SusanofO
Posts: 5672
Joined: 12/19/2005
Status: offline
|
cloudboy: Remember that one thread, a long time ago (I think it was about 9 months ago), when the poor, beleauguered submissive female named "JewleoftheNight" was being put upon, and beaten emotionally senseless by "non-cheaters" on a thread similar to this one? Who came to her rescue?
You did, if I recall, (in so many words).
And remember, a few months before that, when there was that thread that just went on forever, titled "Submissive in a Sexless Marriage" and you had such poignant and sensible things to say to LAM (among others), re: Seeing things from the viewpoint of a female trapped in a marriage w/ a husband (who spent every night belching in front of the tv w/a six-pack, watching Fox news until he fell asleep and paid no attention to her whatsoever - who had the nerve to complain if she sought affection elsewhere?) etc. Well I do.
Either I have a long memory for obscure stuff, or I thought your responses then were sensible, and also compassionate, and based on some deeper thinking and possibly personal experience, too.
And I am here to say, that -
Although it's been awhile, I personally have retained some (still) painful memory of just what it feels like to be ignored, completely taken for granted, and recieve no affection (let alone sex) whatsoever in a marriage. After 10 years of living in an arid, affection-less desert, with a husband who refused to either consider a divorce, or to "let" me have an affair, I finally stopped kicking myself, and had one anyway.
Do I feel guilty about that? Maybe I should, but I just can't bring myself to nail myself to the front door of my church, so that those who have supposedly lead "really good and moral" lives could throw tomatoes and knives at me (if they would - and I know some would). I know I am a good person.
In my particular situation, I was monogamous and I kept my vows. As long as I could - without going almost insane. Lots of people don't bother to go that far. Some don't try to make things work. I sure as heck did, and so are you. Him not acting at all in a loving manner toward me at all wasn't something he considered particularly immoral, I guess. It's what people don't always see happening (day in and day out) that they might consider before they jump on some "holier than thou" bandwagon.
I have recently read a book that theorizes that Mary Magdalene (the female portrayed as the biggets "slut" in the entire Bible, if I recall) was actually Jesus' lover (and maybe even his wife).
Well, even reading it, and thinking about that just changed my thinking about how some view this issue. I mean, if she'd ever once been portrayed as meriting even the least little bit of understanding vs. being almost stoned to death (had Christ supposedly not intervened) then maybe, just maybe - people who call themselves "Christians" today would have a slightly different, more compassionate point of view re: This issue in general (but maybe not, I dunno. But gee - I'd hope so).
I am not comparing you to Jesus - but I gotta say, I like your bravery, and your point of view, and all of the compassion and open-minded understanding that goes with it. And yes - you are married (and so was I) which yes, does bring some relevance to both our points of view, I'd think - whether anyone else wants to think so, or not.
I think there is some place in the world for compassion, and also for understanding re: These kinds of situations - but sometimes, I think that nobody else could ever understand this situation unless they've been in it. And that point of view gets hammered in a little harder every time I read a thread like this one.
But then I have to stop myself and think: Why the hell not? I mean, I have a fair imagination, and I can understand (or try to) all sorts of things I haven't personally experienced: I am not a starving Biafran, and I donate money every month to Ethiopian orphans and starving Sudanese. Why is this situation so damned different? - my conclusion is: It's not. Not really (in terms of their abiltiy to "put oneself oin another's shoes, anyway).
There are some times in life when "going by the rule book" just is too simplistic a response, and not what is called for at all - for some situations - aka in "real life" - and some can, at times require unique solutions, or at the very least, responses to situations that go beyond what was battered into your head in Kindergarten, or maybe in your home growing up, or in your church, even. The situation is more complex and isn't always quickly amenable to "standard, traditional" views (I don't think) of what constitutes what's automatically the "right" or the "wrong" thing to do. I think we both know that (I know you do, and so do I, maybe, do some other folks). But then again, these kinds of situations are the same reason Fundamentalism (in any realm) probably exists.
Many folks seem to not be able to deal well with life's problematic "gray areas" - at all. They need a clear - cut guidline re: "What to do" - even if following one could as easily destroy as many (if not more) souls and-or lives they claim would be hurt by not following it, than if they were to take a more fluid point of view, or a different attempted solution to such a situation than anyone else might be spouting as 'sensible" or "morally correct".
There are people everywhere who seem incapable of thinking any kind of "moral response" can ever occur "outside the box". Especially if it doesn't "look like one" (as far as what they are used to looking for anyway).
Sometimes a spade is really a spade. And sometimes, it's just not. It's when it's something else that people sometimes just don't know how to deal - because it requires experience beyond what they may have personally encountered.
I have concluded that the moment people decide to come to the aid of a "cause" (if they decide to ever do that) - whether that cause is donating to an AIDS fund, or getting an annual physical exam due to some health scare, or changing their views on this kind of situation - it happens usually only when their own personal lives have come into direct contact with circumstances that almost require them to drastically alter some previously held point of view. And usually not before then.
But - there are exceptions. To me compassion trumps "following the logical, laid-out rules" almost every single time - if there is a choice to be made that is in a "gray area". To me, the compassionate response IS the moral response - whether or not it happens to be in line with what the Bible, or Muhammed, or Bhudda, or my next-door neighbor says (or how they've been interpreted by another, merely fallible, human being).
Anyway - I was proud of what you said a few months ago online here, re: This topic - and I am still proud. Yay cloudboy!
Right on. You rock.
- Susan
< Message edited by SusanofO -- 1/29/2007 1:45:30 AM >
_____________________________
"Hope is the thing with feathers,
That perches in the soul,
And sings the tune without the words,
And never stops at all". - Emily Dickinson
|
RE: being married... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread