‘That’ interview, monogamy and kink – some random musings

Quite obviously not all of the topics above are connected, other than the fact that I was thinking about them in the same day.

So, Stephen Fry and ‘that’ interview, gosh.  I have always looked up to Stephen Fry (it’s hard not too for most of us, he is very tall after all). I did bump into him once at Liverpool St station, which inter alia does refute the claim I’ve seen from a number of sources that he has ‘never met’ any women who enjoy sex. I suspect he simply may not have been in a situation with those women where he could possibly tell. I don’t believe he would have realised from our encounter, for example.

So, back to the ‘gosh’: did he really say that? Was he quoted out of context? Was he simply being sensationalist?

Of course it is true that women do tend to approach sex differently to men.  But in a lot of cases, not with any less enthusiasm.

And it is true that men do from time to time get caught ‘cottaging’ on Hampstead Heath and the papers find out and make a huge fuss.  I don’t personally recall reading a similar story about a woman or group of women but it’s surely possible that women are just better at not getting caught.   Wave if you’ve had sex in a public place and not got caught? Yes, I thought so 😉 

Surely the truth is really rather boring and wouldn’t make a great interview (possibly won’t make a great blog either, but never mind, I’m enjoying it). Some women like sex a lot, really a lot. Some can’t be bothered and really would prefer to spend their time playing tennis or keeping their house tidy. And no, those are not euphemisms in case you are wondering. I know this because I know women in both these categories and plenty who really like sex every so often but aren’t desperate for it in between. In the words of one very good friend ‘if I could have sex four times a day it wouldn’t be enough, but that’s not always possible, life does rather get in the way’. 

Which brings me to Monogamy.  No that wasn’t a very good link, please refer back to the word ‘random’ in the title. And I trust you’ll allow for the fact that I woke up in an odd mood today.

For a long time I have questioned whether monogamy is natural for human beings – when I think back I remember some rather fun after-work conversations about it over the past ten years or so. I can absolutely see the attraction of finding one’s soul-mate, and I know people who have done that. And who could argue with the benefits of finding someone who is a true friend, a thoughtful and intuitive lover, someone to rely on, someone who is fun to be with, and who knows all our faults, weaknesses, quirks and foibles, and loves and wants to be with us anyway.

But I have always wondered whether one person can ever be all of those things to someone else, and if they can right now, can they still be in 2, 10 or 20 years’ time? And even if they can, is it fair to ask all of that of them?

For some people reading this, the answer to the above will be a resounding ‘yes!’ and I take my hat off to you. (For these purposes, please imagine said hat as a jaunty black velvet number).

But what about the rest of us? What are the alternatives? Of course, we can find someone who meets quite a lot of those needs right now, and see how things evolve. Or we can look to other relationships to cater for those needs which are not met within our ‘main relationship’. And I’m not just talking about sex – emotional needs can be met by close friendships and family. For those of us with a deep need for unquestioning adoration and devotion this can be met (for a time at least) by children.  In our society, no one questions our ability to love several children, nephews, nieces, god-children, parents, grandparents and close friends.  If we all understand and assume we have enough love to share amongst such a wide group, why is there an assumption that it’s possible to have only one romantic or sexual relationship?  If we truly believed that human beings have an infinite capacity to love and care for other human beings, why is such an artificial line drawn?

Editor’s note: if you’re looking for answers, you may be advised to read a blog written by an expert, I’m really just thinking aloud.

So, I’m afraid this will have to be another part 1/to be continued.  In this case, the reason is not to tease, as it was in earlier posts (NB: I will get around to finishing the London fantasy at some point, it just doesn’t seem appropriate to do that at the moment).  My reason for leaving this post at this point is that I’ve just realized what big subjects these are. I need to do some more thinking. Without doing that I’m at risk of making some sweeping and probably incorrect generalizations. Oh, and I also just thought of another fantasy blog 😉

As I am fond of saying, take care my friends, and be good to each other.


One thought on “‘That’ interview, monogamy and kink – some random musings

  1. i think ,that given the amount of people in relationships who feel the need to step outside it ,for sexual and emotional reasons/needs , it should be a given that we , like our ape cousins are not natually monogamous, if we were would we need marriage ceremonies ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s