Is It Short-term or The Real Thing?

I had a conversation with a woman friend of the family today who was asking advice on what she should do with a relationship she was in. The bottom line was that they had been dating for a while but that, though she really liked him, they were experiencing some rough spots. She was asking if she should break it off and if so how.  She said she had heard an adage that you can’t ever make a long term committed relationship out of a short term recreational one, so she felt she had to call it quits. It’s a question I hear a lot, and one I would like to respond to more publicly.

First of all, it is not that can’t take a short term relationship and make a long term committed marriage out of it, many great marriages have started with no intention of ending up that way (married).  It’s just that the two types of relationships are based on different values and have different intentions.  A short term relationship – one that may include fun and lots of recreational type of sex – is mostly about you. So ultimately what has to survive in short term relationship is you not the relationship.  By contrast a long term committed relationship is focused on the relationship and therefore what must be preserved is the relationship. You actually take second seat to the relationship. So what happens when two people get into relationship is that they ultimately discover their differences.  It is inevitable that you will have differences simply because you are different people.  What committed people do is that they commit to resolving those differences. The differences and their associated difficulties become the reason for breaking up in a short term relationship, but they are the essence of what makes a committed relationship strong.

So the answer to my woman friend was not what she had called to find out. I told her that this sounded like one of those pivotal points where she had to decide if they wanted to make a go at a long term committed relationship. If that becomes the case – and it can only become the case if both parties agree to it – then this impasse becomes the first of many hurdles that they will encounter and must overcome. Just because the impasse had seemed problematic did not mean they had to break up. Unless, of course, this was only a short term adventure. In that case, she had better take care of herself, which most likely meant she needed to break the tie. “And how do I do that,” she asked.

Swiftly and bluntly – in no uncertain terms. In relationship, I told her, men do not understand subtleties. In fact it often requires a stick of dynamite or a two by four across the temple. We often don’t get it when you like us and want us to come after you , and we certainly don’t get it when you want us to go away.  So be clear and to the point.  Clean cuts heal faster and after you want out of there as quickly and cleanly as you can. Short term relationships are about you not him.

Somebody That I Used to Know

I am haunted lately by the song by Gotye and Kimbra that chronicles a broken relationship. He singing from the perspective of one reeling from the end of the current relationship and she from having made the choice to leave because he hadn't let go of another previous relationship. Go figger! Does that really happen? Actually the question might be when does it not happen or how often is that the case?

Living in relationship is a process of entangling the very fibers of your being with those of another and if and when that ends in a break up the fingerprints of that relationship do not disappear immediately, if ever. In Bob Seger's song Traveling Man, he says that each love left traces on his soul. I kind of think of them as being etched into my soul.  I gave my life to each one for the time we were together and is that supposed to fade into nothingness after we are no longer an item? And as for marriage - readers who are familiar with me know that these 20 years of marriage were not my first - I have been married before and fathered two outstanding daughters from that previous marriage. And is their mother supposed to be just somebody that I used to know? I think not.

The relationship did not end well. I was stupid and made very stupid choices that left my ex no alternatives but to divorce me.  But when I came to, I realized that I was still deeply committed as a father and that meant I needed to forge a relationship with their mom.  It took work and it took time, but it has been worth regaining her as someone I still know and cherish.  Recently one of our adult daughters did something pretty spectacular, something about which I knew we were both deeply proud of.  I took the occasion (as I have done many times in the past) to call up my ex-wife and praise her for the magnificent job she did as a mother.  She tried to deflect and say I had a part, but I would not be deterred. I knew that the bulk of parenting through their formative years had hers - and I just wanted to thank her for what she had done.


But the point of this story is that I am clear that she is not just somebody that I used to know. I know that she and each lover I have known has become an inextricable part of who I am.  And I am just another man. We men do that.  Women think we fear commitment. But nothing could be further from the truth.  We commit hard and we commit fully. And when that relationship ends, our commitment somehow does not.  It lingers and hangs out in the deeper recesses of our memory. Their traces on our soul are pretty much permanent.

So  when asked by your current (wife, lover, girlfriend - you fill in the blank) if you are "over" your last love, you can lie and say you're done.  But if she is a normal woman with their uncanny sixth sense that sees through walls and senses even the slightest change in mood or temperature, she will eventually know someone else is still in there.  And if she is hung up on being the exclusive tenant of your soul you may end up singing along with Gotye and Kindra that she's just somebody you used to know.

War of the Roses (Cheating)

I am a regular listener to Karson and Kennedy's "War of the Roses" bit on Thursday mornings on Boston's Mix 104.1 (http://mix1041.radio.com/ from whence I borrowed this image) where a man (sometimes) or woman (mostly) calls in suspecting their partner of cheating. Ms Kennedy then calls that person up and offers a dozen long stems to the person of choice and invariable the idiot blows it. It's sad, yet somehow has me listening. But we have a bit of advice to give would-be cheaters about having an affair straight out of the Married Man's Survival Guide.

