Category Archives: relationships

On Marriage

[This is a post for Forward Thinking. The question is "What do you believe should be the purpose of marriage in our society today? What do you personally see as the purpose of marriage for your own life? And finally, what responsibilities, duties, and/or obligations do you believe marriage should entail?"]

The first question is really easy for me to answer. I think marriage is a collection of rights and responsibilities which we as a society have agreed to give to people who are in some kind of Important Non-Familial Relationship with each other. I don’t think it’s any of my business to police what sort of Important Non-Familial Relationship that is– romantic or non-romantic, sexual or non-sexual, monogamous or nonmonogamous, for life or until they get bored of each other– any more than I would non-marital relationships. (Which is to say that there are moral obligations, like not to abuse each other, and Best Practices, like communicating regularly. I have a lot of Opinions about other people’s relationships actually.)

Like, honestly I’m trying to think of a situation where I’d treat marriage different than non-marriage. Children maybe? Given that children generally do better with more than one parent who is stably and reliably involved in the child’s life,* marriage is often a useful tool for people who want to be parents.

On the other hand, I have very specific ideas of what marriage would mean for me personally.

I have wanted to be married as far back as I can remember, possibly because my parents are the single most functional relationship I have ever witnessed. They’re not Hollywood in love, with the passionate tearful declarations and soaring music and Big Misunderstandings. They’re just… quietly each other’s best friends. They have each other’s backs. They’re in this– whatever it is– together.

When I was very young, I decided that I would get divorced in cases of abuse, infidelity (later, when I discovered that I was poly, changed to “severe betrayal of trust”), my partner and I both being utterly miserable in the relationship even after we’ve tried everything we can to fix it, or my partner’s decision to divorce me. The idea is that I choose to have a relationship with you– even when I don’t want to, even when I’m pissed off at you, even when the only thing I want is to walk out that door and never come back.

Part of it is that, if I selected my life partner well, it is more likely that Future Mes will be happy in the relationship than that Future Mes will be unhappy, even if that seems implausible in the moment. For one thing, I did get married to the person. For another, age and depth of relationships do in fact make relationships richer and more enjoyable, at least in my limited experience. (It turns out, if you have borderline personality disorder and don’t realize it, and if you can only be happy in poly relationships and you’re trying for monogamy, you’re really bad at relationship stability.) I mean, technically all I have evidence for is “Ozy prefers relationships of a year and six months to relationships of two weeks and passionately hates New Relationship Energy.”

Part of it is that I find the decision to be unhappy for the sake of some higher passion to be… aesthetically pleasing; it’s the same sort of aesthetic pleasure I get from people sacrificing for their art or science. I don’t know why; I assume this is one of my Arbitrary Preferences. Of course, I’d expect that my marriage would be happy more than it’s unhappy– but you don’t exactly need much commitment to stay in a relationship that’s good.

Other than commitment, what would I be looking for in my Hypothetical Marriage? Domesticity: I don’t think it’s an accident that a lot of my romantic daydreams revolve around cleaning and cooking and budgeting. Yes, really. Do you want to see the Word documents with hypothetical budgets, or will you take my word for it? Fortunately, domesticity seems to be in high supply in life partnerships.

And I want someone who’s my best friend. I want to read books or sit on the computer late at night in companionable silence. I want to play around with ideas with them. I want that sort of creepy hivemind you get where you can say “the thing” and they’re like “but what about” and you’re like “yeah, right, but still.” (Seriously, my parents do that and I can’t even understand what they’re talking about half the time.) I want someone who understands that I’m always going to be in a triad with my partner and writing and, ideally, is going to make it a quad. I want someone who complements my weaknesses and enhances my strengths, and to be a better person because I’m with them.

Things I don’t care about: sex. Really don’t care. I mean, I’m poly, I can get sex elsewhere, and sex really isn’t that important to me in a relationship regardless. I like holding hands and snuggling and kissing and having my head petted, but if we do all that and never interlock genitals I don’t care. It’s very odd to me to see people talk as if all marriages must be sexual relationships: why is a relationship of friendship and commitment and mutual support somehow less valid because you aren’t participating in one admittedly very enjoyable recreational activity?

