As I suspected, the conversation in the comments of my recent article, Equating Love With Possession, centered around the “open marriage” depicted by Capote in his essay, Mojave, one of my favorites. Of course, what strikes me about the essay, and what I tried very hard to communicate in the article I wrote, wasn’t that this couple allows each other extra-marital affairs. As readers, we get offended by their personal business, and reject the possibility that they might love each other more than we love our partners. We reject Capote’s criticism of our hypocrisy because it’s easier than accepting it.
Today, I published an article by Lady Chatterley that appeared in perK magazine. It’s titled One Plus One Equals Three?, and works as a response or expansion of my article. Chatterley was confused about her sexual identity when she met her fiancé. This man—she calls him Jack—was secure enough to give her the necessary freedom she needed to experiment with her sexuality. The essay depicts, albeit lightly, her menage-a-trois with a couple she found on the internet.
In my opinion, we feel angry with Chatterley for only one possible reason: our insecurity is an Olympic monstrosity. Our concepts of control and love are too closely intertwined, so closely, in fact, that we wish we could control Chatterley and Jack, keep them from having their sexual experiments or open experiences. What other reason could we be angry with people for what they do in their privacy. How does it have any bearing on our lives at all?