(Yes, it seems like I do have alot of opinions and one matter or another but that's just what a blog is about - me, me and more me. What's on my mind and all that crap...anyway)
So like, I've been picking up some books here and there and being the cheapskate that I am, sometimes I do pick up my friends' book. It's really interesting because the decision has always been made for you. After all, wondering into a store with so many possibilities one can really be confused by it all. I mean how long can you stick back to the same author before his/her books run out? And then what? NY Times best seller list? Trust the critics? I don't know. So anyway, her usual bunch of selections are usually crime and thriller infested so I don't think too much of it until I flicked through and found this particular book by this author that I can't even pronounce at first glance. It's almost unbelieveable - Armistead Maupin and the book is pretty looking and you know those books that are neither thick or thin, pretty looking with big white space between the lines - usually those are books about nothing in particular. So I flipped it and something caught my eyes, along the lines of this older HIV positive guy who found a young love in his twilight years.
It turned out that Maupin wrote a whole series of books on the lives and times of a bunch of interesting characters in San Francisco and Micheal Tolliver is one of the characters that he decided to give sort of a spin off and it was really a fun read. I am trying to read it slowly (haven't finish it yet) and one thing that (not exactly bugged me) got me thinking was this part where Micheal was discussing his relationship with his partner on how they should maintain an open relationship because it is more realistic to do so. He is too old and have seen it all to be restrained by just one and his partner is too young to lock himself up in one as well. I guess it makes perfect sense but part of me (the old romantic part of me) was like uncomfortable and I have to admit that while I have done many things in my lifetime, I can still be a prude when it comes to relationship - even though yes the modern and realistic me thinks that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that kind of arrangement.
But don't go thinking that I am judging, no by all means I am not. I am sure it has worked for some people and it is still working for some, I have long decided that this is not for me. At least this is still not for me. My own personal rationale is that while people can argue that human are not meant for monogamy, I can also argue that some experts argue human are not to meant to do alot of things and that is why there are rules out there to restrain us or else everyone will be running amok and doing anything and everything that they like. That's what life is. Not always doing what you want but sometimes giving way to thing that you might not like. So I think by giving in to what we were so called meant to be, aren't we saying that we shouldn't abide to the rest of the rules as well? Where does it end? Where's the line to draw?
Personally I don't think I can live with the thought of someone I love being with another person - even if it's just sex. I don't think sex is JUST sex. Sex is alot more than we care to give credit for. Even one night stands has it's component - attraction, passion, lust - all these are feelings. So there is no such thing as no feeling kind of sex. And these feelings, shouldn't it be reserved to the one you truly love? I won't say that I will never do it, but I highly doubt that I can live with it. I know enough to never say never but I do hope that while some people live happily with it (good for them), I still think a relationship between two person is worth trying it out for. After all, it has worked for many (yes, it has also failed for some)and for over many years as well, there MUST be something about it then, no?