What Kind Of Idiot Doesn't Fear Commitment?
Just posted my Advice Goddess column, "A Wrinkle In Timing." An excerpt:
“Fear of Commitment” gets a bad name. Supposedly, you’re a jerk or psychologically stunted if you express reluctance about throwing yourself into a relationship, yet nobody will diss you for, say, “Fear of Strolling Down a Dark Alley Through a Gauntlet of Gang Members.” Or “Fear of Getting on a Plane with a Guy with a Fuse Sticking Out of His Converse.”Anybody who’s given any thought to the picnic in the park in hell that commitment can be should feel at least a little edgy about it. Committing isn’t saying “We had fun together today. Let’s try to have more fun together tomorrow.” You’re committing to tomorrow, and next Tuesday, and maybe 3,656 Tuesdays from now. The thing is, you can’t promise you’ll keep feeling the same way -- you can only do your best to stick it out after you feel stuck. Bit of a buzzkill, huh? Of course, you want to believe everything will be wunnnderful, sex will only get hotter, and yours is one of those rare, timeless love affairs. But, the truthful answer to “Will you still love me tomorrow?” is something along the lines of “Gee, I dunno.”
Guys, especially, are made to feel bad if they aren’t gung ho to commit, with “Getting Him To ‘I Do’” splashed across every other women’s magazine, and nary a piece on “Letting Him Do What Works For Him.” Men are achievement-oriented, and as a man, you probably have to feel set in who you are and what you do before you can feel ready to settle down with somebody else. And yes, even if that somebody else happens to be a physicist who put herself through MIT as a Victoria’s Secret model, took night school classes from the Dalai Lama, and can cross her legs behind her head while predicting the Super Bowl winner down to a 96 percent accuracy on the point spread.
The rest is here.
I've always felt this was one of the strongest resurfacing arguments throughout your columns. After dating a sociology professor for the last 6 months, having heard every conceivable 'social gender construction' that supposedly renders us incapable of taking responsibility for our own relationships, I have a renewed respect for your willingness to write "men are achievement oriented" without feeling the need to immediately follow it with "but of course not all men, not all the time and not at the expense of women who can do everything they can do, just as well."
by the way, Dalai Lama nightschool is strangely unfulfilling when not coupled with a Victorias Secret sidejob. It becomes too difficult to justify the lousy hours without some appropriately meditative push-up bras.
Jake at March 5, 2008 5:18 AM
the word relationship is mutable...
some people see it as journey, some as plateau. A couple goes out a lot, travels together, and so forth. After a year or so of that, there will be 199 tons per square inch of pressure to make it permenant. Yet, why change a good thing? If it has gone that way for a while, that IS commitment. It is also open ended. Smashing it into marriage makes it into something slightly different. A well-defined responsibility. Once there are legal strings on it though, you have a third entity sharing the bed, and it ain't a 90 pound lab named bruiser. It's the government. Who dictates how all of this works, and makes it very difficult to leave.
Thus increasing the pressure to make the right decision, because if you don't you will be paying a lawyer $10K to straighten it out, and that's only if you DON'T have kids.
In my mind, this fact alone distorts the whole relating thing right off the bat. The stakes are artificially high. In addition, once there is legal binding, there is less incentive to actually WORK on it. It is hard to get away, so you are stuck in the honey. If you've ever ended up married to someone who loved to go to movies with you all the time when you were courting, who when married, suddenly refuses to go to movies, then you my friend know what I'm talking about. The guy in the original question is working in a difficult industry, where there is much uncertainty. That is why he is wondering how brutal it will be. The thing is, the lady love he is enamoured with, may have a very different view of their relationship, once they decide to marry. Right now he may say, I have to shoot over the weekend, so I may not be around so much... and that my irk her a little, or not at all [assuming he didn't already make a date with her he is breaking]...
