« Misc. Site Updates | Main | Random stuff--August 18 »
Adultery and Family Values
In the 2002 movie "Far From Heaven", starring Dennis Quaid and Julianne Moore, Quaid plays a married man and father of two, who has same-sex attraction and ends up leaving his wife and kids for a male lover.
Similarly, the recent announcement of New Jersey governor James McGreevey--also married and a father of two--that he had an extramarital affair with a man brings up a few questions about homosexuality and adultery.
The gay community has maintained since the beginning that they are not 'anti-family'. This begs the question, though: in situations like Gov. McGreevey's and the one portrayed in "Far From Heaven" where the husband of an established family finds he has same-sex attraction--are they then justified in committing adultery and/or leaving their current family in favor of a same-sex lover?
Society (properly...if fadingly) disapproves of adultery--saying a husband should remain faithful to his wife even if (a) he meets someone else whom he is more attracted to and/or (b) he is not, in fact, attracted to his current wife at all. Especially when kids are involved, society says it's not proper for a man to have an affair with another woman, nor to leave his current wife and kids in favor of a new lover.
(Yes, women can have affairs too--but we'll just focus on the men for now...)
When same-sex attraction is involved, though, what exactly has changed? The man still meets someone whom he is more attracted to than his current wife and probably has little to no attraction towards his current wife at all. Does the gay community say, then, that a man in this position can and should have an affair and/or leave his wife and kids in favor of a new male lover? If yes, then that makes the "we're not anti-family" charge hard to refute. If no, then that implies gay men are still capable of being good, faithful husbands and fathers despite perhaps not being attracted to their spouses anymore. (see discussion here--scroll down to the next-to-last paragraph)
[Side Question: Given Gov. McGreevey's established family, it appears inarguable that he (at one time, at least) was capable of having a normal heterosexual relationship with women. How does that fit in with the "Hard-Wired Theory" of homosexuality? Is McGreevey then properly considered 'bisexual'?]
Considering that a large number of gays happen to be (heterosexually) married when their same-sex attraction is discovered, I'd like to see some evidence that the gay community is encouraging them to stay faithful to their existing families, instead of the opposite...
August 17, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1029178
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Adultery and Family Values:
Comments
This is a very thoughtful post. I'm not gay, and as far as I know "the gay community" does not have one specific opinion on this. If anything, I think many homosexuals would have a problem with a man who has a secret (or somewhat secret) sexual relationship with another man while having a wife and kids at home. Many gays don't like it when a gay man "passes for straight," whether it be at work or at home.
Each family has its own way of dealing with things. Gov. McGreevey's wife seems to be incredibly understanding about all this, though it's possible she's just putting on a public face until the smoke blows over. I know of many women whose husbands came out of the closet years into the marriage, and in some cases there is seething resentment (at least as much as if she found out he was sleeping with another woman) and in other cases the couple stays close friends and they work together to raise the children and make the transition as painless as possible.
This is the optimal situation, I think. Many people (and not just homosexuals) would say that it's not good for the family for a gay man to just stick it out in a marriage that is not just unhappy but, essentially, a sham. Children pick up on this and it's not good for them. Divorces are painful, but growing up knowing that your parents do not love one another can be just as painful. This is not to say that it would be "impossible" to have a good marriage if the man is gay (as you discuss in your other post), but it's quite likely that the man in question will feel his entire life is a lie. His wife is not going to be too happy about this, either, knowing that her husband married her only to conform to a societal standard.
Your phrase "leave his wife and kids in favor of a new male lover" is key. Does it have to be "in favor of"? I don't know if anyone could say that a man is "justified" in leaving his wife for another man, though it may be understandable.
Situations like McGreevey's will exist as long as gays are not accepted in our society. When gays say they are "pro-family," this in part means that they would like to have their own families. They don't want to have to deny something fundamental about themselves in order to be in a family. So long as we demand that gays pretend to be straights in order to succeed in our world, we will have gay men marrying women but then (1) hating themselves and perhaps their spouses, (2) having affairs with other men, or (3) leaving their wives.
As for the "hard-wired" theory, I think sexuality is more complex than any theory can allow. McGreevey had a relationship with his wife, but no one but them knows if it was "normal." Richard Posner and others have written about proximity, availability, and social custom being important factors in sex, at least as important as biology. As McGreevey himself said, he tried to do what everybody around him was doing, and it took him a long time to fully admit that he was not the person he was trying to be.
The opposite effect can be seen in prisons, where otherwise heterosexual men have sex with other men, only to go right back to heterosexuality upon release from prison. Most of these men would say that they aren't gay. They were just doing what they could with who was there, which was what a lot of people around them were doing.
Posted by: John-Paul | Aug 26, 2004 11:32:54 PM
Great comment! (I should have emphasized more that the McGreevey's have not split up--unlike the family in "FFH", and in fact have shown no inclination to do so...that's another interesting topic for another day)
JP brings up the important question of whether husbands and wives should stay together despite personal problems (not necessarily homosexuality related...), especially if there are kids involved. Should a couple in a 'bad' marriage stay together for the kids' sake? Couples can't naively think their marriage problems are beyond comprehension from their kids and won't have any lasting impact...but, the mom or dad taking off at the first sign of 'irreconcilable differences' or when someone 'better' presents themselves, that teaches a lesson too.
Maybe the point is, how are we defining 'bad' marriages? Or 'good' marriages? Abusive relationships can be thrown into the 'bad' category very easily, but then how far up can you take the 'bad' category. Since there are no 'perfect' marriages, even 'good' ones must have some 'bad'--I think any couple that's persisted through the years will tell you that it happened because of working through the bad, not just enjoying the good. The problem seems to be divorce is so common...and easy (which makes it more common--a self-fulfilling prophecy) that people at the first sight of problems think 'well, that's it...it's too much trouble to work through this. Better go on to the next person and see if that's any better...' The divorce rate will continue to rise because society's expectations are so low (note the article from Wednesday applauding relationships who have survived for a whole year and a half!) plus the tendency towards self-gratification. I don't think the trend will turn around until more couples are committed to the idea of success of the family unit, going above and beyond the personal desires of any one individual member. Will that happen anytime soon? Hmmmm...
Posted by: The Baron | Aug 27, 2004 8:16:49 AM
Great blog...some thoughts...
i am happily married to a straight gynecologist and loving man, we're LDS, but previously i was married to a poor soul who suffered from SSA or same sex attraction- my exhusband is a dentist also(i'm not sure why dentists have the highest incidence of SSA and depression but they do) anyway- my former marriage was more a "best friendship" then intimate, I might add I am a former model/actress etc. so i don't think it was my looks, so i dug around a bit and found a letter he wrote to byu about SSA, his own! I also found some pics of he and some young adult men--welp at that point i was unsure about our temple marriage, starting taking to my doctor and my bishop, and eventually married my doctor (present husband-and i am so happy!) and stayed friends with my bishop to this day! what i want to say to men and women in my former situation is don't blame each other or the church etc. just please don't live a lie either. It was initially heartbreaking to find out my first husband was gay-- but then i realized in many ways he could not help it-- i just didnt have the strenght to stay in marriage...moral of the story, honesty is the best policy and marry within your own sexual preference!:) love shehun
Posted by: she | Jan 22, 2005 6:01:10 AM
