Do I want to have sex with every female friend of mine? Is it possible not to want to have sex with every female friend of mine? Is that even a problem?
Answered in order: Yes. No. Maybe.
Here’s the backstory. I’ve been reading, digging, and commenting on Tiny Coconut for a pretty long time. It’s a smart, honest, and introspective. The author (TC) and I have become friends in that weird way that consistent cross-commenting bloggers do. She lives across the country from me. (On the lesser coast, I might add.)
We have never, ever flirted.
Turns out, TC was coming to NYC. So I suggested we meet for coffee. I mean, it would probably be my only opportunity to actually meet this lady who I’ve come to like. I can honestly say that I had no ulterior motive: I just wanted to shoot the shit for an hour and see what she was like. We made plans to meet last Friday.
The evening before, I decided that in all good conscience, I should get permission from Maggie to have coffee with TC…. and she promptly said “No way.” I was momentarily miffed until she said “How would you feel if I said I was going to lunch with some strange guy I met on the Internet.”
Hypocrite, me.
Here’s the craziness: I’ve had lunch with female friends upon whom I’ve had major crushes. I don’t know if it was that I was actually hiding something in those cases (albeit something weightless and never acted-upon) or that these were local folks that I already knew from AA or work with whom plans were made spontaneously… I’d like to think it was the latter, but I suspect there’s a healthy dose of the former. But as my sponsor said, the great thing about using certain AA women to learn to develop healthy cross-gender friendships is that you can’t fool around with them:
The “you’re busted” reaction would be instant, complete, and overwhelming.
I was talking about the TC thing with my sponsor, and when I told him my motives were pure, he said, “You are SO completely full of shit.” And I immediately realized that he was right. Fuck.
What he pointed out was this: if something were to click… and I don’t mean something adulterous… but if TC had a great laugh, a lovely smile, or a sense of humor that hit me the right way… would I groove on it? Would I sit there, basking in the subtle glow of tickled libido and innocent flirtation? And if so, should I be there?
The answer of course, is whatever Maggie says it is.
Which brings us to a comment TC made in her post:
I know there's nothing untoward going on here, unless forging a new friendship with a man is by definition untoward.I think the answer here is that there’s always something a little teeny bit untoward going on. And under most circumstances, there’s nothing wrong with that. But if I’m in a relationship where security and equality matters, I have to respect my partner’s opinion.
I will say this: When Maggie said no to TC, I said, “Okay, but I’m keeping FemaleFriend1 and FemaleFriend2.” And I am. And since I am, and since I’m not going to be sleeping with either of them, I just might not tell Maggie every single time I have coffee or lunch with one of ‘em. Maggie knows about them, knows I’m friends with them, so does reporting in do any good? But even writing that, I feel like a giant-ass hypocrite.
Ugh. I’m done. This is the most inconclusive post I’ve ever written.
Love to all. Even you, the dude who almost bit off the Monsignor's hand at Communion.
10 comments:
Men and women can be just friends but yeah, we (both the guy and girl) nearly always entertain some thought of that friend in a sexual way.
I have had a number of male friends hit on me, a couple have even confessed to loving me. I have had friends that I have also been attracted to, but I only ever acted on those feelings once... and he is my husband now.
My husband has some very close female friends, they were in his life before I was and I must confess to feeling a little jealous of them. I don't know if he is in any way threatened by any of my male friends, I hope not.
I totally understand where you are coming from because I, like you, would like to meet some of the people I've 'met' via blogging, a couple of whom are blokes. I must admit that they are very interesting and seem like lovely individuals (WARNING lights going off right here!)
So yes, Maggie probably has a good point!
From one hypocrite to another... I would be uncomfortable with my husband meeting a girl he met (anywhere) for lunch. But I would think it was okay if I went out with a male friend.
I am not a jealous control freak - but my husband is HOT!!! and I have so many friends who have commented on him. I trust him - but I had a girl hit on him major when I was 8 months pregnant. grrrr. So I do not trust other women. Maybe Maggie feels the same about you.
Christi
p.s. my husband asked me if I thought you were hot - when I showed him your blog. I said oh yeah - that arm really turns me on. ha ha
And just WHAT is wrong with my arm?
:-)
I know you are not expecting any advice here - are you? But I would be the last one to be able to offer any.
