One more thought on the subject and I'll let go.
Sex, love, relationship, cohabiting, marriage. What are they about? As I observed in a bar at NUS Conference many years ago, when we were campaigning against the enactment of Clause 28, why is it that the so-called Christian moralists emphasise that traditional marriage is about sharing a life and companionship, and so on, and that sex is just a small part of that, but when it comes to homosexuality it's all about anal intercourse.
It's a bit like Butterflies. As far as I could gather, she never actually slept with the bloke, but she knew she was 'committing adultery in her heart.' Like Bill and Monica - the nature of the sex act was a mere technicality to the motivation.
Is a no-strings fling a lesser degree of infidelity than a full-blooded affair? Is it more palatable if you stop at Deansgate? Do people have affairs to make up for a shortfall, or to seek new variety, in their physical life? Or is it because they want to be with that person and the existence of another is immaterial to that.
For that matter, what is it that makes us couple off in the first place? Is it a physical sexual impetus or a socially-driven need? Would it work if we had a 100% satisfactory sex-life with our partner and got 100% of our companionship needs from platonic friends. Or do I need the mixture of a not-quite-perfect (interpret that how you will) sex life and the care and attention, and the great company that can come from only one person?
People ask 'what is love? is this love?' but rarely ask 'what is sexual desire?'
I've alluded before to my tendency to have crushes. They are characterised by a physical reaction to being in their presence (or seeing them on TV) - a physical reaction that includes an increase in pulse rate, perhaps a slight trembling, and a dampening of the palms. But is that really sexual attraction? I have similar physical symptoms when I hear fantastic music, or when I learn that Arsenal have drawn at Bolton, or when there is something fast-moving and fun in the Blogosphere. That can't be a sexual response. So am I incorrect in interpreting my excitement at being in the presence of a crush-object, or finding their address on 192.com (not that I would use it), as being a sexual reaction, or a sexual attraction.
Maybe I just want to spend sometime with that person.
But yet, I don't feel that with women. Sure, there are plenty of women whose company I enjoy, or female celebrities I admire - maybe one or two I ever-so-slightly fancy in a 'would never do anything about it' way. but I don't feel that frisson in the same way.
And, ultimately, I think, what is the point? For the sake of argument, suppose I were to embark on an affair with said crush-object, what would be the outcome? The newly established status quo could not be left unchangeable.
There are three options, broadly. One, to continue a perpetual juggling a act until old age and death overtake, which I think would be mentally draining. Two, to have a brief fling, and then have to tolerate the embarrassment of being in the same office as that person (or find a new job, for the wrong reasons). Or thirdly for each to leave their current partners, which I regard as unthinkable, and anyway couldn't be done without a great deal of upheaval and having to deal with the hurt of the innocent parties and also the reaction of friends and relatives.
Yet people still do it.