But when they are married, she may get quite upset that he isn't spending as much time with her. Or she may be astoundingly supportive. You would like to believe that she would be, yet we all probably know lovers or friends ourselves that have proven this to be untrue.
then there is "The Plan" whereby you get married after a year of courting, w/in another year you have bought a house, and a year later you "Start A Family". If you are an engineer with a steady job, this may seem normal at 25. If you are an artist who isn't sure how long their consistant employment will last, "The Plan" may wig you the heck out. Yet men are often told that women have been forming this plan since they were little girls, and woe, I say WOE to any man who has a problem with that. I can personally attest to at least one case of that. My life as a Photographer began it's end when I got married. It's security didn't fit with what my new wife was expecting, and so being traditional and duty bound to the marriage, I went back and got a CS degree, and became a programmer. I make a much better salary as a programmer, but I was happy as a photographer. I learned the hard way that the support I was getting from my wife at that time varied quite a bit based on her plans for me, and I have a number of friends who had similar things happen after the commitment was set in stone.
A lot of this story comes from the differences in the way 2 people talk about their expectations of life as a unit, versus life as 2 individuals. The words they don't say, the things they take for granted the other knows, are what cause the trouble. Like the idea that work is peripheral to what The Unit is doing. Sometimes this is true, and sometimes not, but how often to you discuss it?
Commitment is kind of like hardening steel. It can make the blade hold an edge for work, or make it so brittle, it breaks. It takes discerning which thing needs to be done, to make the best...
SwissArmyD at March 5, 2008 6:09 AM
And you'll get no more blowjobs after you get married.
Chrissy at March 5, 2008 7:52 AM
Or, as I like to say, "marriage cures blowjobs."
Amy Alkon at March 5, 2008 8:02 AM
Two points.
1. You guys are far too cynical.
2. OK, not far too cynical, but a little too cynical.
There are plenty of people who pair well for a lifetime; they respect and consult each other in matters large and small, and the wives blow the husbands with glee and enthusiasm.
On the other other hand, marriage has been mocked and broken for a couple generations now. Women who complain about getting men to commit sound like Detroit used to sound in the seventies and early eighties, as Japan started kicking their asses:
"Whaddya mean 'quality'? What the fuck? We're selling the same shitty cars we've always sold. Why aren't people buying anymore?"
You have to have lived through this to see how pathetic it was... To see this proudest, most dynamic of American industries exposed as a hollow, robotic, and incompetent enterprise. In the earliest of those years, radio commercials from Detroit's Big Three used to describe satisfied Honda and Toyota and Datsun owners as "foreign car buyers" while trying to bring them back into the showrooms.... Mocking them to their faces, as it were.
That's who women who complain about "commitment" have always sounded to me. They can't offer enough value to close the deal, and so they want to pretend the problem is in the marketplace.
But it's not enough to say that marriage runs against human nature (or even just human impulse), because so does learning to read. But with an aggressive program of education and a system of rewards, almost everyone learns to do that, right? And it improves our lives a lot.
Crid at March 5, 2008 8:30 AM
An old favorite joke of mine:
A man and wife are at a chapel about to get married, before the ceremony the groom is chatting happily with his best man and other close friends, to all the world not appearing the least bit nervous in the grand male tradition, and truly happy as can be. His single friends are mystified, and ask him how he can be so happy and eager.
Groom says: Guy's, the girl I'm marrying gives the best blowjobs I've ever had.
Meanwhile elsewhere the bride is getting ready for her big moment along with her bridesmaids, she looks radiant and happy as can be, and her friends tell her so.
The bride responds: Of course, I gave my last blowjob yesterday.
Robert H. Butler at March 5, 2008 8:31 AM
In brief, Crid, because I'm running out, marriage isn't for everyone, but when somebody presents that they're not interested in that sort of lengthy commitment, or just committing to being with somebody for a lengthy time, they're treated as if they're cracked in the head or emotionally broken.
Amy Alkon at March 5, 2008 8:46 AM
"they're treated as if they're cracked in the head or emotionally broken." Or as evil, heartless spineless bastards that string women along for our own pleasure. This is one of the reasons that in my experience man hating lesbians are generally oxymorons.
vlad at March 5, 2008 9:11 AM
> they're treated as if they're
> cracked in the head or
> emotionally broken
Who do you think yer talkin' to?
Vlad- NOt sure what you mean
Crid at March 5, 2008 9:54 AM
So what do men call women that don't want to commit to them? Oh yeah, I forgot, a slut. I think that term needs to be narrowed down and defined a bit better.
The last 2 guys I dated wanted to marry me and were quite pissed when I politely declined.