Still odd, although slightly less stupid, is the insistence that marriages must be romantic. Romantic love is a storm of emotion that often makes you want to be with someone forever, so of course people assume that if you’re in romantic love you must be together forever. But I think a lot of people think two friends marrying is Less Real Somehow, which is just bizarre. And while it is perfectly valid to get divorced because you’ve fallen out of love with your partner, because anyone is allowed to end relationships for any reason, I find the assumption that falling out of romantic love automatically ought to lead to divorce to be silly. You can still be partners even if you are no longer lovers. It’s totally valid!

*Although many times this is not possible. I in no way intend to shame single parents, who are usually good people struggling with a very difficult job.

About these ads

Jezebel Continues To Be Full of Horrible People

Commenting Note: This post is not about how you are unable to get a date and you are sad about that. I sympathize with people who cannot get a date! Really, I do! You are welcome to fill up my inbox or askbox with all of the tragic tales of your inability to find a romantic partner! But if you try to do it in this thread I will delete your comment.

Someday this article will go down in history as the point at which “Nice Guy ™” ceased to mean anything.

I mean, seriously, what do guys who sexually harass you on street corners, your abusive ex, and Hugo Schwyzer Robert Jensen douchey male feminists have in common? Other than being men, interacting romantically/sexually with women, who think that they’re nice people while actually being assholes? I know Nice Guy ™ is confusingly named, but it doesn’t mean that, it has a very specific meaning, it means “men who feel entitled to sex with their female friends because they are nice.” Also, no one wakes up in the morning saying “today I’m going to be a misogynist pig because I enjoy hurting women.” They say “I know! I’m going to brighten some woman’s day by yelling at her to ‘smile’!”

But I’m not actually ranting about the continued misuse of the word “Nice Guy ™.” (That’s what Twitter’s for.) I want to look at this particular item.

The Aspirational Fuck Buddy

It’s just a sex thing and you’re not ready for a relationship. You’ve told him this. But he won’t listen. He doesn’t understand rule number one of taking your pants off is that you can’t fuck your way into a relationship.
Likes: Making you soup when you’re sick.
Dislikes: The fact that you are not his girlfriend and have told him that you should stop sleeping together.
Pop culture muses: The dude from 500 Days of Summer

Okay, maybe I’m missing something… but how the hell is that an example of misogyny? Look, you can genderswap it:

The Fucking Clingy Bitch

It’s just a sex thing and you’re playing the field. You’ve told her this. But she won’t listen. He doesn’t understand rule number one of taking your pants off is that you can’t fuck your way into a relationship.
Likes: Making you soup when you’re sick.
Dislikes: The fact that you are not her boyfriend and have told her that you should stop sleeping together.
Pop culture muses: Bunny boilers.*

See? Now it’s an item in an AskMen.com article.

People of all genders have casual sex with people and fall hopelessly in love with them or have casual sex expecting that this will mysteriously lead to A Relationship. It’s not a girl thing or a guy thing, it’s a people thing.

Which is not to say that it isn’t a gendered phenomenon. For one thing, the girl version does some kind of weird pseudofeminist “he’s in love with me! That misogynist!” thing, while the guy version is blatantly misogynistic.

I also think the whole business is rooted in some deeply toxic assumptions about relationships and sexuality. For one thing, it is incredibly fucked to expect that other people have to date you because you have a crush on them and are non-objectionable. It continues to be fucked if you’ve had sex with that person.

On the other hand, sex produces emotions in lots of people, including feelings of closeness and intimacy. Friendships (even casual friendships) often result in unintended crushes. I have no idea why someone would think “I’m going to have a friendship, and add an activity that results in a lot of people having romantic feelings for people they do it with, and this will mysteriously reduce the chance that someone will end up with romantic feelings.”

There’s this bizarre idea floating around that romantic feelings are a thing under one’s volitional control, and that if other people have feelings you do not like it is their fault somehow. (See also: poly people who open their relationship on the condition that you not fall for anyone else.) But the vast majority of people cannot stop themselves from having crushes when they have them. The label “casual sex” is not a magic salve that makes them able to.

