believe, for me. (I want to emphasize: for me. Apparently it is a Big Deal for a lot of people.)

It's not even so much as "what physical activities you are and aren't allowed to do by mutual agreement," though that is a part of it; as much as "these are the ways in which we respect one another, and if something is inadequate, let's talk." Much more of the story between us than the strict rules that define it.

[Jason]

@Deird-

Yeah, that was a case of me not realizing that implied something unintentional, until someone else read it.

Its a sin I committed far more frequently when I was new to slacktivist, but still do on occasion. Commenting here has improved my writing skills immensely.

[cyllan]

Any advice on how to deal with all this?

Try something along the lines of "Mom, Dad, I respect your values and your opinions, but my relationship is something that I have to be comfortable with. What happens in my house and in the privacy of my intimate life is my business and not yours. I will do my best to make sure I don't wave uncomfortable things in your face, but you have to respect my choices -- and the training and values that you gave me -- enough to not comment on this particular area of my life."

Possible TMI Ahead

Unwanted pregnancies happen if you have unprotected PIV sex. But that's hardly your only option. I have been happily and safely having protected PIV sex for a number of years and only got pregnant when I decided the time was right. You can also avoid PIV and engage in a whole lot of other things that are just fine.

Lack of experience on it's own isn't a deal-breaker. Lack of willingness to explore, discuss and experiment would eventually become one. I, personally, would not date someone who was not interested in sex before marriage, but I would date someone who wanted to hold off on sexual activity for a while. I think making sure that you and your partner are at least in the same book when it comes to sex is exceedingly important. I've seen what happens to relationships when two people aren't sexually compatible, and it usually ends in tears and broken promises.

[Will Wildman]

if that's not the case, I am concerned that my lack of sexual experience and these family issues would be a problem.

I started feeling a lot more comfortable about being a virgin when I codified a personal principle: If my prospective partner sees my lack of sexual experience as a flaw or problem, then I may not want to get in the sack with them after all. This thought might or might not be of use to you.

---

*metaphorically prods Deird with a fingertip to check substantiality*

Either you're real or you're a very popular hallucination.

[Lampdevil]

Jason, I think I've picked this up in things you've posted before, it's evident that your parents matter greatly to you. And that your parents opinions of you matter greatly to you. And that's quite fine, as we do want the approval of our parents, and harmony within the family is certainly something to strive for. That said... you're an adult now. One that apparently lives outside of the household, and is not financially dependant upon them. If the only thing that they can do, when you express a political/sexual/cultural opinion that they don't hold, is be disappointed? You are lucky. And also, potentially, quite liberated by it. If they can't ruin your livelihood, evict you from your house, steal your posessions, take away your children, or cause you physical harm, then I say Defy Away and let them huff and puff.

I love my mom and dad, but they are only human. My mom will tolerate nearly anything from me, while my dad is a tad more prickly. I live all the way on the other side of the province from them, so my contact with them is mostly by phone, and mostly on my own terms. I have hung up on my father when he was being horrible to me, and it felt good to assert my adultness in that way. I can choose who I wish to engage with and how to let people treat me, even my parents, ha ha so there. This is where my opinion is coming from. This is why it may not be applicable to you, a man who has a much different relationship with his parents. Still! I think there's some merit in standing up, looking the ones that raised you in the eye, and saying "I'm doing it my way, tough."

(However, the above is all kind of theoretical to the exact subject you're getting at. My parents could care less who I'm screwing outside the bounds of marriage, as it would be kind of hypocritical for either of them to scold me. My super-Catholic cousins and aunts, however, are not given the unvarnished truth about my life. I have lied when explaining my living situation to them. I have moved in with a man, and then gone "Y...yes! I've moved in with... with Michelle! My co-worker! It's fabulous!" and then forbid the man in question to EVER answer the phone. It makes it worse that we weren't even DATING or anything, he was just a friend, but I wanted to avoid the tongue-clucking that would result from the arrangement. It becomes EVEN WORSE when the man in question became my boyfriend about 6 months down the line.... the story has now been delicately shifted towards Michelle moving out, and this fella moving in, and one of these days I may just lose it and declare to them at the top of my lungs WE HAVE SEX WITH EACH OTHER AND IT IS REALLY AWESOME, GO JUMP IN THE LAKE YOU PRUDES.

We can at least take away the lesson that lying is bad, and you shouldn't do it.)

[Yeah, maybe I'll go pseudoanon on this one]

[TMI like whoa]

Jason: Mmmmaybe. I haven't had sex; initially, it was for religious reasons. I'm no longer really opposed to sex, but I don't seem to have the drive to have sex with another person that others do. I'm not asexual; I find lots of people fun and attractive, but I'd like to genuinely want to have sex with someone before I do, and that's just not something that has ever happened to me. (Well, not when the object of my affections was otherwise free.)

I don't talk about my virginity with many people, because it's a little weird and a lot personal, and mostly none of their business, and it's not something I think about much. (Also, it leads to the impression that you're a hardcore fundie, even if you're not, or a total naif, even if you're not.) So I suspect you're missing a slice of the abstinent population; there's a fair amount of stigma involved, so it's something that tends to come out a little farther into the conversation. Hardcore religious types tend to be more forthcoming because it's more acceptable and they're looking for someone like themselves, usually. (And because virginity is sort of fetishized in many hardcore conservative communities.)

Try not to panic ahead of time. Don't have sex until you're ready, and I suspect that you'll find that with the readiness for sex, you'll also find some solution (or resolution) to the worries about your parents. There's a lot of potential solutions - she'll probably have her own apartment or house, or you could move, or you could go to a hotel, or or or or. There will be options, and things will become more clear. Or they won't, and you can have just as much stress and worry in a month or six or twelve.

And there are forms of sex that bypass the risk of pregnancy even without contraceptives. Tab A and Slot B are not the only combinations. :)

[sarah]

[[Deird: We do exist.]]

I am not a figment of my own imagination, either.

*Pokes self*

Yup, we do exist.

[Dav]

"One of the crucial things about my personal understanding of stories is that they only exist in a relationship. A story without a teller is shapeless noise."

Oh, I never heard this put quite so nicely. YES.

Thank you, hapax.

[Dav]

[pokes self]

Nthing the celibate woman poking.

. . . wait, that sounded wrong.

---

Also, if *cough* Former Conservative *cough* is around today, my conversation with Justin basically just ground to an infuriating end. (Unless he apologizes really, really fast.) So much for the morning's optimism.

[Lonespark]

Ooooooh, story.

And sex, too.

I also have had the problem where I don't understand jealousy and have therefore done things kind of on a "better to ask for forgiveness than permission" basis only semi-intentionally.

And also too, Mr. Sparky and I have been together for fourteen years and married for twelve. I would not say, overall, that our story has been a good one. The relationship has had mutual abuse, deceit, betrayal, significant failures on many points. But it is a good story now. And I feel like the people we are now, the characters we are now, do belong together in at least some some sense. (Maybe our canon got a much-neede reboot?)

[Zigforas (who is lurking less)]

And a marriage -- or any similar committed relationship -- is a special version of this kind of story. It is a story that two people create together, taking turns as teller and listener, or simultaneously creating and witnessing together...Fidelity resides in the commitment to the story itself.

Thanks for sharing, hapax. This was beautifully written.

It's interesting for me to process your post in the context of my own experience as a former fundamentalist/evangelical now in an interfaith marriage (Christian(?)/Jewish).

I was very involved in an evangelical ministry when my partner and I first started dating (and I'm glad that he could appreciate me even then for who I am, though we have very different experiences and backgrounds in regards to both religion and sex). Our relationship was met with considerable resistance. I think much of that resistance flowed from the challenge our relationship posed to their particular version of the Grand Story (as our denomination understood it). The choice that my partner and I made to be together, and the love that we share, is "apostasy" (their words) precisely because it tells a different story about God. And I am (now) a joyful apostate: my partner and I are creating and witnessing a new story together.

[Karen, who is still stoked about getting a Slactiverse link]

"ten- page graphic description of barely plausible gymnastic exploits"

It would have been worth reading the entire article if it had been nothing but !!!! and that sentence.

[Kristy]

Is the prevailing assumption that alcohol consumption will lead irrevocably to sex, or are there people who think just drinking and chatting all evening is an intimacy too far?

Actually, that is an interesting point. I wouldn't say that drinking and chatting all evening is "too far," but then, as noted above, my definition of "too far" is likely different from most people's. I will, however, say that it is intimacy.

Part of my worldview (or, part of my problem, if you like!) is that I don't see a huge dividing line between emotional intimacy vs. physical intimacy. If I like someone enough to stay up all night talking to them, I'll generally like them enough to hug or cuddle with them. If I like them enough to hug or cuddle with them, I'll generally like them enough to kiss them - and so on, and so forth. Which is absolutely not to imply that I'll fall into bed with anyone I meet for coffee (goodness, I'm going to make myself out to be the slut of the boards if I'm not careful), just that I don't see clear-cut boundaries - only gradations. Not always uni-directional, either: a night spent sharing drinks and talking can sometimes be more intimate than a sexual encounter.

So while it's an unusual way to look at it (and I don't think most people would see it that way), I can understand the idea that sharing intimacy, even "just" emotional intimacy, with several people could be considered poly.

[MadGastronomer]

Nick! Congratulations!

And I think that the issue about meeting women for drinks is that it's ambiguous. It might be a date, which means it might be cheating on your fiancee, and even if you explain that it's not either one, there may be people who still go, "Nudge nudge, wink wink, you sly dog," or whatever.

[Kristy]

...True. That's a much simpler explanation :) (I may overthink at times. It happens.)

[Nick Kiddle]

//Part of my worldview (or, part of my problem, if you like!) is that I don't see a huge dividing line between emotional intimacy vs. physical intimacy. If I like someone enough to stay up all night talking to them, I'll generally like them enough to hug or cuddle with them.//

Yeah, I think I see it in a similar way. Part of having relationships is to work out where to draw boundaries, and I suspect everyone will put the line between "too far" and acceptable in a different place. It just never occurred to me that having a drink would be on the wrong side of the line, except in a relationship with serious jealousy/insecurity issues.

