Debbie and I talk most Friday evenings, and tonight was no exception. We started with the usual trivia. I had my annual physical today, and did a bunch of laundry. She's been working on a quilting project. That kind of thing. Then she asked, "Do you want to talk about the things we've been discussing in email?" Oh right. That stuff.
I went first. And in the moment, I had absolutely no idea what I was going to say. So I slowed way the hell down. It felt like I was articulating maybe one word a minute, or something like that. I realized that what I really feel is what I expressed a couple of days ago: I love Debbie and Marie both, and I want them both in my life; but I don't want to move in with either one. But putting it that way sounds callous. So I tried, with infinite care, to say this:
- I know what I feel for you [Debbie].
- I know what I feel for Marie.
- They are different. Neither one interferes with the other.
- But they are both called "love" even though they are different.
- I can understand that there might be obstacles in the practical world: I can't visit you both at the same time, and if I kiss you too tenderly people might misunderstand. But to me those are practical obstacles and not emotional obstacles. At an emotional level, I don't see a problem loving them both.
In reality I was nowhere near that articulate. And as I say, it came out very slowly.
The first thing Debbie said was that she really appreciated my slowing down so much. She didn't say why, and I tried to think about possible reasons in parallel while she continued to talk. Maybe when I talk fast I'm kind of like a steamroller, and she finds herself swept along too fast to evaluate what I'm saying. And for a topic that is as emotionally difficult as this one, maybe she worried that I could sweep her into agreeing to something that sounded good at first, but that she wasn't happy with in the long run. Whereas this way, she had plenty of time to evaluate what I said as I said it. Maybe.
Another thing she said is that talking with me regularly has reawakened her feelings for me, and that she agrees in calling those feelings "love." As an aside, she said that if she were in my position, she doesn't think she could keep the two loves from interfering with each other, though she's prepared to believe that I can. But she says she doesn't have a problem keeping our love chaste. In fact, in some ways our love feels "purer" [her word] when it is not confused with carnality. She recognizes that she and I were apart when I got together with Marie; and if we hadn't been apart, it might not have happened. (I told her a little bit about my courtship of Marie, by way of assuring her that if I had been in relationship with her I wouldn't have had the motivation to rebuild my relationship with Marie.) Based on that, Debbie said it really wouldn't be fair of her to swoop back into my life now and try to steal me back.
But, she went on, none of that affects my relationship with her, not at the deepest level. Right now I know her very deeply, and she thinks she knows me pretty deeply too. (I agreed.) And we both know that we will love each other for the rest of our days. (I agreed.) That will be true, she added, even if we never see each other again. It will be true even if we put serious filters on how we act. It will be true because it is simply how things are. She doesn't want our behavior to hurt Marie, and so she wants us to be cautious and aware of what we are doing. But that doesn't stop us from loving each other.
One side note: Debbie said that she thought part of why we know each other so well is that we were lovers sexually for a year. I agreed, but emphasized "only part." In fact, if you look at how we interacted when we worked together way back in 1993—how easily we talked, how personal our topics of conversation were, how we kept regularly in touch a year later when she and her family moved to frappin' Europe—I think you can draw a straight line between where we started and where we are today. I conceded that we would both have balked at the word "love" back then, because we were both married and committed to monogamy. But it was love all the same, or the seeds of it.
We talked about some other things around the periphery of this subject, but this was the important part.
No comments:
Post a Comment