Now, if you were sensible human beings, you would handle an unexpected unrequited crush like this:

Crusher: I have a crush on you!
Crushee: That’s awkward, I don’t have a crush on you.
Crusher: Well, in that case, I will have to stop having casual sex with you, because that would just make me sad that we’re not dating.
Crushee: Cool!

OR

Crusher: I have a crush on you!
Crushee: That’s awkward, I don’t have a crush on you.
Crusher: Okay. I’d like to still have casual sex with you then.
Crushee: Unfortunately, I don’t feel comfortable having casual sex with someone who has a crush on me.
Crusher: No worries.

OR

Crusher: I have a crush on you!
Crushee: That’s awkward, I don’t have a crush on you.
Crusher: Okay, I’d like to still have casual sex with you then.
Crushee: Neat! I’m free on Wednesday.

This is one of those multiple-choice type situations.

But those models are all based on the assumption that “I don’t want to date you” is sufficient reason not to date someone. Unfortunately, a lot of people are under the impression that you’re not allowed to not date people unless they’re Bad People. If you refuse somebody, then you’re a horrible person grinding their beautiful romantic heart under your heel– unless, of course, they’re an entitled misogynist or a psycho clingy bitch, in which case they’re Bad People and you’re allowed. (This is actually the flip side of the “if I have a crush on you you have to date me!” assumption.)

To sum up:

  • People do not have to date you because you have a crush on them.
  • Most people can’t control whether they have a crush on someone.
  • Not wanting to date someone is a perfectly good reason not to date them.  

*I have BPD, I’m allowed to make bunny boiler jokes.

Kinky Sex Is Fucking Beautiful

I’m friends with one of the founders of Harvard College Munch, and he recently showed me this about how Harvard College Munch is literally the worst thing that ever worsted. Mostly he just wanted to know if he should get “sexual anarchist” on his business cards. (Sources say yes. God, no one has ever called me a sexual anarchist. So upset.)

Now, there are lots of objections that one can have to this article. For instance, what “wide-ranging impact, profoundly effecting students’ daily lives”? I go to a school that has an official school Violet Wand, and yet there are no discernible effects except “lots of students, even vanilla ones, have been electroshocked just to see what it’s like.” I wouldn’t call that profoundly affecting students’ daily lives.

But the objection I want to have is to the sentence “we have always been eager to discuss with these other groups our competing views of how best to honor the dignity and beauty of sex, but we do not even share this much common ground with Munch, which instead seeks to associate sex with violence, humiliation, and oppression.”

(Note: below the cut, I talk about my sex life! If you don’t want to hear about it, here’s Cute Roulette.)

Continue reading →

Unhealthy Relationship vs. Abuse

Trigger warning for abuse, naturally. Moderation note: I describe my relationship with my parents here; I have absolutely no interest in your advice about what to do. It’s meant to illustrate my point, nothing more.

My relationship with my parents is… fucked up.

I’ve been mentally ill since elementary school, but after a few failed attempts (including one threatened suicide) to explain that something was wrong to my parents, I spent nearly a decade hiding that I was mentally ill and pretending to just be a fuckup who, like, chose to fail all zir classes and not have any friends.

So the revelation last year that I was mentally ill… in fact, that I was mentally ill enough to attempt suicide and be Baker Acted… well, it understandably came as a shock to them. They’re neurotypical, most of the people they have experience with are neurotypical, they have no idea how to cope with me. They’re overwhelmed, they’re worried, they’re afraid that they’ve been terrible parents, and they want me to stop being unhappy. So they ended up freaking out a lot and making some truly questionable decisions.

Not to mention that on a very fundamental level they have yet to grasp that mentally ill people have different needs than people who are not mentally ill. So if I ask my parents not to give me a hug when I’m crying because physical touch is literally physically painful to me, their response is fifteen minutes of “but I was just trying to help! I love you and wouldn’t do anything to hurt you! How can hugs hurt you, you’re supposed to like hugs when you’re sad!”, being over-dramatic and self-congratulatory about how they are NOT HUGGING ME LOOK HOW GOOD THEY ARE, and then forgetting a week later.

