Are we fighting human nature in trying to be monogamous? I'm dating a guy I dated five years ago. Back then, he was sexually inexperienced. Now that he's been around the block, he totally disagrees with monogamy and wants us to have a sexually open relationship. I'm very open-minded and have no problem with people in these relationships, but know they're not for me. We can't discuss the issue because he gets so defensive and riled up, civil conversation is impossible. He accuses me of looking down on him and finding him "disgusting," which I don't. He almost has me convinced that the only successful relationships are the open ones, and that I'm one of a minority of people who want monogamy. — Turned Around
Yes, the suburbs are just teeming with wives calling to their husbands as they're going out the door for work, "Honey, want me to TiVo your dinosaurs thing in case your sex date runs long?"
Actually, it seems clear that vast numbers of people are having sex with somebody other than their partner or spouse. They just do it behind that person's back, as did the then-married Newt Gingrich, probing Clinton about lying about l'affaire Lewinsky — when Gingrich wasn't too busy probing his naked congressional aide. Other married cheaters will roll out of a motel room bed, then snarl about how horrible and disgusting it is for other consenting adults to have sexually open relationships: those where partners honestly confront the fairytale notions that one person can meet another person's every need; that two people can remain together "till death do us part," and not get to the point where keeping the spark alive is a job for a Panty Bomber-load of PETN explosive.
The Bible is no help to those who claim that the multiply partnered are immoral and wrong. Gideon, the guy the hotel room editions are named for, had lots of wives and a concubine. King Solomon had hundreds of both. In "Biblical Literacy," Rabbi Joseph Telushkin writes that "Biblical law permits a man to have more than one wife," but he adds that "biblical narrative...depicts multiple marriages as almost always leading to multiple miseries." Even Nena O'Neill, co-author of the '70s bombshell "Open Marriage," came around to that point of view.
She subsequently wrote in "The Marriage Premise" that couples may agree to sexual nonexclusivity, but often experience jealousy, insecurity, resentment, anger, and feelings of abandonment — "sometimes as strongly as they do when a clandestine affair is discovered." So, a person can make lofty pronouncements about not wanting to deny their partner any of life's pleasures — until the difference sinks in between having extra hot fudge and having the hairy guy next door.
As for your situation, are you in a relationship or a really tiny cult? You've made it clear the open thing just isn't for you. If your boyfriend cared about you, he'd say, "Aw, gee whiz, wish you felt differently," and probably be on his way. But, he's determined to have his cake and a bunch of other people's cake, too, so he's trying to bully and head-game you into believing you're small-minded and boring. He's got you so sidetracked defending yourself against bogus charges (looking down on him, finding him "disgusting") that you're on your way to glancing up from your relationship and finding that you're no longer part of a couple but a face in the crowd. Ditch this guy and find one who's open to discussing your needs — beyond how you'll need to let him keep the key to your heart in a cabinet he bought off somebody running a valet parking concession.
Felon Like Some Company
I'd appreciate if you'd introduce me to a lady between 35 and 65 for friendship and more. I'm 48, six feet tall, 220 pounds. I'm an artist, writer, and musician. I'm currently in prison, but I'm not guilty, so I expect to get out of here soon. — Jailhouse Rocker
I guess you're asking me to post a personals ad for you: "Enjoyed long walks on the beach; now enjoying short walks between electrified fences." Sure, the incarcerated man has his merits: There's no wondering where he is at night or worrying he'll run off with another woman (at least not for another 10 to 20). Of course, a woman who goes for a man behind bars almost always has something seriously wrong with her. Luckily, like almost all the prisoners who write me, you're innocent. Put your time into attracting a lawyer, and maybe you can invite a lady to your house instead of your House of Corrections. You'll get a better class of woman when you can say you're a 48-year-old artist/writer/musician rooming with another guy because you need to pick up extra cash, not because he got caught leaving three bodies in a ditch.
