“I believe that marriage should not be a prison.” Familiar? Sure. I agree. However, increasingly I find that married people, especially men, are indulging in the worst form of double standards.
I had met this liberal enlightened gentleman a few years ago. He was married, with young kids. During the course of one conversation he told me that he did not believe that marriage should have any strictures. He was not one for having flings, however. He believed in ‘meaningful relationships’.
Ah well, so far so good. His social circle included a woman who was interested in him; he wasn’t. I jokingly said I thought her moves and his responses should be blogged. They were quite delightful, really.
He flared up. Not because he was concerned about the lady in question. Guess what? “Do you think I want to mess up my marriage?” he asked.
“But you said you had this open thing going and had a talk with your wife…”
“I had a general talk about what an ideal marriage is. She would not like this one bit.”
“So you are not this big shit liberal you claim to be, right?”
“I cannot let go off my marriage, though I still believe one can have relationships outside.”
“And what about the other person?”
“I would make it clear to her.”
“Oh…and you cannot make it clear to your wife. How pathetic.”
This is what is quite disgusting. However much you and I may talk about a “scrap of paper” meaning nothing, the bottomline is to save one’s ass and the legitimacy you have acquired.
I knew Bob Dylan (not his real name) many years ago. He was in a relationship. We met in a work situation. For some reason he mentioned me to the lady...you know superficial stuff. She started calling up the office when he was not around and would ask to talk to me and then enquire about him. Quite weird.
Anyhow, assignment over, we did not stay in touch. Some years ago I got a call from him. He was now married, had kids, had left the country and was back – alone. It was a practical decision, he said. We spoke occasionally, mainly about movies and books. One day I got an email. It was a proposition in rather sensual language. I had never seen this aspect of Dylan.
I wrote back telling him off, without sounding rude, that a day did not work with me. (Yes, a day is what he wanted.)
A few days later there was an email. It was from his wife. “Hello," she wrote, "hope you remember me. I am still around. I see you are exchanging notes with my husband.”
She had hacked into his account. I wrote back, “Hi, of course I remember you and good to hear from you. Instead of asking a stranger about your husband, wouldn’t it be better if you asked him why he is sending such messages to people?”
Silence.
I called him up and told him about what had transpired. He was upset. Not about his note to me. Not about her writing to me. But about my replying to her. “I would have handled it,” he said.
“How?”
“By keeping quiet.”
Oh, how they love to stay quiet. I suspect this was his way to keep her tense and worried. There was a game going on.
The wives may at the very most confront their husbands, but to them the ‘criminal’ is the woman even if she has had nothing going with his silly spouse.
“Hi,
Please visit X (the city where he was) for just two days. I will take leave for those two days and receive you at the airport. You can check in at Hotel Y. We will spend the whole day sightseeing the city. In the evening, we can freshen up and have a dinner and sip a little wine either at the room or at the restaurant at the hotel. (Then he spoke about certain intimate things that we “will” do.) The next day, we can take a drive to Z, see around the city, and stay there (repeat details in parenthesis). The next day morning, we will drive back and you can take a flight back to Mumbai. I have been wanting to suggest this to you for a long time. Let me know what you think.”
I did not reply. He sent the mail again. I did not reply.
Several days later when he called I did not broach the subject. I wanted to see just how mercenary a person can get. I had told one friend about it and she was shocked, not merely at the suggestion but at the way he made so many assumptions and was deciding what I should do. Where I should stay, for how many days and the exact routine we must follow.
This did not even sound like a good fantasy; it was a darned itinerary given by some horny travel agent.
- - -
Do you know what happens when I post stuff like this? Some of my ‘friends’ wonder: How come you get all these sorts of reactions? Yes, they think it is all about me, they don't care that it feels like hell …I have spoken to women and they do have such experiences to recount.
Most art concentrates on the stoning for adultery theme, mainly Christian art. In Hindu art Lord Krishna is always shown with Radha; he can be surrounded by gopis, which is fine but not with Meera who has to sit dressed in white and pine for her lord and jubilate in sublimation. Is this the price for desire?