Don’t—don’t go there! Period. End of sentence. Good-bye. ‘Nuff said.
Look, we understand that at times the woman you live with and have committed to sharing your life with, to growing old with, yeah her, that woman, can be a (check the appropriate bullet below):
Royal pain in the ass
Bitch
Holy horror
Major problem

But she is your pain/bitch/horror/problem. Furthermore, we recognize that the source of her being that way might not necessarily be you. So what? Deal with it. That is what marriage is all about—dealing with the issues. Hey, any fool can deal with the ideal woman who is never a problem. It doesn’t take skill to do that! But when she is too much to take, hanging in there takes real skill.
And having an affair because she has shut you out, or because she has become more problematic than you want to deal with, or because some young thing has winked at you will not only make matters worse, it will result in your now having two problems not one. So let’s lay down some basic rules concerning having an affair:

Rule #1—It is not a matter of IF she will ever find out, it is only a matter of WHEN she will find out! One of the basic differences between men and women is that men tend to show loyalty by withholding and protecting state secrets. We know we can trust a man when he repeatedly demonstrates that he is worthy of confidentiality by not talking to others about what happened. Women, on the other hand, establish trusting circles by sharing secrets. It is their way of including another at the most intimate and trusting level. (Remember the “stain” on Monica Lewinski’s dress? How do you think that story got out?) So, this being the case, that doe-eyed “understanding” woman you might consider spilling your guts with, and your seed in, will need to share her secret with others. It is only a matter of time until her circles of influence cross paths with your wife’s. So from the very beginning you better be aware of the fact—and it is a raw, cold, hard fact—that she will find out. At that point, you just might as well move on to the divorce chapter, because philandering is ample grounds for divorce in any state.

Rule #2—Comparisons kill! There is a law in optics called the “Mach band.” It refers to the illusion of contrast when, say, a sheet of white paper is next to a sheet of dark gray or black paper. Right at the edge, the contrast is heightened making the white look brighter and the gray or black look even darker black. Diverting your attention to any other woman than your wife will produce the same effect. Not only will the contrast seem heightened, but it will be generalized to the entire sheet of paper, which in this case is both your wife and your potential mistress. Those behaviors that were formerly only ancillary irritants (i.e., not the big problems) will take on heightened proportions and make her downright ugly. Your irritation will grow into anger and disgust. Every aspect of her; her breathing, her hygiene, her voice, her perfume, everything will become more irritating in contrast to this warm seductive body with whom you are now entertaining the notion of an affair. By contrast, the other woman will take on superlative qualities. She will suddenly develop runway model characteristics. She will become more radiant, more voluptuous, and more irresistible than you ever imagined. And you will suddenly be unable to control your inner desires.
Don’t be a fool—it is just the optics of the Mach band!

Rule #3—The Groucho Marx Club. Groucho was once quoted as saying that he “would not want to be a member of any club that would have [him] as a member.” Applied to the affair situation—now you have to follow this convoluted logic here—you are talking to a woman who: 1) knows you are married; 2) thinks that she might be able to seduce you away, and then subsequently; 3a) believes that you will never be unfaithful to her, so long as ye both shall live; or 3b) thinks that you are worthy of her love, having just been a philandering son-of-a-bitch to your wife! Does that strike you as logical and rational? If it does, we have some names of therapists in your area you may want to consult (actually any one will do!).

Take it from the masters (not us - but those masters whose wisdom we arepassing on) this is s dumbass idea from the get-go. It is far easier to do the work of relationships than to deal with the pain and cost of affairs and eventual divorce. 'Nuff said!

Screwed for Life

A few weeks ago two teenage boys in New Jersey were convicted as sex offenders - a lifelong status they will never be rid of - for horsing around. The crime these two 14-year-olds committed was sitting, bare-butted on another kid's face. The were being 14 year old boys. And unless the appellate courts overturn the conviction, neither can become a teacher or a volunteer who comes anywhere near minors. Preschools and YMCAs will have to post their pictures in the lobby if they live withing three miles of the location, - and other such great punishments. Oh I suppose they might be able to become lawyers or politicians but basically for anything else they are screwed.
For life.
I am not saying what they did is right, nor am I claiming that the act would not have been humiliating or disgusting for the kid on the bottom (two years their junior). But what I will say is that it was not rape and it was not too far afield from what teen age boys have been doing for eons. Boys have been lighting farts, mooning school buses, comparing penis sizes and a whole host of other indescribable and unsavory actions since there have been boys on the planet. Again - it does not justify their actions. But do such actions warrant a life sentence?
I really want to go on a rant right here, but I am speechless. Our society has gone too far. Boys are labeled ADHD for their naturally high energy; boys are not permitted to struggle and fight (and learn that it hurts) so they never find out till it's too late; boys don't get to lose in games (everyone is a winner) so they have no concept of how to cope with and learn from their difficulties; and boys are seen as sexual predators. There was a recent case of a kindergarten boy who was expelled (from kindergarten) for what the teacher called sexual harassment (he hugged two girls). I constantly have to remind my 13 year old son that he needs to be very careful about what he says and how he jokes, least he be likewise charged and have his future ruined.
Enough already - it is not sinful to be a boy, stupid at times, but not a sin.