Hey Newt: Call it What it is

Our Formspring Friday post this week dealt with the issue of infidelity.  In it, we mentioned that we have "unorthodox" views of monogamy.  Although Jill and I are both commited to each other emotionally, and for the most part physically as well, we would consider ourselves "monogamish", to use a phrase coined by advice columnist and personal hero Dan Savage.

We acknowledge that physical monogamy is a difficult thing to maintain for life.  We don't necessarily believe that human beings are wired for such a lifelong commitment.  We believe that if less of a premium was placed on physical monogamy in relationships, there would be less divorce, less unhappiness, and what the hell, probably less war and aggression in general.

This brings me to the topic of Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker and current Republican presidential candidate stumbling toward the White House on a platform of - what else - family values (i.e. traditional marriage).  While perusing EdenFantasys this morning, I stopped by SexIs and found an article pertaining to Gingrich and the recent allegations by his second wife Marianne that he requested an open marriage when she caught him having an affair with another woman.

It's no secret that Gingrich has been a bigger threat to his own marriages than gay marriage could ever be.  By all accounts - other than those of Gingrich himself - he divorced his first wife while she was was in the hospital for the removal of a tumor, then married the woman with whom he'd been conducting an affair.  Not quite twenty years later, the process repeated itself, this time with a different illness, and a different mistress.  If the pattern repeats itself, and I imagine it will, Gingrich has already started an affair with the woman for whom he'll leave his third wife.

I note with some amusement that, while Gingrich was calling for the impeachment of Bill Clinton for lying under oath about his involvement with Monica Lewinsky, he himself was having an affair with a younger woman who wasn't his wife (yet).  I understand the rationalization that allows Gingrich to believe that he is a better man than Clinton, that his offense was less severe simply because he hadn't been giving sworn testimony under oath.  But Gingrich considers himself a man of God, and has admitted not only to his extramarital affairs, but in having them, failing to live up to God's standards.*  If God exists, the thought that He would excuse Newt for not only lying to and cheating on his wife but also treating her with the care that one reserves for a Tonka truck because he wasn't under oath only solidifies my lack of faith.

During Thursday night's G.O.P. debate, Gingrich lashed out at moderator John King for daring to open with a question about Gingrich's alleged request for an open relationship.  The audience cheered Gingrich's cagey response, even though as the article notes, the point of a debate is to answer sometimes difficult questions.  Yes, there are many other issues to discuss during a presidential debate, but this is news, and it deserved to be addressed.  Whether or not Gingrich's former wife is telling the truth - and based on what we know of him such a request is not beyond the realm of possibility -  it could be said that Gingrich has invited such allegations by his past behavior.  

His righteous indignation may have fooled those in the audience, but not me.  I am of the opinion that when you have comported yourself in the manner that Gingrich has in his personal life while simultaneously besmirching the names of others who have done the same and then bewilderingly promoting yourself as a champion of family values, you don't get to act like a victim.

It takes much to offend me, but I can admit to taking some offense at Gingrich's proposal of an open marriage, and in particular, the circumstances in which it occurred.  He didn't suggest that Marianne allow him to have sex with other women, and upon her refusal, carry on an affair anyway.  This would have been bad enough.  No, Gingrich asked for an open relationship when his wife discovered the affair - which had been ongoing for six years!  I'll give the man credit for having balls.

But even had the arrangement been agreed to, an open marriage isn't something you ask for as a means of justifying six years of deceit.  And it's certainly not an ultimatum you hang over the head of a partner, with divorce on the opposite side of the coin.  As someone who would engage in an open marriage given the right set of circumstances, I don't appreciate Gingrich co-opting the term.  Call it what it is, Newt: A vehicle to deliver you from a marriage you were no longer interested in sustaining.

*Apologies for the Fox News link.  I hope it doesn't crash your browser.

-Jack

This post was sponsored by EdenFantasys.