MARRIAGE AND MONOGAMY: Mark Barton replies to Lynn Gazis-Sax

Lynn Gazis-Sax: I'd say that, under those circumstances, sticking by your religious beliefs in premarital chastity is a rational choice.

Mark B.: Yes and no. If you're a person of conservative religious views whose goal is to have a marriage that endures no matter what, then it's certainly rational to pick a like-minded religious conservative, because you then have considerable extra assurance that he/she won't walk out no matter how miserable you both may end up. On the other hand, I don't view making a primary goal out of mere endurance of a marriage as particularly rational. I'd like to see marriages last only as long as they're meeting the emotional needs of the people in them (including any kids). (Deciding when that's occurred is tricky because multiple people are involved, but that doesn't make knee-jerk absolutism rational.) And if marriages are going to fail, I'd like to see them fail early, in particular, if at all possible before any kids come along to raise the stakes. And given that different couples are working to different goals, it would not be particularly rational of religious conservatives to congratulate themselves too much based on the experiences of other couples.

Lynn Gazis-Sax: On the contrary, the evidence I see around me is that, hard and "unrealistic" though it may be to expect to stay sexually faithful to one person, it seems to be even more unrealistic to expect to tolerate your spouse sleeping with another person.

Mark B.: Gay men are not immune to jealousy. It's hard either way, and the best solution depends on the personalities of the people involved, as well as any age or power imbalances. The take-home message is not that open relationships are a must, but that negotiation is a must.

Lynn Gazis-Sax: If sexual fidelity isn't something expected of marriage, but rather a mere private arrangement--something as optional as avoiding premarital sex is now--then I no longer benefit from the general expectation that my husband and I are no longer open to sexual propositions.

Mark B.: Why is that a significant benefit? If propositioned, you just politely say that you're in a monogamous relationship. Only a cad would press the issue further.

Lynn Gazis-Sax: Many women--including ones who are firmly pro-choice as to what should be legally permitted to other women--are unwilling to consider an abortion for themselves, in the event of an unplanned pregnancy.

Mark B.: As I said, that's entirely their prerogative. And if that's their position then they are morally committed to something rather closer to the traditional model.

Lynn Gazis-Sax: And, remember, this whole argument comes up in the context of whether straight married couples can benefit from allowing some sex outside of their marriage. So, if a husband's mistress' birth control fails, what is the wife to expect? That she'll get an abortion to suit the wife's convenience? That she'll forgo her right to support from the father of her child because she doesn't want to trouble his wife? It's just wildly unrealistic to advocate marital "arrangements" without considering the fact that pregnancies will result.

Mark B.: Quite so. The whole point is to think about some of these possibilities up front and make "arrangements" rather than be caught by surprise when someone yields to temptation and cheats anyway as often happens. On the one hand, it's not as if the present system is working all that well. DNA studies have consistently shown that a significant minority of kids (10-20%) are fathered by someone other than the man listed on the birth certificate. And on the other hand, the experience of gay men is not irrelevant because they have faced an analogous problem with STDs. Safe sex practices are reliable (although not foolproof) when conscientiously applied but tedious and easy to get sloppy about. On paper, strict monogamy is a perfect solution. In practice it often fails due to cheating, and the failures are typically disproportionately
destructive because they're unprepared for.
posted by Eve at 9:39 PM | link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home