//And I think that the issue about meeting women for drinks is that it's ambiguous. It might be a date, which means it might be cheating on your fiancee, and even if you explain that it's not either one, there may be people who still go, "Nudge nudge, wink wink, you sly dog," or whatever.//

The idea that I might be a sly dog is pretty amusing, but I see why people would get that impression, depending how it was presented. In some ways, thinking I was gay all these years has been a poor preparation for these questions, because men go for drinks with other men all the time and no-one thinks anything of it.

[The Board Administration Team]

TIME SENSITIVE PETITION

TRIGGER WARNING: TRIGGER WARNING: Mistreatment of QUILTBAG people.

Petition: 48 hours to stop Uganda's anti-gay bill! Click here

[K]

I'm also going anonymous for this post.

My first serious boyfriend cheated on me twice. Both were just cybersex, but we were celibate for religious reasons, so that was still significant. We broke up for about a week after the first time, but then got back together because we realized we still loved each other. After the second time, we just stayed together. It hurt me both times, but it didn't destroy the relationship because I knew it was not a reflection of his love or lack thereof for me. I think, in hindsight, that he may be polyamorous by nature--he's certainly able to care for more than one person romantically/sexually at a time. However, he's monogamously married now, and we're still good friends. So I very much understand what hapax is getting at about the story of the relationship being what matters, more than whether either party had other relationships at the same time.

Jason, I was in a situation very similar to yours a year and a half ago. (I'm female, though.) My parents still believe in no sex before marriage; I abandoned that belief several years ago. I finally entered a relationship with a guy who had very little sexual experience for non-religious reasons. (His social circle is mostly male, and he had extremely severe facial acne until maybe three years ago.) We're not together anymore, but it was a really good experience. The only negative of us both having been inexperienced sexually is that neither of us had the opportunity to learn from someone who knew what they were doing, so the sex was never great. I live about a forty-five minute drive from my parents, but it was hard to hide that I spent most weekends at my boyfriend's house. I'm not sure what my parents think about whether he and I had sex, but they were at least polite enough not to ask whether we were or not. The worst that I got from either parent was advice to think about whether I wanted my future children to have a non-Christian father.

It's doable. It might be worth thinking through what you'll say to certain questions from your parents if necessary--even if you change your mind, it'll help you prepare. I've been able to rely on the fact that my parents have some belief in minding their own business, so I may have had it easier than you will. You might want to respond to questions with a simple statement that what you and the significant other have done is between you and her.

As for pregnancy, if you know how to use condoms correctly and the woman you're with is on the pill, the odds of pregnancy are extremely low. If a condom breaks AND she's missed a pill that cycle, you can consider plan B, but I've never had a condom break and I feel pretty safe with the condom/pill combination.

[Laiima]

Congrats on your engagement, Nick.

[Karen, who is still stoked about getting a Slactiverse link]

Oh, and congratulations on your engagement, Nick!

[Friend of many QUILTBAG people]

Congratulations, Nick!

[MaryKaye]

When we got married, my husband and I made a considered decision not to swear monogamy. We swore, instead, that we would never hide an affair, that any children resulting were a joint responsibility to the extent that the third party involved would allow, and that any extramarital sex had to be as safe as possible (condoms, STD testing, etc).

Twenty years later those careful arrangements have still never been used, as far as I know (and I think I would know).

It would be pretty disruptive if I had an affair, because it would almost certainly suck energy out of a home relationship that desperately needs it (our adopted child is very needy and we are just barely coping). It wouldn't be the sex so much as the time and energy and affection. Frankly, if I had the temperament for a one-night stand that would do a lot less harm than a non-sexual intense emotional fling.

I think that if people swear monogamy they should keep their word; but also that suspicion and controlling behavior are really toxic, harder to survive than an affair by far. I am happy with what we decided, and I think I still would be if he decided, one day, to take advantage of the permission-in-advance. (I'd guess, though, that I'm more likely to do that than he is. He combines the traits of being turned on almost solely by touch and really disliking being touched by anyone but a close intimate. It's not a combo that works for casual sex.)

The principle that's kept me married twenty years is "talk about it and tell the truth." It has led to a largish number of horrendous quarrels. Neither of us is an easy person to live with. But all of the quarrels are eventually resolvable. I've seen a lot of my peers' marriages self-destruct and dishonesty and secrecy are right up there on the list of reasons why. (This is why I can't stand most Hollywood romances: they seem to valorize deception.)

[Andrew Glasgow]

Hapax, that was very interesting. I've recently started something that may become a relationship (crosses fingers) and I will be sending the lovely lady in question this url. I am very curious to see her reaction.The fact that we both enjoy the same sorts of novels, movies and shows is contributing to the move towards a relationship, but I think it's apparent Hapax is not talking about this at all.

For myself, a great part of my life is defined by the stories I have read, but I've never thought about my life, and those that I am sharing it with, in terms of a story itself.

