Recently, I met up with a couple old friends, a married woman and a single gal enjoying the fruits of a new romance. I told them about all my turbulent relationships, joking about the slackers and bad boys, the commitment-phobes and jerky alpha-males who’d come into my life since we’d last seen each other.
“Oh, I’ve been there loads of times,” my married friend said after I described my most recent run-in with a sexy, relationship-shy stoner.
She’d been there loads of times? Shocking.
Married women, especially once they’re moms, seem to me so organized and fulfilled, it’s hard to imagine any of these poised individuals knocking around with losers. But once I thought about it, I remembered all the other married women I know who’ve admitted to the same sordid pasts.
My friend Sonya’s husband is a successful TV producer with a taste for fine wine, classical music, and most interestingly, fidelity. But before she met him, Sonya was chasing after an egomaniacal actor who was two-timing her with a co-worker. My friend Jane married a well-to-do marketing exec who’s the most loving, mild-mannered husband in human history. Before him, she dated a series of flakes, most notably, a lunatic with an addiction to crystal meth.
The other intriguing comment from my married friend was in response to my single pal’s confession that she thought her new flame was “super nice,” but her “heart didn’t skip a beat” when he walked into a room.
“Never mind that,” my married friend said. “The man you feel passionate about is not the one you should be with.”
So the good news is single women who constantly meet up with commitment-phobes and jerks can rest assured they’re not aberrations on the dating landscape. Apparently, it’s normal to meet a bunch of meatballs before you find the good man you’ll call your own.
The other side of the story is how so many of my wifely friends admit these meatballs made their hearts go gaga and their loins lava hot. On occasion, some of them even miss the beloved jerks who made them so loony, reminiscing about the roller coaster ride that added kick to life, the emotional depths they found themselves swimming through, and of course, the fantastic sex. But these wives also seem glad to have been saved by their husbands.
Since the end of my marriage, probably ninety-five percent of the men I’ve dated fueled my engine, but were certainly not stars on which to hitch my wagon. The “nice guys” who’ve entered my world always become friends while the not so nice become much more. Maybe it’s because I’m a writer or because I bore easily and dig emotional extremes. I’ve always preferred the roller coaster to the merry-go-round.
Of course, passion fades over time. Unfortunately, even the most constant love can, too. Both scenarios leave one numb. So I’m wondering about this passion thing. What is it anyway?
A skim through the dictionary will tell you passion is all about lust. It also describes the most amorous love, the deepest hate and every overpowering emotion in between. But the word comes from the story of Jesus, referring to the pain the man endured before he was nailed to the cross.
Thus, passion is really about suffering. And, well, I’m tired of suffering in relationships and tired of deprivation. You get to a point where the inner turmoil of loving a maniac loses its romantic sparkle and you want something that sticks.
Still, I am who I am, and I want to be as hot and bothered by a man, as I am comforted and contained.
Rather than finding someone who stirs my passion, maybe the point should be to find someone who has his own passion, so our two fires can fuse together and spark a volcano. Rather than connecting myself to someone who lets me know through suffering how deeply I can love, the goal should be to find a person who doesn’t consider sharing and intimacy a death sentence.
A man can be a maverick without being a loser, and his intensity can be unwavering instead of chaotic. He can be hot-blooded and also able to commit himself, self-assured without forgetting to be kind. The challenge for a woman is to be emotionally ready for such a unique individual.
And be lucky enough to find him.
All very well, but if it`s a choice of celebacy (I am not designed for that, no, no, no) and being allowed to celebrate and enjoy my sexuality, even with a sexy loser, with whom I can and do have intimacy and friendship and a damned hot time, who is as much meeting my needs as I am meeting his, then why not? Life is not all rose coloured spectacles, waiting for Mr Nice, maverick who isn`t committment shy. Sexual liberation was exactly supposed to allow women to choose how and when they use their bodies: Choice, not being dictated to by the notion that an ideal man and a husband is necessarily the answer if ´you are lucky enough to find him`. Surely this negates a woman`s right to choose. I agree that making better choices is crucial though, but advocate that women do what they want, so long as they are not hurting anyone, then why wait endlessly?
yes but sometimes, i used to think that friends with benefits sex was better than no sex. after having been through a rel that deteriorated, and enduring bad treatment-i’m not so sure. its very depressing to be treated badly, however hot the sex. and yes sex, like pizza, can sometimes be bad-especially if you feel used…
I was wondering what your thoughts are on polyamory. A friend of mine recently turned me on to the concept, and although I have no idea if it’s for me there are some very interesting theoretical foundations there.
I personally find myself much happier being single by dating a large pool of women at the same time. That doesn’t mean I tramp around and sleep with all of them; rather, I try to cultivate a healthy social life based on interactions with many types of people. It’s quite balancing. And living in big city, I get out a lot and see/do things.
In the end, I have ceased being fixated on finding The One (or a One) and am trying to move beyond the tunnel vision of monogamous expectation — all with terrific emotional-spiritual results!
And from a purely stylistic side, I just wanted to add that I really enjoyed the “their hearts go gaga and their loins lava hot” line. Top!!
Call me old fashioned, but having a stable functional partnership holds top priority for me…for more reasons beyond basic physical self-satisfaction. I enjoyed this post and agree with the points being made. Definitely food for thought.
A stable relationship doesn’t make for a “lets do it 5x a day” sex drive, but there is something so sexy, alluring, and wonderful about being with someone you genuinely like and care about. And those types of guys are usually up for holding your hand as you walk down the street, instead of only being seen with you in bed.
This article caught my attention because I am currently with a “super-nice” guy but feel a bit disinterested. Sex is great, that’s not the problem. I feel like I am physically attracted to him – he’s 6’5″! And, emotionally attracted to him – he says and does things you only hear in the movies. It’s our intellects that are not compatible – he’s a bit of dumb-dumb (poor short-term memory, can’t anticipate shit, always loses stuff). These things along with some physical quirks (nerdy voice, odd facial expressions, always touching his nose) drive me crazy. He has his act together, he puts me first and he’s an overall great guy who I would be stupid to leave. Why am I so indifferent?????
TD, this is called non-compatible relationship. The things that irritate will get worse.
Sorry
I think that passion can be great, its emotionally exciting and without it love can just seem like friendship. But at the same time however during these rollercoaster times we become so idealistic we become very vulnerable and can become deeply hurt very easily. I think it’s important to have a balance; a man that you lust for and cares for you. Without both aspects kept in balance relationships can become ultimately flawed.