This Side of Austin (part two)

It is safe to say that Daniel received superb reviews from the entirety of my family and friends back home in the Austin. Thumbs and big toes up!!! “He’s a keeper!” “Isn’t he why you moved to New York?” I can still hear the soundbites. It also safe to assert, however, that the only review that matters is the one Daniel and I give each other. The real issue may be: Is what I brought home really as good as it looks?

In my original thoughts on fidelity, I questioned its presence in the realm of commitment. Daniel and I are still facing this issue. Unsure about whether my flirtation with Eli is over (he's everywhere!), I am left with other strikingly similar situations. Eli wasn’t the first. In all honesty, Eli hasn’t been the last. Charming men seem to abound, especially now that I’m in a relationship. They should teach this correlation in every physics class. It's just science:

One boyfriend equals one dozen suitors.

Behold, the question I want daringly to propose: Is fidelity essential to commitment, or are they two completely different entities that we have tried to unite since nineteenth-century Victorian ideals were introduced to the West? How faithful are we to real, raw emotions when we’re faithful in relationships?

I know what I sound like. I agree; it’s a bit much. I feel, however, that if I am going to espouse something as difficult as sleeping, flirting, and kissing just the one man forever, I should also be able to criticize constructively the institution of fidelity that requires this. It’s a valid question. I’d like to establish whether this can be asserted undeniably, and if so, how often?

More and more, I have met seemingly healthy couples with open relationships. Upon learning of such arrangements, I tacitly disapproved on the inside, while, on the outside, I rather tolerantly affirmed the practice as a valid alternative. Some claim that open relationships remove an almost impossible expectation. Others assert that they remove the sexual ignorance of either one or both of the partners. Still, it seems to give men less to lie about. Do the partying paireds have it so wrong?

Really, I’ve considered it many times. After some struggling, I have come to terms with the fact that it’s really simple mating math. I should have pulled out my still unwritten physics text on relationships. The solution can be acquired by the application of a foundational equation: No two relationships are alike. A combination of two autonomous individuals must themselves determine what works for them.

Are the two, investment and commitment, as related as I thought? Daniel and I agree that they are intrinsically intertwined. Is sexual openness okay for us? No. How about for others? I don’t know; ask them. We must now concern ourselves with the physics of phlirting. It looks like my PhD candidate of a boyfriend will have to tutor me. It’s a good thing he’s at Columbia.