And yes, cinema has tackled the subject, often delicately. Surprisingly, B. R. Chopra made a comedy of it in Pati, Patni aur Woh. Here the guy gives a sob story about his ‘invalid’ wife (a lie) to his secretary; she falls for him. The denouement is of course about the happily married couple. And the repentant other woman.
Another film was Rang Birangi by Hrishikesh Mukerjee. Here you had a go-between deciding that his friend’s life needed to be spiced up, so again a secretary comes into the picture. There was more honesty in that the main protagonist was aware, but the message was extremely stupid: that you could use another woman to spice up a boring marriage.
Stupid, did I say?
No. It is really close to the bone. That is what does happen. Look around you.
And then you have progressive newspapers like The Independent that carry articles titled, 'Adultery isn't the end -- it's a wake-up call'.
Wonder whatever happened to good old alarm clocks.
- - -
Image 2: Cartoon stock
Image 3: Dr. He Qi’s painting Woman caught in adultery
Image 4: Radha, Krishna and Gopis, Wikipedia
7 comments:
No offense to you. But I strongly believe that a woman shouldnt discuss intimate things with men. When you discuss such things, men tend to believe that you are interested. Especially Indian men (no offense to Indian men) cannot take topics on sex without controlling their fantasies with the woman they are discussing. :-).
Anyways, this person seems to be still interested in you as you are still taking his calls. This is what I think is keeping his hope alive.
Again, no offense intended. I just thought I would say what came across my mind.
No offense intended but this is one of the most presumptuous comments I have come across. It also reveals in all its 'glory' the very double standards mindset I mentioned.
1 You are assuming intimate details were discussed. They were not, but even should a woman choose to do so it does not give men the carte blanche to take things for granted. In some professions that include academia and writing these are subjects for exploration. Men better learn to live with it.
Secondly, you have made a personal comment that seems out of place. You obviously do not read well. Three years ago was mentioned...and even if one chooses to talk to someone one has known for several years one does not expect or desire anything else. Some women do have the courage of their convictions to accept what they do and continue to express their views. This posr dealt with the larger issue of adultery. Perhaps you did not realise it....
You did say you wrote whatever came to your mind. No offense, but next time let things incubate there and give them an opportunity to grow...
As a brother of men, I always laugh at statements like, "I would've handled it," as if the man has a plan for every detail of every bothersome scenario fate throws at him and you were meddling in something way, way out of your depth.
If silence and secrecy is his technique for handling things, then he must eventually realize that this technique is, by the laws of some crazy physics, the cause of his troubles as well as the solution! It's a real perversion--or maybe a perfect example--of the reap-what-ye-sow equation.
Bob Dylan's letter, with all the "and then you'll do this and then you'll do that and I shall provide the wine" fantasies, is offensive to anyone who enjoys a good fantasy! Here's a link to the hilarious not-good fantasy of the famous Fox News Bill O'Reilly. It's from The Smoking Gun. It's part of a legal doc from the lawsuit brought against him by a female producer of his show. He confuses a loofa sponge with a falafel:
O'Reilly's Loofa=Falafel Fantasy
O'Reilly still alludes to this lawsuit by saying there are many people who will try to extort money from a living saint and drag his innocent name through the mud--all because he let a dirty (hence the shower scene) woman take advantage of him.
Thanks for reminding me about these things.
FV:
honesty does offend many...
and some mistake liberal for easy virtue...
Hypocricy thy name is man!
as it goes:
Frailty, thy name is woman!
and SO, We have classics :)
Prez of AFC:
Thank you for a reasoned response.
Machismo probably makes men "handle" things...
Unfortunately, silence and secrecy work in the 'perfect' scenario where man and wife are 'brothers' in arms.
The O'Reilly thing was hilarious. Did not someone tell him that a loofa is also a loofa?
PS:
"honesty does offend many..."
In this context, where is there room for offense? Do you mean honesty hurts?
"and some mistake liberal for easy virtue..."
That is a case of projection on their part.
Devika:
Your second quote does not quite fit in here...
Most classics and literature reflect life, even if they need to exaggerate it.
Post a Comment