Of course, this situation could be straightened out if I explained to them what my mental illness means and what they ought to do. Except… my brain already believes my parents are Scary People Who Will Hurt Me. My instinct is to avoid whenever possible, placate when not possible. This is not a mindset conductive to setting boundaries or making them upset, the way I’d have to to point out that they’re treating me in a way that hurts me. So I am literally unable to give them the information that would help them.

This relationship is clearly unhealthy, because it leaves one half of the relationship in an anxiety attack every time zie contacts zir parents, and the other half concerned about why their child is suddenly SO DISTANT. But I don’t feel like it’s abusive. Abusive implies that there’s fault, that there’s an abuser and a victim; my relationship with my parents just involves some people with needs that cannot be fulfilled in the same relationship.

I think there should be space to say that a relationship is unhealthy without saying that it’s abusive. I like “unhealthy.” It doesn’t imply judgment; it reminds us that there are a lot of situations where no one is clearly at fault but everyone is unhappy. And you know what? Just because it’s not abusive does not mean that it’s okay.

I also think the construction of “unhealthy relationship” might help some abuse survivors, because it gives them a space to recognize that their relationship is fucked up when they’re not ready to admit yet that it’s abusive.

I’d also like to give permission to people in unhappy relationships to end their relationships. I think a lot of us tend to assume that we can only end relationships, or certain kinds of relationships like marriages or family, if People are doing Wrong Things. But if a relationship makes you miserable, you don’t have to stay in it. Not wanting to be in a relationship with someone is enough reason not to be in a relationship with them.

Platonic Affection and Trevin Wax

Lately a lot of atheist bloggers have been making fun of Trevin Wax‘s theory that gay sex is bad because men can’t be bros without being mistaken for gay anymore. And to be fair there are a lot of really laughable aspects to his theory: for instance, he seems to believe it is some kind of Inevitable Law of Nature that when one person gets more free someone else gets less free. (Maybe that explains the whole “we’re propping up dictators to protect our freedom” aspect of US foreign policy. America is just trying to hog all the freedom for itself.)

Despite that… well, I kind of agree with him.

Wax is right that many same-sex friendships avoid displays of affection for being thought of as “gay.” Of course, this is the result of homophobia and the fact that far too many people think of “gay” as an insult, not the natural result of gay people being public about their sexual orientation. But then he’s a homophobe clutching at increasingly desperate straws, what do you expect, rational argument?

There are very few ways of expressing affection in American culture that are not instantly read as romantic. “I love you”? Romantic. Snuggling or holding hands? Romantic. Thoughtful little just-because presents? Romantic. Commitment to maintaining your relationship over the long term or even spend your lives together? Romantic. Agonizing about whether to break up with someone, or crying into your ice cream when you fight? Romantic.

So therefore we tend to assume that all really intense friendships are really sexual or romantic. See the idea that men and women can’t be friends, the people who refuse to allow their romantic partners to be friends with people of the same gender as them and, yes, the homophobic fear that being friends with someone of the same gender makes you gay.

American culture makes a lot of really toxic assumptions about friendship. For one thing, we tend to assume that a romantic relationship– even if new and fragile– is always and everywhere more important than a friendship– even if old and deep. Sometimes the friends themselves believe it and end up ditching their friends for a romantic relationship only to return after the inevitable breakup. For another, many people seem to believe that friendship is something that diminishes in importance as you get older. In middle school, your best friend is the most important person in the world, and in college, bros before hos (fistbump); but soon enough prioritizing friendship means you’re a manchild who refuses to grow up, and you wind up forty years old with no friends but your spouse.

I agree with Dean Spade‘s wise words that we need to move towards treating friends more like we treat lovers and lovers more like we treat friends. To have boundaries with and reasonable expectations of our lovers, and to value, commit to, and deeply cherish and invest in our friendships.