Someone once told me "what they don't know doesn't hurt them." And, unfortunately, I've noticed that it's much less headaches and worries and problems if some things are not communicated with spouses. No, I am not encouraging or practicing adultery. It's just that many times we (especially women...) tend to look at things a little more than what they actually are.
Hey : )
You have a very nice arm.
You just can't tell to much about a person from just an arm . Now a leg you can tell a lot - ha ha.
I think it is awesome that you told your wife about the intended lunch and honored her opinion. That is so cool. I don't believe that what you don't know doesn't hurt you. I believe that the truth will always come out - and deceit from witholding info hurts worse. Unfortunately I know that from experience.
Hey - put a pic of your leg - and I will judge - oh wait I remember seeing a foot - it looked pretty good. ha ha
Hmmm...I'm sure I have something to say here--and it's something about whether or not flirting is a bad thing, as well as a few other issues you brought up--but I'm stuck right now with an inability to sort thoughts into sentences.
I will say, however, that for the record, and in case I have not made it perfectly clear throughout, I think it's AWESOME that you didn't even hesitate to not only hear what Maggie was saying but also to comply with her request. And I think it's almost equally awesome that she feels safe enough to just tell you when she's not comfortable about something you're doing. All of this says good things about your relationship in my opinion.
TC (totally amused about all this discussion about myself as even a potential object of flirtation!)
As someone that has been reading TC's blog for a while too, it is so facinating to see the process evolve--the therapist in me. I, too, admire that you take your wife's input so seriously. She must feel very validated. As far as the issue itself, I am glad your sponsor culd call your number on it. There is always something underneath our behavior and addicts are especially cunning with theirs! Speaking, of course, from experience. Happy Sailing!
jealousy is always interesting, even hypocrisy. that is, in the stages of the "hypocrite's" unawareness of their hypocrisy.
interesting how the mind works is all.
I do think that girls and boys can be just friends, but I do kind of agree that there's always something a little, teeny bit, untoward going on. There's a sexual undercurrent, however innocent, in many, many interactions. And sometimes I think that our culture is SO incredibly repressed that those innocent feelings get made into something bigger than they really are. Which is just natural physical feelings that don't have to be acted upon. Does that make sense? I really, really hope that Zube Boy flirts with cuties when I'm not around. I don't want it to go any further, but flirting is natural and healthy. Which is why I do it sometimes.
And, you and Maggie really DO have a great thing going on. Really and truly. Your openness is inspiring.
I'm totally outside my blog sphere and just wandered by, but I've got a big mouth, so what the hey. Seeing as drugs can suppress the libido (e.g. "chemical castration" of sex offenders) and people vary physiologically in all kinds of ways, I suppose the scientists are right when they say different people have different strengths of libido. I also believe in Kinsey's idea that people show a spectrum of sexual orientations, and as a result I conclude it's only our culture that makes heteros worry about this problem only for other-sex friends. (To be a jealous partner of an overt bisexual must be an accursed existence!) Meanwhile, personalities differ, and so do domestic/romantic partnerships. So I think it would be silly to propose a rule about heterosexual friendship. It depends who you are, who you're with, and who the hetero is. Even a rule of thumb may be too much to ask, as far as I'm concerned. Another thing is that I don't see a dilated pupil or an erection as a deal breaker. Yogis can overcome animalistic responses to walk hot coals, but basically we're animal and compartmental. "Falling in love" also is compartmental or a consequence of many pistons firing, I believe. I think our psychology and history and current state of mind have to collaborate in allowing or preventing us from sliding into romantic adoration with some one. Stranding on a desert island can do wonders, I'm sure. So why make it harder for yourself to be friends with people you're attracted to by declaring it's a law that friendship is impossible or doomed? That kind of self-talk seems at risk of self-fulfillment. Why deny yourself the company of half the world? Why confine yourself to the gendered cultural confines of your sex? To only know your own sex seems like a recipe for a naive sense of what makes people tick (one I suffered from for my first decade and a half or so). I say just be cognizant of what the relationship is about and your responsibilities to others. Unless you find you fall hard and always and simply can't control yourself at this stage in your life. Perhaps rethink the policy every decade or so. This has been an atheistic public-service announcement.
Post a Comment