Sunday, June 8, 2008

What could be good about adultery??

I just read an article [follow this link here] about one of the most moronic books I have ever heard of in the field of relationship self-help. The book is called When Good People Have Affairs, and it is by a therapist named Mira Kirshenbaum. And it is all about alleviating the guilt and shame that adulterers feel, so they can go blissfully on about their business.

A word of warning: everything I know about this book comes from the article. But it saddens me that I can believe it all too easily.

The author starts off by saying that "Cheating on your spouse isn't a moral act," and "We all agree that infidelity is a mistake" and "I'm not encouraging affairs." But then she goes right ahead and does just that.
  • "Those who have affairs are seeking real happiness and love in their lives."
  • "Sometimes an affair can be the best way for the person who has been unfaithful to get the information and impetus to change."
  • "If handled right, an affair can be therapeutic."
  • "You could think of it as a radical but necessary medical procedure. If your marriage is in cardiac arrest, an affair can be a defibrillator."

A defibrillator? What?? Can anybody take this seriously?

I concede that an affair does not have to require a divorce: for all our problems, Wife and I have stayed together a long time. But the language of therapy and of getting your needs met sounds jarring in the context of marriage. That is the language of economic man -- the rational consumer. If we apply that language to marriage, it is because we assume at some level that marriage is an economic transaction like any other: I put food on the table and a roof over Wife's head, and in exchange I get ... well, whatever it is that I get.

Now, there is a word for this kind of transaction -- cash for sex, or for companionship -- but last I checked marriage wasn't it. I certainly hope that marriage is more than legalized prostitution. I will point out that one of the features of classical economic activity is that there is always room for competition. So if the price gets too high, any rational consumer takes his trade elsewhere. If the whole point of marriage is that I pay for sex or companionship, then as soon as Wife becomes too expensive (e.g., about the time she throws one of her cyclonic temper tantrums) it is only fair and rational for me to find somebody else who can provide the same goods cheaper. Sorry, no hard feelings and all that. There's nothing personal ... it's strictly business ....

If you find your flesh crawling at this view of marriage -- the way I do -- then maybe marriage is not really an economic transaction. But that means in turn that it is not really about getting your needs met in the most efficient way possible. Whatever marriage is, it sure ain't that. And this means that the whole premise of Ms. Kirshenbaum's book -- that affairs can be good because they can conduce to our getting our needs met better -- is nullified from the outset because that's not what marriage is all about in the first place.

Ms. Kirshenbaum's view of adultery is closely linked to her view of divorce: "Sometimes -- many times, in fact -- divorce is worth it.... It gets us out of misery-making marriages and we have a chance of finding happiness somewhere else." Well, maybe. If your outlook on life is so shallow, self-absorbed, and manipulative that you think building a marriage is like shopping for shoes, then sure -- trying on a new brand might enable you finally to buy sandals that don't pinch your toes. But if you think that building a relationship -- a marriage, a home, a family -- is like building up a little miniature country, then adultery is a form of treason and divorce is civil war. The research that has been done over the last couple decades on how divorce affects children supports this latter image: think Shiloh, and not shoes.

I loathe everything else that I have read about her book, so it should come as no surprise that I disagree with her about the value of honesty. She writes: "This is the one area in which the truth usually creates far more damage in the long run." The betrayed spouse will undoubtedly be hurt by the news -- as if this is any surprise! -- so the adulterous spouse should just shut up about it because it is bad to hurt people. Bad to hurt people? This is some kind of profound moral principle? My God, how old is this woman -- don't we expect children to get more sophisticated than this in their moral reasoning somewhere in their middle teens? I am dismayed that anybody this childish is allowed to practice any kind of professional therapy.

Sorry to have to belabor the obvious, but the hurt was done back when the affair happened. Knowing the truth is just a basic concomitant, because we can't any of us survive without knowing the truth about what is going on around us. If that truth hurts, tough shit: much of life hurts. And if it hurts the adulterer to inflict agony on the betrayed spouse ... gosh, that might have been something to think about before falling into bed with the Other Man (or Other Woman). But if you are going to commit adultery, the very least you can do is have the backbone to own up to it without flinching. Anything less is the basest cowardice, and I find it contemptible.

In summary, Kirshenbaum appears to teach that life is all about you and your needs, and that other people exist in order to meet those needs. Your challenge in life is to search until you can find the person you is best accommodated to you; how many hearts you break along the way, how many ruptured relationships you leave strewn in your wake -- none of that is important. Because, again, it is all about you. The very thought that you could accommodate yourself to somebody else -- or even to some kind of external principle of good behavior -- is just asking too much.

Kirshenbaum has written a philosophy for keeping us all perpetually six years old. I bet people will eat it up.

No comments: