The Jack and Jane Did-He-Cheat or Did-He-Not-Cheat Hypothetical
From Chuck Klosterman's IV:
"Let's say you have two friends named Jack and Jane. They have been romantically involved for three years and until recently lived together. Suddenly, Jack calls you on the phone and sadly mutters, "Jane just broke up with me." You ask why this just happened. Jack says, "She thinks I cheated on her." You ask, "Well, did you?" Jack says "I'm not sure. Something strange happened."
This is what Jack proceeds to tell you:
"There is this woman in our apartment building who I barely know. I've seen her in the hallway a few times, and we just sort of nodded our hellos. She is very normal looking, neither attractive nor unattractive. Last week, I came home from the bar very drunk, and-while I was getting the mail- I ran into her at the mailboxes. She was also intoxicated. Just to be neighborly, we decided to go to her place for one more beer. But because we were drunk, the conversation was very loose and flirtatious. And this woman suddenly tells me that she has a bizarre sexual quirk: she can only have an orgasm if a man watches her masturbate. This struck me as fascinating, so I started asking questions about why this was. And then –somehow- it just sort of happened. I never touched her and I never kissed her, but I ended up watching this woman masturbate. And then I went home and went to bed. I told Jane about it the next day, mostly because it was all so weird. But Jane went fucking insane when I told her this, and she angrily said our relationship is over. She's moving out right now."
Whose side do you take, Jack's or Jane's?"
I'm taking Jane's here. Here's why: Jack violated the intimacy terms of his relationship with Jane. While he didn't have sex, he was sexually intimate with another person. In doing so, he violated his commitment to Jane.
Now, it could be argued that he because his astonishment was not due to the eroticism of the moment but rather the peculiarity of the situation he did not cheat. His relationship with Jane took precedence over his astonishment.
This is not the same as paying for a lap dance at a strip club either, unless the dancer achieved orgasm, in which case I need directions to said club. This is also not the same as phone sex in which both people are participating.
Jane may be overreacting though. Jack was upfront and honest about the situation and spelled out exactly what took place. He did not attempt to conceal any information and genuinely believed the situation to be peculiar. He found no eroticism in the moment. For that, I think Jane needs to rethink her leaving. Jack also needs to be smacked upside the head by his friends for not giving them the wily neighbor's address.
"Let's say you have two friends named Jack and Jane. They have been romantically involved for three years and until recently lived together. Suddenly, Jack calls you on the phone and sadly mutters, "Jane just broke up with me." You ask why this just happened. Jack says, "She thinks I cheated on her." You ask, "Well, did you?" Jack says "I'm not sure. Something strange happened."
This is what Jack proceeds to tell you:
"There is this woman in our apartment building who I barely know. I've seen her in the hallway a few times, and we just sort of nodded our hellos. She is very normal looking, neither attractive nor unattractive. Last week, I came home from the bar very drunk, and-while I was getting the mail- I ran into her at the mailboxes. She was also intoxicated. Just to be neighborly, we decided to go to her place for one more beer. But because we were drunk, the conversation was very loose and flirtatious. And this woman suddenly tells me that she has a bizarre sexual quirk: she can only have an orgasm if a man watches her masturbate. This struck me as fascinating, so I started asking questions about why this was. And then –somehow- it just sort of happened. I never touched her and I never kissed her, but I ended up watching this woman masturbate. And then I went home and went to bed. I told Jane about it the next day, mostly because it was all so weird. But Jane went fucking insane when I told her this, and she angrily said our relationship is over. She's moving out right now."
Whose side do you take, Jack's or Jane's?"
I'm taking Jane's here. Here's why: Jack violated the intimacy terms of his relationship with Jane. While he didn't have sex, he was sexually intimate with another person. In doing so, he violated his commitment to Jane.
Now, it could be argued that he because his astonishment was not due to the eroticism of the moment but rather the peculiarity of the situation he did not cheat. His relationship with Jane took precedence over his astonishment.
This is not the same as paying for a lap dance at a strip club either, unless the dancer achieved orgasm, in which case I need directions to said club. This is also not the same as phone sex in which both people are participating.
Jane may be overreacting though. Jack was upfront and honest about the situation and spelled out exactly what took place. He did not attempt to conceal any information and genuinely believed the situation to be peculiar. He found no eroticism in the moment. For that, I think Jane needs to rethink her leaving. Jack also needs to be smacked upside the head by his friends for not giving them the wily neighbor's address.
Jason, please tell me this is just a messed up hypothetical that came to you in a bourbon-induced musing and "Jack" didn't actually plead his case to you.
ReplyDeleteWhile your analysis seems pretty balanced, I'd have to say that I think you give Jack too much credit. After a three year relationship, Jack should have known Jane's basic terms on sexual exclusivity. For example, assuming that they have never participated in partner swapping or three-somes or Jane hasn't allowed Jack to occasion places of ill-repute or view pornography, then Jack should have assumed that watching his own private little show with home-wrecking neighbor-girl was a hefty no-no, alcohol or not. If not, then Jane may need to rethink her hypocrisy.
On another note in defense of alcohol: Alcohol is a good friend of mine and gets a really bad rap. Folks always blame regretful actions on alcohol (e.g. it was just a college thing and we were drunk; I didn't want to, but I was drunk; I've never worn woman's clothing while sober, etc.) However, it's important to keep in mind that alcohol does not give new ideas. It just lowers inhibitions.
Pax,
Craig,
ReplyDeleteIt's from Chuck Klosterman's IV... I'd go with Jane's side, for the record...
Klosterman does come up with some interesting arguments, but I think this one is fuzzy.
ReplyDeletea. Jack is a dumbass who should have known where the boundaries of his relationship with Jill were and should have respected them. Maybe he felt he was though.
b. Jill has a right to be upset, but depending on what boundaries were set, it may not be grounds for leaving. Might be grounds for a bitch slapping, some relationship counseling or leaving Jack to sleep on the couch for an extended period of time, but on it's own I don't know if it is grounds for leaving.
c. If their relationship was rocky at the point, then this may have been the point to put it over the edge and she took the opportunity to bail. If it was not rocky, maybe Jill was over-reacting.
d. Who knows for sure or cares. Most men are stupid in their opportunism and most women have bat-shit level craziness in their blood. This is why most relationships fail. At least that is what almost 2 years of wedded bliss have taught me.
Jack was a Dumbass and deserved what he got. Even if you get a Lap dance it is a violation of that trust.
ReplyDeleteIf you are going to watch some woman masturbate or get a lap dance you DO NOT tell your Wife or Girlfriend because you will get the exact reaction that Jane had
i read this book - you should give credit to klosterman (or anyone else) when you quote them. the ethical thing to do, yes?
ReplyDeleteSerious ethics violation on my part, Techiegirl. Good call.
ReplyDelete