Yay Nick! I really don't see anything wrong with saying 'I am meeting so-and-so-who-happens-to-be-female for a drink' when that's literally all you're doing, especially on a message board where the people you're talking to aren't people you know offline, and for whom your relationships are only their business insofar as you care to share them. Congratulations to you and your lucky lady.

Jason, don't give up! OKCupid has (or so it seems) worked for me.

[Andrew Glasgow]

Oh, and mods? The permalink for this post seems to be ending in just 'i.html', is this something you can fix?

[Jason]

Jason, don't give up! OKCupid has (or so it seems) worked for me.

Well, so far its been me writing lots of women and not getting any responses.... and women I am not interested in writing me...

Hopefully eventually something will click.

[depizan]

How does OKCupid work, anyway? It sounds horribly stressful.

[The Board Administration Team]

@Andrew: Oh, and mods? The permalink for this post seems to be ending in just 'i.html', is this something you can fix?

Thanks for pointing that out. TypePad sometimes does that (strips off everything but the first letter of the post name) for arcane reasons not obvious to we mere mortals.

Hopefully the fix stays fixed.

[Albanaeon]

@ Jason. Having been on the receiving end of relationship where the other being abstinent only because of her parents feelings on the matter, I will say that it really made things bad. For one, we weren't the ones setting the boundaries or directions of our own relationship. If we had settled on those ourselves, it might have been a way to build a stronger relationship because they were OUR choices. Instead, this outside limiter became a huge drag on both of us. Sex became this huge thing that we were never, ever allowed to do, and because of that it became the center of our relationship, overwhelming even more important things like if we were ready for a commitment. Second, it wasn't hard to feel that, in our relationship, her parents were more important than me, and that honestly became a far more hurtful thing for both of us. Don't get me wrong. Parents are important, but if you are working towards a long term/lifetime relationship, I found that I couldn't be second. I couldn't feel that I could really trust her if her mom could override any decision we made. Finally, it really didn't matter since even though we didn't have sex, she was still punished as if she was. So all the frustration and longing and all the other things that accompanied trying to live up to other people's expectations rather than each others was for nothing.

So, I would say that you have to find what your boundaries are, and your partners, and keep parents' a distant third. It's you, and your partner, who are the one's making the decisions and trying to find what's right for you.

Oh and congrats Nick!

[Andrew Glasgow]

@Jason

Well, so far its been me writing lots of women and not getting any responses.... and women I am not interested in writing me...

Hopefully eventually something will click.

It gets that way. But you might also want to try going out with the women you're not that interested in, just for the practice at interacting with MOTOS, and that sometimes you may find something interesting when you're actually on a date.

Also, keep in mind that women tend to get a lot more messages than guys do, and as a factor of that, you'll need to do a little something to make your messages stand out (maybe you're already doing this, but in case you are just saying 'Hi, wanna chat', say more than that!) and some women will just ignore the majority of messages they receive.

[Laiima]

I second Andrew's advice, Jason. I met Mr Laiima through a singles group (pre-Internet) which was overwhelmingly male (4:1, maybe more), and I got *tons* of responses, mostly from guys who ignored my bio and what I said I was looking for and what I didn't want. Initially I replied to everyone who contacted me, out of politeness, but quickly found out I had nothing in common with most. And a pesky few would not take No for an answer. So I stopped responding to any but the ones who made it clear they'd read my profile and didn't see me as generic/ interchangeable.

[Andrew Glasgow]

Just as a contrast, Laiima, OKCupid has, I think, a significantly higher female population than male. And women still get more messages than men.

[Nenya]

My most interesting set of exchanges on OKCupid were with a married poly couple who lived the next state over and were interested in a girlfriend, around the same time that I'd posted to my profile that I was curious about being the third person in such a relationship. I eventually took that part down, because I figured it might attract creepy guys, but we had some really interesting conversations on and off for a couple of months. Nothing ever came of it vis a vis anything sexual, but it was pretty neat.

Hapax, this article is lovely and amazing. It reminds me a little of a part of The Ethical Slut where the authors say that it's important to let every relationship be what it is/what it wants to be/what fits it. They gave the example of how one relationship will work perfectly fine if you see each other twice a month, but will founder if you try to make it a daily thing, whereas another relationship will need more frequent contact (including living together, perhaps) for it to find its best rhythm. I think this works for friend relationships and family relationships as well as romantic ones--even this discussion with Jason about parents' attitudes in re: sex is partly about how that parental relationship fits into one's life (in this case, alongside a romantic one, which is to say, how one writes the story with both those sets of people).