Chrissy at March 5, 2008 10:22 AM
I'm proud to report that, after 12 years in the relationship and four years of marriage, I continue to blow my husband with both glee and enthusiasm.
Eva at March 5, 2008 10:24 AM
Eva, does he return the favour?
Chrissy at March 5, 2008 10:29 AM
"Vlad- NOt sure what you mean" All of the true man haters I have met have always been straight women usually of the other side of fugly with a personality to match. All the lesbians I have met see most of us as annoying at worst. There are of course exceptions, like the nasty senator who wants us covering someone else's child support.
"So what do men call women that don't want to commit to them? Oh yeah, I forgot, a slut." Um, I think we have different definitions of the word. A slut would be one who is juggling multiple men at once in the sack usually without telling them.
vlad at March 5, 2008 10:32 AM
now we have vlad's definition of a slut. I think what he described is a 'no strings attached' relationship. Some guys think that only they can have those, so if the woman with whom they are having this nsa relationship is doing the same as they are, she is...a slut!
Chrissy at March 5, 2008 11:27 AM
Yes, Chrissy, he does indeed.
Eva at March 5, 2008 12:23 PM
SwissD - you need a hug...I've been quite enjoying your comments today, even if your reality appears a little down in the dumps at the moment.
"That's who women who complain about "commitment" have always sounded to me. They can't offer enough value to close the deal, and so they want to pretend the problem is in the marketplace." - Crid
Great comment. Additionally I feel that many women crave marriage in a way that's somewhat irrational. They can rattle of a few pre-fabricated reasons why marriage sounds like a great idea. But, when it comes down to it, they don't say anything meaningful. I'm positive that marriage was brainwashed into them. It's a "just 'cause" sorta thing - they've been told that people grow up, get married and have kids. Then it turns into this sick competition of who gets married first and has kids. I'm getting the chills.
Marriage isn't for everyone as it isn't the most fulfilling path for all people. Right now I think people are starting to realize this. I have naively high hopes for the future of marriage. I think marriage rates will decline and that's GOOD b/c that leaves only the people who really, really want to and who have what it takes to make it work...as opposed to the "Just 'cause" group who turn icy cold after "I do" and it's all downhill from there.
I also think this will help raise fewer assholes overall b/c the parents are totally dedicated (cause the didn't just pop out a few little 'uns for the fuck of it).
Gretchen at March 5, 2008 12:44 PM
"I think what he described is a 'no strings attached' relationship." No, it's only wrong (for men and women) and consequently deserving the term slut when the other person thinks it's a real relationship. If it's agreed NSA then it's agreed NSA and willing to do NSA does not make you a slut. Willingness to fuck (both literally and figuratively) anyone and everyone to get your way makes you a slut.
vlad at March 5, 2008 1:04 PM
"usually without telling them." Shit sorry the usually shouldn't be here.
vlad at March 5, 2008 1:06 PM
heh, no-strings-attached, must be a modernism. There are ALWAYS strings, even if the strings are escape cords, like "no, I'm not intrested in marriage..." I think perhaps, Chrissy, you are wonderfully unique... Most guys have the experience that after going out for about 6mo. one of those 4pound bridal magazines "accidentally" gets left in their car, she stops every 10 feet in a mall to coo over baby carriages, and maybe comments off handedly that all of your furniture 'will have to go'. Assuming the guy notices such things right away, well now he has a decision to make...
Maybe your two beaus, just were caught off guard.
'Course as people get older and more experienced, the dynamics change.
SwissArmyD at March 5, 2008 1:18 PM
sure Gretchen, hugs be welcome, but this 'ould be my normal personae... in reality, I should simply say less, because there is almost no way to make relational issues sound neutral... If you are happy, you seldom dwell on it, it just is, and it's enough. When you've been blown apart for whatever reason, you tend to examine that. It makes it sound like that is all there is.
SwissArmyD at March 5, 2008 1:27 PM
"Maybe your two beaus, just were caught off guard." Or maybe you didn't stink desperation. Women who stink of desperation seem to turn off the guys who are interested in more than NSA. They appear to attract the "fuck and flee" types like bees to honey. Thus you ended up with the marrying types.
vlad at March 5, 2008 1:32 PM
Women bitch, bitch, bitch about men's unwillingness to commit. Then, 70%+ of divorces are initiated by women. I wonder what the word "commitment" means to women?
