Watch Me Entertain Myself!

Sacha Guitry once said, "You can pretend to be serious, but you can't pretend to be witty." Oh yes, I'm the great pretender.
(pilot episode: 20 January 2004)

Saturday, March 29, 2008

Putting The “Adult” In Adultery

An article in The New York Times states what scientists have long known: “sexual promiscuity is rampant throughout nature and true faithfulness is a fond fantasy.” David P. Barash of the University of Washington in Seattle has a great quote about it: “Infants have their infancy; adults, adultery.”

Surely we’re more than animals, you say. Why of course. And besides, it’s not just humans who exhibit outrage when catching their partners double-timing them. Animals also fight those marauding mistresses who take away their partners’ time and attention from their family.

Still it’s fascinating why Nature has equipped man and mammals with a penchant for fooling around. Scientists have theorized that spreading of the genes promotes genetic improvement of the species. Meanwhile monogamy takes another hit; most agree that staying faithful to one’s partner and family is more an economic necessity (keeping the resources within a particular group) that’s just been given social and religious justifications (see all those silly love songs, romantic novels and movies, and the “til death do us part” in religious ceremonies).

Economic protectionism isn’t as important to gay people since our partners need not be dependent on us to keep them alive (unless you have a jowang palamunin, in which case your stupidity is your loss). So how come the idea of an open relationship isn’t as widespread within the gay community? Oops I’m sorry, my mistake. Actually fooling around is common; it’s just publicly frowned upon and unacknowledged. Why can’t we just be adult enough to admit what’s really happening versus what we want to believe is happening?

Is it better if we are just more accepting of the need to fool around once in a while? Will relationships (ironically) last longer if monogamy isn’t its foundation? Or is it better to continue as is, playing around on the side and praying you won’t get caught? Or do we aim for something that actually goes beyond nature, which is to be truly faithful? And do we have the right to look down on people who do not or cannot be faithful?

Disgust—este, discuss.

7 comments:

mraunch said...

ay hanap away ito hahaha!
believe me, most gays have very staunch stands on this (read: ive made up my mind, ayoko na magbago ng isip)

i think it has to do with the fact that you cant touch this subject and not touch romantic ideals which means papatayin mo din ang mga ideals of love when you go into this.

pabayaan na lang natin, people will find what works for them when the itch hits them.

Quentin X said...

Ouch!

joelmcvie said...

@MRAUNCH: "Papatayin mo din ang mga ideals of love"? May kanta ang bandang XTC: "I'm the man who murdered love, yeah!" Mwhahaha! (evil laftir)

@QUENTIN X: Oops, sowree! =)

Marcus: Bading Down Under said...

Parang gustong magcomment but I wouldn't know where to begin... or rather, I don't know if I should publicly incriminate myself any further... :-D

mraunch said...

hehehe you have to admit life would be so much more efficient if love didnt exist...
(i dont know if i want such a life but i know it's gonna be really productive)

Anonymous said...

As gay people we have lived with the societal norms that that straights have been living by for the longest time - I think this is the reason why we have a hard time accepting the definition of what a relationship should be like. Same goes for the definition of how a family should be composed of, how individuals should love, where and what appendage should be inserted into which orifice...

My two cents worth: the rules of a relationship should be defined by the people who are in the relationship, not by the other people.

Best regards - Homie

davenport said...

blog hop

--- --

"the need to fool around"

im trying to rationalize the idea further.. pero ano klaseng need ba ito, psychological or biological, or a plain statement to justify one actions of unfaithfulness, knowing the content of his character is weaker against his psychological/biological needs..

siguro unfaithfulness comes in, in romantic terms, when a person try to make promises of 'i love you, my only one, til death do us part'and committing himself emotionally too to a different partner while he has another.

one may thought he was sexually attracted and only desired sex outside the relationship but in reality he needed a simple embrace..which unlucky too much/tpp hard to asked sometimes to a partner..thus chaos.