There are times when I understand jealousy very sharply, and times when I don't. I probably feel jealousy more often than my beloved lady at the moment, who says she "doesn't do" it. I think that back in my teens/early twenties when I believed in no sex before (opposite) marriage, I would have read more jealousy and/or more worry about adultery into Hapax's post, because I couldn't conceive of someone talking about fidelity in terms other than what you *didn't* do. It was all about not looking too long at the hottie at the office, about not letting your sex drive run away with you, about how bad and sinful you were if you ever thought of cheating. But fidelity in terms of what makes your relationship thrive, what makes it feel most genuine and true to both/all of you, that's a completely different thing. It's like, say, my brother picking out a birthday present for my sister-in-law: if he gives her a gift certificate to FabricLand, or some awesome new roller derby gear, she will be delighted. If he gives her chocolate because That's What You Give Women On Special Occasions, she will be unhappy and quite annoyed: she hates chocolate passionately. By the same token, what works for my brother & SIL in terms of fidelity is very different than what works for my sister & her girlfriend, who are pretty thoroughly poly. And neither of those relationships looks like mine. (And yet we all want love, support, companionship, sex, intellectual stimulation, etc, from our partners, and we're getting it--just by different means.)

[Kit Whitfield]

I've never been comfortable with talking about stories in the abstract. I think I said on a much earlier thread once, in response to someone calling sex a 'resource', that sex only exists in motion - like dancing or walking, it's something that happens rather than exists, a verb rather than a noun. I feel similar about 'stories': to me, there's no such thing. There's this story or that one, but 'stories' is not a category. I can use workmanlike terms, like 'plot' or 'structure' or 'style', but somehow 'stories' as a category puts my teeth on edge.

--

Jason: as regarding relationships, I'd deal with it as and when. It's always something you'd have to work out between yourself and your girlfriend, and going in with overly fixed ideas probably wouldn't be good for the relationship anyway. I can say that a man withholding sex can destroy a relationship because that's happened to me, but it's going to vary from woman to woman.

I would not be put off by a woman being more experienced than you. It doesn't mean you won't be compatible; nor does it mean she'll reject you for being inexperienced. Everyone's life is different, and it's how you are now that affects who you can be with.

And contraceptives aren't 100% foolproof, but properly used, they generally work. Potential TMI/fertility issues ... I've used the Pill, a contraceptive implant, condoms and a coil at various stages in my sexually active life. I never got pregnant. Then I went off contraception and got pregnant first try (in a phase where I was supposed to have low fertility as the effects of the last method wore off; the doctor actually made a note on her file of her surprise at how quickly I conceived). In other words, I'm very fertile, and so is my husband, and our fertility works well together. But you'll note that I never had an accidental pregnancy. Contraception did the job even on someone fertile.

If you're worried, use condoms and make sure you use them right; that puts the ball in your court. Don't use condoms past their date; don't put them on with long fingernails; don't use one that's touched you with the wrong side in case of stray sperm; withdraw as soon as you've climaxed so it doesn't slip off; get the right size. You should be fine.

[Kit Whitfield]

Oh, and don't use oil-based lubricants because those eat latex. Water or silicone based ones are both good.

[random atheist]

Hi guys, I know I've been gone for absolute ever (and will probably disappear again after posting this, sorry), but this thing is urgent, I only just found out about it a few minutes ago, and you lot were the first bunch I thought of who would probably be able and willing to mobilise in time. There's a law that may come into force in Uganda making same-sex love punishable by death. The Ugandan president has shown himself vulnerable to international pressure before. This group is trying to get everyone to sign a petition.

The law will be voted on in less than 24 hours now (it says 48 hours on the webpage below, but that's a bit out of date).

Please please please go to the address below and sign. Sorry it's so long, I'm rubbish at HTML and time is too tight for me to spend any of it trying to work out how to make this into a neat little link.

Please do sign. So many people could die.

http://www.allout.org/petition/uganda?utm_source=All+Out&utm_campaign=f707604a6c-Uganda_05_09_11_English_US&utm_medium=email&utm_source=All+Out&utm_campaign=a69279476f-Uganda_05_10_11_English_NOT+US%26Canada&utm_medium=email

[Friend of many QUILTBAG people]

random atheist,

You'll be pleased to know that attention has already been brought to the issue. I first posted about it yesterday on the "Board Business, May 5" thread, then TBAT quickly took it from there and posted about it on other threads, including this one yesterday at 09:45 PM.

[random atheist]

Many apologies! That'll teach me to run in in a panic without having checked earlier posts. Thank you for letting me know!

[anonymous for this TMI post]

I have a slightly different take on Kit's contraceptive advice, as I *have* had an unplanned pregnancy while using a contraceptive sponge. (Said child is now in college). My advice to my kids about sex is "don't have potentially reproductive sex without deciding IN ADVANCE what you'll do if a pregnancy results." Needlessly off-putting--maybe. But if that pregnancy of mine hadn't occurred in a stable, long-term relationship, accompanied by enough money to support the kid and health insurance to cover labor and delivery, both I and the relationship would have been in BIG trouble.

[Friend of many QUILTBAG people]

@random atheist,

Wait, WHAT? You have absolutely NO reason to apologize! You are to be commended for bringing attention to this important issue, and you were obviously in too much of a hurry to check whether that had already been done. In fact, I apologize if I came across as if I was admonishing you for your "lateness" (and btw, what's wrong with more than one person bringing such an important issue to light?).

[random atheist]

@Friend: Aw, thank you! And there's no need for you to be sorry either. I'm just glad you cared enough to get people on to this thing. That means a lot, it really does.