Jay R at March 5, 2008 2:25 PM
Oh Jay R, but its ALWAYS the man's fault. I mean if only he could have made more money, been more sensitive, gotten hotter, given up football, talked more about his feelings, not expected blow jobs, taken out the trash without being asked, been nicer to her mother, remembered to buy her flowers, not gone to his friend's stripper stag, noticed she got her hair done, had a better sense of style, listened to better music, quit watching wrestling, given up his stupid friends, gotten into yoga, drove a better car, read better books...well, you get the point.
With apologies for de-railing any serious conversation...it's been a long day.
moreta at March 5, 2008 3:52 PM
I have the 'bad boy' boyfriend. No complaints, but he's not the type of person I should commit to in the long term. I would be stupid to, and I think this is where alot of people trip up. The issue isnt poor men jilted by their disatisfied wives, or wives jilted by cheating husbands. The issue is who is this person? I want to be married at some point and have children but I'm very honest with myself about who I am dealing with.
PurplePen at March 5, 2008 8:35 PM
I don't see the problem with sluttiness. To me, sluttiness is fucking around like there's no tomorrow. And yes, someone who is honest about it is still a slut. The functional, commonly considered definition of a slut is someone who has a lot of the sex with a lot of partners. The fact that I don't happen to see anything wrong with it, doesn't mean I'm going to change the definition of the word used to describe it.
I will instead say; "I'm a slut and bloody well fine with it." And I'm not even sleeping around anymore. But I used to, a lot. It's only because I am content with the woman in my life and really don't have the energy or interest in pursuing sexual relations with anyone else, that I'm not now. My life is busy enough and stressful enough as it is. But I'll always be a slut at heart.
And I will always, always heart my fellow sluts, lechers and whoremongers. May you always have a warm piece of ass to play with and keep you warm in the winter.
DuWayne at March 5, 2008 11:35 PM
I had no idea Amy was a physicist - too.
Radwaste at March 5, 2008 11:50 PM
Heh heh...I like to leave a little mystery.
Amy Alkon at March 6, 2008 2:18 AM
Thanks DuWayne, I heart sluts too.
There is a book on the market called 'The Ethical Slut'. I should read it.
Chrissy at March 6, 2008 7:03 AM
Near-impossible to find in bookstores, thanks to neo-Puritanism.
Here's a link:
The Ethical Slut: A Guide to Infinite Sexual Possibilities
Amy Alkon at March 6, 2008 7:08 AM
I am definitely thinking I should read that book. Mostly I just think it would be entirely appropriate on the book shelves. By the sound of it, it would be a decent book for the boys to read when they get a little older.
I think that a lot of kids tend to grow up with this view of sex as something naughty, something that makes the practitioners somehow less of a person. I think this tends to translate into a lack of respect for those who engage in sexual behavior with them. I.e. it's ok to lie or otherwise behave dishonorably towards their partners. When we try to make it out to be something wrong or otherwise try to repress sexual urges, we outright encourage this kind of behavior.
Parents try so hard to get their kids to behave ethically and with integrity, in nearly every aspect of their lives. But for some reason many parents think it's best just to ignore this when it comes to sex.
DuWayne at March 6, 2008 8:30 AM
"I think that a lot of kids tend to grow up with this view of sex as something naughty, something that makes the practitioners somehow less of a person. I think this tends to translate into a lack of respect for those who engage in sexual behavior with them. I.e. it's ok to lie or otherwise behave dishonorably towards their partners. When we try to make it out to be something wrong or otherwise try to repress sexual urges, we outright encourage this kind of behavior."
Well, you're right there with Robert Heinlein - see "Stranger in a Strange Land". He makes the same point, and that what we get is cheating, furtive glances and outright lying about the importance of sex. Look at all the people nuts about what Britney is doing. It's not because they are concerned for her welfare. Look at any magazine rack.
And as a result, some people think that Hefner's Playmates - which he has taken great care to present as real people, with full lives - are sluts. At least we haven't let Muslims tell us to torture them. Yet.
