What’s Good for the Goose?
Let me start by prefacing this post by saying that, in my opinion, women tend identify more with the emotional and men tend to identify more with the physical. If one wants proof of this, they only need to ask a couple in a committed relationship for their honest opinion as to what constitutes an ideal way to spend an evening with their significant other. This is not to say that there are not emotionally-minded men, or physically-minded women; Nor is it to say that both sexes don’t have both physical and emotional needs; Nor is this to villanize either perspective. It is just that from my experience, females tend to relate more to an emotional connection with their significant other while men tend to relate physically. Anyway, operating under this assumption…
The other day…well, who am I kidding…about six months ago (ok, sue me, I’m not really good at keeping up with this blog thing), I was watching Cheaters on G4. It’s a little bit of a guilty pleasure of mine, although, I must admit that when both parties are equally “guilty” and equality unapologetic, it is much more entertaining than having to suffer through the gut-wrenching experience of watching someone’s heart break. The episode that I was watching on this particular night followed a familiar story line. Girl thinks guy is cheating and hires investigators. Investigators follow guy and obtain evidence for presentation to d-bag host. D-bag host confirms that guy is cheating to girl and gives girl opportunity to confront guy. Girl takes opportunity to confront guy and catches guy in act with other girl. Fight/drama ensues.
This episode, however, provided more to me than usual.
After the girl had sufficiently berated her “no good cheatin’ ass” of a boyfriend and proceeded to call him every insult know to modern society, she immediately ran to her son who was sleeping in the room next door. The focus of the show then turned to the fake concern of the host as he let loose his plethora of clichés regarding “other fish in the sea” and “conflict making her grow stronger.” My focus, however, turned to the interaction between the girl and her son.
Her son couldn’t have been much more than one-year old. There was an air of desperation when she first grabbed him from the warmth and security of his blanket-filled crib, but now, as the host rambled on in self-satisfaction, her eyes lost focus and stared blankly past the camera and she held her son close with a motherly tenderness, repeatedly kissing him on his bald head as the salty remnants of tears dried on her cheeks. And ever so slowly, but ever so surely, her rapid breathing and choked whimpers began to subside as she regained her composure – ever clutching to her offspring. It was at that time that I had the following revelation:
When a guy and a girl enter a monogamous relationship, they are both agreeing (or accepting) that any physical connection and/or physical reinforcement that they seek is limited to their partner. When a guy and a girl enter a monogamous relationship, they are both agreeing (or accepting) that they can still seek an additional emotional connection and/or emotional reinforcement via, inter alia, children.
When considering the initial assumption, presented above, that women tend identify more with the emotional and men tend to identify more with the physical, it should be apparent that this agreement heavily favors the woman. Plainly stated, when a male feels unsatisfied; when he feels like he is not having his physical needs met (his governing emotion) there is no alternative means. When a woman feels unsatisfied; when she feels like she is not having her emotional needs met (her governing emotion) there is always the option of turning to children. In fact, not only is the woman permitted to add another individual to her committed relationship to have her emotional needs met, she is lauded for it. Congratulations abound, parties are held – hell, the greeting card store has an entire section devoted to it. And, furthermore, the emotional reinforcement that she receives is unlike anything that she can get elsewhere and, more significantly, unlike anything that her partner can provide. When a newborn enters her life, it is more than a typical emotional connection. The love between a child and his/her mother is a deep, unconditional love unlike any other. So where does this leave the man? Does anyone think that a man would be congratulated for going outside of his marriage to sleep with some nubile 19-year old to fulfill an unmet physical need? Somehow, I don’t remember seeing a “Congratulations on convincing your wife to let you bang the neighbor” card the last time I was in the Hallmark store. We all know that the man would be ostracized for committing such an act. And let’s not kid ourselves about what fuels the actions in question. A woman’s biological clock is nothing more than an urge that her body desires to be fulfilled. I think we all know that men have similar urges, but a man giving into such urges receives responses that are less than desired.
And it is such a recognition that hit me when I watched this woman on Cheaters. When I witnessed her run to her son for comfort, I was struck by how animalistic is was…so basic and instinctual. She didn’t run to him to ensure his safety. She ran to him to ensure her safety. She had just taken a serious emotional hit. She needed to feel loved. She had a need and she had found someone else to fill the need. In my opinion, the same could be said for her “no good cheatin’ ass” boyfriend in the next room.
Filed under: Relationships | 1 Comment
Tags: cheaters, emotional needs, men, physical needs, Relationships, women
Though you have to admit that once they entered into the contract of marriage, the husband (and the wife too, though it seems she has not broken this rule here) made a promise to forsake all others for his wife- meaning: no cheating. Since there is no such related clause in the wedding vows regarding children (and societally parents are expected to love their children more than their spouse, I think), the only guilty party here is the husband. The wife did nothing wrong here, and broke no vows of her marriage contract.