[Lonespark]

Hapax, a favorite professor of mine taught a course on something like "narrative and the American Experience." It was amazing. I think she was using "narrative" similarly to how you are using "story."

In other news, I just got sucked into the fact that someone is Wrong on the Internet, and am getting involved in a borderline flame war with a Folkish Heathen over whitewashing/racebending/etc.

[Asha ( EHHH??)]

My sister has gotten pregnant three times while using contraceptives. Yeah. *shrugs* Her body loves concieving, but she has a terrible time with her health DURING the pregnancy itself. It's been so bad that her obstetrician basically told me that I would have to be extremely careful about having kids.

[Zigforas]

Jason,

A friend of mine read an article that claimed that men who had accounts on OkCupid tended to be messaged more by women if the picture was taken in profile (side of the face, not looking directly at the camera) or showed the male person in some sort of interesting, nonthreatening activity/setting (rock-climbing, cooking, etc.) that communicated something about his interests. (I can't link back to the article--I have no idea where he read it. You might be able to find it if you googled around for it.)

Then, as an experiment, my friend asked another male friend--who'd had little success on OkCupid--if he could edit the second friend's account to see if he could increase the number of responses he was getting. After my friend edited the second friend's account so that his main picture was no longer one where he was looking directly into the camera and added some cool pictures of Second Friend cooking and on a trip to Costa Rica, Second Friend started getting considerably more responses from women he found interesting.

I don't know if this sounds helpful at all, but it might be worth a shot! (What made me think of it is that your userpic here at the Slacktiverse has you looking directly at the camera.)

[Andrew Glasgow]

(What made me think of it is that your userpic here at the Slacktiverse has you looking directly at the camera.)

That's all good advice, Zigforas, but it should be noted that Jason's user pic is not him, but a picture of the 'trolololol' singer. Linky

[Jason]

I don't know if this sounds helpful at all, but it might be worth a shot! (What made me think of it is that your userpic here at the Slacktiverse has you looking directly at the camera.)

That is not actually a picture of me.

[Mmy]

@hapax: I found this post resonating deeply with me for (at least) two reasons.

First, I have had (and continue to have) what is usually referred to as an "unconventional" marriage but which I do not mean "open" but rather one that challenged general perceptions of what marriage is/means/can be.

Spouse and I don't feel that we "own" each other and in a sense the word trust is irrelevant/misleading since trusting the other person sounds that they are accountable/answerable to you (as in 'I trust you to carry out my instructions.) A marriage of equals (to me) means a marriage in which the one thing one is sure of is the character/nature of the other person in the relationship. I know spouse to be a good, thoughtful, intelligent, caring, ethical, hardworking person.

Second, all experience to me is a story -- even when I am in pain, sorrow, unhappy, happy, interacting with others part of me is writing a narrative. My mother was the same -- she had a couple she wrote about all her life. They weren't the same as her and dad but they grew old with her and dad and her own experiences of her own life informed the stories she told herself about this couple.

[Nick Kiddle]

@ everyone congratulating me: Thank you all so much. In the face of all the trouble I posted about on the other thread, it's so nice to also have a bit of news that puts a goofy grin on my face whenever I find someone new to share it with.

[Zigforas (who now knows about the trololol singer)]

That is not actually a picture of me.

Ahh. Trololol....I learn something new every day.

[Gyrofrog]

"[r]esearch into our primate cousins shows that other animals engage in non-reproductive sexual behaviors..."

I would submit that all animals do it for fun. Or, to turn it around, most animals don't know that they're procreating (and for that matter, some or many humans don't, either) whilst havin' thangs.

[hapax]

Belated congratulations to Nick Kiddle! What happy news!

[Andrew Glasgow]

@Gyrofrog

I would submit that all animals do it for fun. Or, to turn it around, most animals don't know that they're procreating (and for that matter, some or many humans don't, either) whilst havin' thangs

Warning: brief discussion of violence.

Well, animals with a sufficiently-developed brain to have 'fun', and for whom reproductive strategies have allowed mutual pleasure to be a factor. (For some animals, literally all reproductive sex is effectively rape, although exactly what 'rape' means in the context of non-sapient animals is up for debate. e.g. Mallard ducks.)

[Andrew Glasgow]

Hmm. s/literally/virtually/ in the previous post.

[Kit Whitfield]

Congratulations belatedly, Nick! :-)

[Lila]

Andrew: ducks are, admittedly, gross. (We used to raise them.) Also, bedbugs. WARNING: do not look up bedbugs if squicked by invertebrate rough sex.

[Mmy]

Nick -- something happened to my congratulations post -achhhh.

So, let us try this again.

Happy news!!! Congrats!!!!

Best to you both.

[lalouve]

Well, I am presmably the opposite of those who avoid, for whatever reason, sex outside marriage: in an open marriage, having had sex with lots of different people, considering myself experienced. And I have never, ever, rejcted a man for his lack of sexual experience. It makes absolutely zero difference to how attractive he is.

[sarah]

Hey, Nick, congrats!