Radwaste at March 6, 2008 3:42 PM
Ironically, I just picked up Stranger In A Strange Land from the library. It's been a few years since I last read it. Unfortunately, I loaned out both of my copies of it and should probably give up and buy another copy.
It's hard to say how much Heinlein influenced my views on sexuality, not just Stranger but a good many of his novels. I also read a lot of other authors who managed to express a similar take, including Aldous Huxley and Piers Anthony. Ultimately, I think that Brave New World was far more eye opening for me at eleven (especially as it was followed hard on the heels with the graphic novel, V for Vendetta), than Stranger was when I was fourteen. I remember really enjoying it, but being underwhelmed in the face of the enthusiasm with which it was recommended by a friend. It wasn't until years later that I realized he was probably rather keen on the sex bits.
I definitely think that we have become a nation of voyeurs, entirely because of puritanical to the point of freakish social conditioning. I think the obsession that so many of us seem to have with other people's sex lives, is indicative of a very seriously destructive social pathology.
And it falls over onto the lives of people like me, who would like to raise kids who aren't ashamed or embarrassed about their bodies. Kids who can go to the doctor and explain they have a pain in their testicle, without turning red. About four months ago my oldest rammed his testicle into a wall he was climbing. This was the first time he had had such an accident, after his testis actually developed enough nerves that it actually, really hurt. He was very upset about it and decided that he wanted to "write" about it in his journal for school. It really pisses me off that his mother had to explain to him that this would probably not be a very appropriate topic for his journal, all the entries being read aloud in class. (It's kindergarten and they are asked to dictate, even if they can write all the words themselves.)
I think it is indicative, when as we are moving (ever so slowly) towards being more open about sex and sexuality, that incidents of sexual assault have been dropping. Sexual repression is at least partly responsible for a certain amount of sexually deviant behavior. While I believe that we are geared to a certain amount of it all, repressive attitudes can exacerbate the existing condition and under some circumstances, can be the direct cause of the deviance. (No, I am not talking fetish. I am using sexual deviance to refer to criminal sexual behavior. There is nothing wrong with a little kink, or even a lot. It's really only deviant when someone is victimized)
Ultimately, it pisses me off most, as a parent trying to raise non-repressive children. Honestly, I don't care if he wants to play show-me-your's with the kids he plays with. But in this day and age, that can mean serious legal issues. They're kids for fucks sake. They're curious. But instead of allowing healthy, non-sexual exploration of each others bodies, we're all caught up in making sure they don't have a traumatic incident. What few people realize is that exploring and even touching is far less traumatic than being told so very strongly, that our private parts must always be kept private.
DuWayne at March 6, 2008 9:06 PM
"What few people realize is that exploring and even touching is far less traumatic than being told so very strongly, that our private parts must always be kept private."
DuWayne,
I hear you and I've had my share of frustrations over keeping our (now much older than yours) boys non-repressed and cool with their bodies - and respectful towards others.
I found in the end that tired old word "inappropriate" became very useful.
I don't much care for it - but it appeared to strike our sons as oddly emotionally neutral while giving them the wriggle room to understand the undesirable public behavior wasn't wrong or rude - just not fabulous in the circumstances.
(We were on liberated Fire Island once - near us in NY - when a couple of happy guys jogged past us on the beach wearing - oddly enough - ONLY firemen's helmets and tiny jackets. The eldest son- he was about 7 - said to his younger brother rather formally: "Now that would not be appropriate at school...")
Jody Tresidder at March 7, 2008 5:52 AM
"...sex as something naughty, something that makes the practitioners somehow less of a person. I think this tends to translate into a lack of respect for those who engage in sexual behavior with them. I.e. it's ok to lie or otherwise behave dishonorably towards their partners."
I've found that attitude with a lot of guys I've been with and as soon as they disrespect me, I stopped sleeping with them. Some were surprised by this. I would ask them if they didn't like sex, or thought so little of themselves that only a real low-life would sleep with them, or if they wanted a woman that would never touch them. They usually didn't have any answers to these and other questions. I thought the whole thing was pretty funny, because it was obvious they still wanted to sleep with me, and were confused why they were cut off.
The guys with high self-esteem don't do this, so are the ones I continued to see. I've always been very ethical and considerate with any of my partners, and expect the same.
Chrissy at March 8, 2008 8:36 AM
Leave a comment