This whole Anthony Weiner thing has got me thinking about the parameters of "fidelity" in relationships. By which I mean, fidelity is (to me) a relative concept, defined by the individuals involved in the relationship.
First I have to say this: I don't know whether or not these internet and phone exchanges were okay with Weiner's wife. He mentioned that she knew about them before they were married, but we don't know whether or not that means she was cool with it. If she doesn't consider it cheating, then he wasn't cheating. Period.
Regardless of the parameters of the congressman's marriage, there are many couples out there who would not consider what he did cheating. Some couples have open relationships where outside sexual experiences are fine. For others, the partner has to actually have sexual contact for it to be considered cheating. On the other side, there are folks who believe that sending suggestive photos over the internet is, in fact, cheating. There are also those who think that receiving a lapdance is cheating. Even further down the spectrum, some people consider watching pornography cheating, and others think that even masturbating is cheating. Some people even believe that looking at another human with a lustful eye is cheating (think Christine O'Donnell here).
What I'm trying to say is that this concept of "fidelity" is too relative for us to just point blank say that Anthony Weiner was cheating on his wife, especially if we don't know what was and was not okay between both partners. If his wife was fine with it, then he wasn't cheating, because "cheating" by definition implies that one partner was breaking the rules of the relationship.
Cue the barrage of conservative Bible-thumpers who believe everybody should live by their standards. Many have probably already spoken out about Weiner's supposed "infidelity," and to be sure many more would if they themselves hadn't already been caught toe-tapping in some airport men's room. For these folks, even couples who have a polyamorous agreement are "cheating." While they may be "cheating" on the standards laid out in certain religious beliefs, not everybody conforms to such a rigid set of rules.
What would be lovely is if we were all comfortable enough with our partners to discuss these parameters, and have them be equally-applicable. But because we live in a patriarchal society, there will always be a certain shame in discussing just how "faithful" we need to be. To be sure, if we can't clearly discuss our thoughts on morality, monogamy, lust, attraction, etc, then we're going to continue having a whole lot of "cheaters" in the world. Some folks who don't believe looking at porn is cheating might be surprised when they're "caught" and their partners accuse them of infidelity. Others might push the limits further and further until they do cross a boundary that, instead of being discussed thoroughly, was assumed to be cheating by one partner but not the offender.
Me, I have my own definitions of what constitutes cheating, but those aren't really any of your business. Not being a relationship counselor, I can't say what folks should do when their boundaries don't meet, though it's fair to say that a simple compromise might lead to grudges and back-handed revenge.
Regardless, I don't know whether or not Weiner cheated on his wife. I honestly think he apologized to her, first and foremost, for having made the mistake of making his "junk" so public, and for making her the wife of a guy involved in a sex scandal. Or maybe she wasn't okay with it but pretended to be, or maybe she just decided to turn a blind eye to avoid the matter altogether. Again, I really don't know, but as much as I'd like to find out, I know that their personal definitions of fidelity are really none of our damn business.
No comments:
Post a Comment