[storiteller]

I really love this post because I'm very interested both personally and academically in the idea of story (hence my handle...). I actually wrote my masters thesis on how a rural community in Ireland became split over an environmental controversy in part because of the widely diverging stories they were telling to themselves and each other. Because I know some folks here have an academic bent in this area, I've actually posted my thesis and a summary, if anyone's interested: Narratives, Trust, and Natural Gas. All of my research was interview-based and it was fascinating listening to people tell these elaborate narratives about this issue that some of them had dealt with for nearly a decade.

In terms of relationships, the few times my husband and I "broke" our story were not sexual at all. Once, he failed to tell me (or anyone else) about a major issue he was having. I quickly forgave him because I realized the story he was telling himself was the same one he was telling us - that everything was just fine, even though it wasn't. The other time, I realized that I wasn't giving his faith the credit he deserved for it. I was on my self-righteous high horse and was seriously undervaluing him as a person. Somehow I had twisted around the story of our relationship, and when I had that insight and the story righted itself in my head it was a painful/good revelation.

[storiteller]

Also, congrats, Nick! Best of luck with the across-the-pond issue. I know hetrosexual/cis-gendered friends from Canada and the U.S. who are getting married and it's hard enough for them. I can't imagine how complicated it must be for you.

[Launcifer]

Many congratulations, Nick! Also, commisserations on the Irons' league position.

[Ross]

That's all good advice, Zigforas, but it should be noted that Jason's user pic is not him, but a picture of the 'trolololol' singer. Linky

By a curious coincidence, the first time I ever saw the trolololol video was last night, when I got home after reading this comment on the origin of Jason's userpic. I wasn't even seeking it out as a result of curiosity or anything.

(It was in a gag review of the Best Worst Movie Ever, Troll 2)

[Holdie]

Some folks here say they're not the jealous type, or they don't "do" jealousy, etc. It's a dangerous notion to have about oneself. Everyone is capable of jealousy, just as everyone is capable of love or hate.

Normally I'm not the jealous type. But I was consumed with jealousy once, for about three months, almost 20 years ago. The emotion stil feels vivid. If you've ever fallen in love with someone, and you felt consumed with that person, you know how intense jealousy can be.

Sometimes you tell yourself stories that are untrue: "I am incapable of violence." "There are no circumstances under which I would cheat on my spouse." "I could never become addicted to something." "I am immune to jealousy." These are prideful stories that we tell ourselves. The proud are ever in danger of being humbled.

[Lonespark]

I...guess?
I mean, yeah, I've been jealous and/or envious a ton of times, and it's impacted my life negatively. For me, though, it's usually something akin to professional jealousy. Jealousy as related to sexual relationships doesn't happen with me, and it's not anything about being a good person, it's just related to the way I perceive intimacy, sexual or otherwise.

[Dav]

Holdie, I don't hear pride when people say that they're not jealous people, and it interests me that you do. I've known people that just don't seem to get jealous. I don't think it's pride to tell people that they don't "do jealousy". It's descriptive, not proscriptive.

I don't seem to have an addictive personality, at least as far as drugs are concerned. Are you making a distinction between "don't seem to" and "never"?

[MaryKaye]

I think that if I were in a particularly obsessive mindspace (been there before) I might be ravingly jealous of my partner's *time*. As in, I want it all, how dare you give time to anyone/anything else? But even in that state of mind, if he had a sexual affair while I was, say, away on a business trip I don't think I'd particularly care. I'd just want him to drop it completely when I got back.

I don't think I'm wired to see sexuality as a resource. Time, energy, money, work, affection, those are resources. But him having sex with someone else just doesn't matter until it impacts his time, energy, etc. given to me.

My strong impression is that he is the same way. He knows he was not my first sexual partner and he doesn't care. He'd care now, because my time/energy are really scanty and it's hard to imagine how I could carry on a zero-energy affair; but I suspect that if I did, he wouldn't care much at all. (Zero-energy here would of course require that neither of us had to put time or money into the STD issue, but that seems technically feasible with, say, snogging.) I know I told him once that I had a crush on the cute sixty-year-old I was doing martial arts with, and he was, if anything, kind of tickled by it.

People are just wired different ways, and I think you *can* often say "I would fall prey to this failing, but not that one" if you have a reasonable degree of self-knowledge. Yes, people get surprised from time to time, but often I think that could have been diagnosed (by seeing the pattern of self-deception) well in advance if the will and skills at self-analysis were there.

Me, for example, I should *never* do drugs because I would get addicted in a flash. I've known that for a long time. On the other hand, even though gambling was a huge problem for my birth father, I don't have problems with it--I can take it or leave it, and I don't gamble things I can't afford to lose. I don't think either of these statements are particularly prideful-stories material. They're just observation and introspection.

If you build "I'm not vulnerable to temptation X" into your self-image because it reflects who you want to be, yes, that's asking for a possible nasty surprise. But if "I don't feel temptation X" is an observation, that's a different story.