Got a problem? Write Amy Alkon, 171 Pier Ave, #280, Santa Monica, CA 90405, or e-mail AdviceAmy@aol.com (www.advicegoddess.com)
COPYRIGHT 2010 AMY ALKON
DIST. BY CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
11 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
**"The Bible is no help to those who claim that the multiply partnered are immoral and wrong. Gideon, the guy the hotel room editions are named for, blah blah blah"*** Except that was thousands of years ago, and when the New Testament was written (if not before), God changed the rules. See 1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12, and Titus 1:6. Alcon really should have simply left the Bible out of it, as we all know what it says about this sort of thing. I have no idea why Alcon dragged Scripture into the discussion, but she should have at least quoted it correctly. I'm really tired of hearing people quote the Old Testament and then claim that it somehow means the Word has contradicted itself or is at odds with how modern Christians live.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Matt
Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 PM
|
|
|
|
**"The Bible is no help to those who claim that the multiply partnered are immoral and wrong. Gideon, the guy the hotel room editions are named for, blah blah blah"*** Except that was thousands of years ago, and when the New Testament was written (if not before), God changed the rules. See 1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 3:12, and Titus 1:6. Alcon really should have simply left the Bible out of it, as we all know what it says about this sort of thing. I have no idea why Alcon dragged Scripture into the discussion, but she should have at least quoted it correctly. I'm really tired of hearing people quote the Old Testament and then claim that it somehow means the Word has contradicted itself or is at odds with how modern Christians live.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Matt
Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:32 PM
|
|
|
|
Many people enjoy open sexual relationships. I'm not one of them. To the woman with the boyfriend who wants an open sexual relationship, neither one of you should try to change the other in regard to sexual attitudes. It won't work anyway. The way you feel about sex is the the way you feel about sex. I would suggest to two of you just be friends and each of you continue to search for partners with similar sexual attitudes.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Irene Hollimon
Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:05 AM
|
|
|
|
Matt, your comment makes no sense. While it is true that the Old Testament was written thousands of years ago, so was the New Testament! So does something written anywhere from 30-300 years after Jesus more relevant today than something written long before Jesus was born?
Also, the last time I checked, both the New and Old Testaments are part of the Bible. Alkon is referring to the Bible - period. She's not picking and choosing text to suit her argument like so many do when making arguments about religion. Rather, Alkon is referencing common stories regarding bigamy.
Alkon's advice is solid. The man is playing games - trying to make it like he's doing what everyone else is (as if that's a reason to do anything). Fortunately, the woman is seeing through this and Alkon is just giving her the encouragement to dump him.
Comment: #4
Posted by: JJH
Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:30 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: JJH. Ok, since I wasn't clear, let me try again. I was having trouble understanding why the Bible was even brought up in the first place - the LW didn't mention it, Alkon has given us no reason to think she is a Christian (neither has the LW for that matter), and I seriously doubt that her boyfriend - the kind of person who apparently believes open relationships are normal, healthy, and desirable - is the same kind who would pay much attention to Scripture anyway. Finally, her example of Old Testament polygamy has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. The man in the LW's letter didn't want to marry multiple women; he wanted to carry on a relationship with the LW while still maintaining the freedom to have sex with other women. That is not polygamy, it's just plain "sleeping around."
Comment: #5
Posted by: Matt
Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:37 PM
|
|
|
|
Finally, I was also making the point of responding to what Alkon said: "The Bible is no help to those who claim that the multiply partnered are immoral and wrong." Uh, sorry...but yes it is. As I said, the rules changed when the New Testament was written, if not even sooner. Yes, both Testaments are part of the Bible, but many of the things written in the Old Testament were designed for use in the time period between their writing, and the arrival of Jesus. His appearance changed a lot of things and the New Testament is written to reflect that. You don't go talking about polygamy in the culture of ancient Israel and then use that to justify "open relationships" in 21st century America. It's a classic case of quoting something out of context. Alkon revealed a colossal ignorance of Scripture in even bringing it up.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Matt
Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:40 PM
|
|
|
|
Finally, I was also making the point of responding to what Alkon said: "The Bible is no help to those who claim that the multiply partnered are immoral and wrong." Uh, sorry...but yes it is. As I said, the rules changed when the New Testament was written, if not even sooner. Yes, both Testaments are part of the Bible, but many of the things written in the Old Testament were designed for use in the time period between their writing, and the arrival of Jesus. His appearance changed a lot of things and the New Testament is written to reflect that. You don't go talking about polygamy in the culture of ancient Israel and then use that to justify "open relationships" in 21st century America. It's a classic case of quoting something out of context. Alkon revealed a colossal ignorance of Scripture in even bringing it up. She's comparing apples to battleships.
Comment: #7
Posted by: Matt
Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:41 PM
|
|
|
|
Sorry I'm a little late on this... but perhaps the posters here should do a little research. Alkon was raised Jewish and is now an athiest. She is using the Bible as merely a reference, she wasn't condeming religion. Get your facts straight.
Comment: #8
Posted by: REDHEAD5_30
Fri Jan 22, 2010 7:11 AM
|
|
|
|
Re: REDHEAD5_30. Do "research" on what - Alkon's spiritual beliefs? I believe I pointed out that we have no reason to believe that Alkon is a Christian. Reference my comment dated Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:37 PM. If anything, your comment adds to my contention that there was no need to bring the Bible into this in the first place.
Comment: #9
Posted by: Matt
Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:31 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Matt
Actually It proves why she is using the bible as a historical reference instead of a religious refference and why she doesnt reference the New Testament as you do.
Comment: #10
Posted by: REDHEAD5_30
Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Re: Matt I also find it interesting that Alkon references several books but the Bible was the one you had a problem with... I do agree with your comment though that the guy is just looking for a convoluted excuse to sleep around.
Comment: #11
Posted by: REDHEAD5_30
Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