[kisekileia]

I agree that self-knowledge about one's vulnerabilities and non-vulnerabilities is quite possible, MaryKaye. For instance, I know from my experiences with computer games that me at a slot machine would be a disaster waiting to happen. On the other hand, I've taken several drugs that have addictive properties (by prescription in most, but not all cases), and I've never shown any inclination to abuse them. People really do vary.

[Holdie]

Dav, I think people regard jealousy as a negative emotion. When a person says he's not the jealous type, I do think that's a statement of pride. It reminds me of people who announce that they don't own televisions. They can swear up and down that they are simply making a statement of fact when they say they don't own a TV, that they don't feel pride about it. But I don't believe 'em. To that, they can retort that I'm merely projecting my insecurity about my TV-watching. But I can throw that right back at them: Who is really the insecure one?

Another way to say it is this: If you haven't felt jealousy, it simply means that you have avoided it, not that you're not prone to it. Given the right circumstances, you could be consumed by it. If you haven't confronted those circumstances, your virtue hasn't been tested yet. So I think saying "I'm not the jealous type" is a form of self-deception. What is pride but self-deception.

I'm interested in this topic because I have recently suffered the flipside of jealousy: infatuation. When I was young, I became infatuated all the time. But in 16 years of marriage, I had never gone apeshit crazy over someone else. I had never pined for someone and thought, "...if only we were closer in age, and we had met when we were both single..." until recently. I'm getting over it, but for a while this infatuation was like a tremendous storm through my emotional life -- a near-obsession that isn't far from the passionate obsession of jealousy. And you know what? I never dreamed I was vulnerable to infatuation -- at least, not after I got married way back when.

I'm glad I didn't act on it, and I'm not going to console myself that my inaction is a badge of virtue.

[Ruby]

Off-topic insect question--for the past few days, a number of buzzies have been hanging around my balcony. I fear they may be building a home between the slats. They're not wasps as far as I can tell: they're kinda chubby-looking, but not yellow fuzzy honeybees. They tend to "hover" then zoom. My brother thinks I should call a bee wrangler to see if they can be harmlessly transported away, but I want to know what they are first. Thoughts? (I live in the Midwest, btw, in case location helps.)

[Nick Kiddle]

//Many congratulations, Nick! Also, commisserations on the Irons' league position.//

Thanks, but why do you think I'm concerned with West Ham's performance?

(It should be "Iron's", because we are only ever the Iron and never the Irons. Personal peeve, sorry.)

[Deird, who prefers people who believe what she says]

But I don't believe 'em. To that, they can retort that I'm merely projecting my insecurity about my TV-watching. But I can throw that right back at them: Who is really the insecure one?

That sounds... really arrogant of you.

[depizan]

@Ruby

Could be Yellow Jackets, in which case you definitely don't want them moving in. They can be pretty agressive - or at least they're seriously not afraid of people, which makes it very easy to get stung by one.

[Ruby]

Deird: That sounds... really arrogant of you.

I think it depends on the tone of the conversation. It is possible to project an attitude of superiority while making statements that, in themselves, are mere recitations of fact. Probably the most common ones I come across are, "I don't play video games" and "I don't read romance novels." Innocuous statements at face value. However, depending on the conversation, the implication can fairly be, "I don't play video games, because I have better things to do with my time than play childish shooting games," and "I don't read romance novels, because I am not a frustrated spinster."

[Lila]

(Typepad seems to have eaten my post. Apologies if this appears twice.)

Ruby, those sound like carpenter bees. Does that sound like what you're seeing?

[Ruby]

@depizan--I don't think I want them moving in even if they're harmless! :D

They are not yellow that I can see. They are all black and round. Quite big.

[Ruby]

@Lila--Oooo, that may be it! And they are very interested in the spaces between the boards of my balcony (second-story apartment).

[Deird, who *likes* romance novels]

However, depending on the conversation, the implication can fairly be, "I don't play video games, because I have better things to do with my time than play childish shooting games," and "I don't read romance novels, because I am not a frustrated spinster."

*nods* True. I think it was just the way Holdie was expressing it that was putting me off.

[Nick Kiddle]

I don't own a television because I already spend approximately 50% of my waking hours on the internet. I suspect that if I had a television, that would account for the other 50% and my productivity would go from very low to zero. Also, not having a television gives me a great excuse to hang out with my dad for a couple of special sporting occasions, so it works out very well. Holdie can believe me or not, entirely as zie chooses.

[Lila]

Ruby: unlike the PSU folks I don't advise killing carpenter bees. They don't sting, wood damage is usually minor, and you can deter them by painting or varnishing the wood surface over the winter. Bees are cool, they're important, and their populations are declining.

[Asha ( EHHH??)]

I don't watch TV for a number of reasons- largely because of time and that commercials drive me batshit. I tend to be obsessive about it, and can't look away. I like specific shows, but just zoning out? Not really something I enjoy.

[Asha ( EHHH??)]

But, to actually make a point that relates back to previous comments, I don't really feel proud about it. I understand why some people would, but for me it's almost embarrassing because I know I lack that bit of current cultural currency. At the same time, I just can't make myself watch TV without a specific reason.

[LC]

This was terribly lovely. As a storyteller myself, I think I may have to use this imagery in the future.