Mark Arbour Posted July 14, 2014 Author Posted July 14, 2014 Point taken but neither one was perfect during those four years...who knows what would have happened if Wade didn't constantly ditch Matt for his female hookups when their relationship first started...I remember how tough that was on Matt...maybe it's not a stretch to say that that set some of the tone. You may be right, but I doubt it. I think that Matt was able to slide that whole part of their initial relationship aside, and write it off to part of Wade's molestation experience, and how that forced him to stay in the closet. If you notice, Matt never brings that up, but Wade does. I think it weighs heavily on Wade's mind, but isn't an issue at all for Matt. Matt was a slut but he didn't have relationships that threatened his and Wade's... Carl Haupt. And I do remember an offer that Matt made for a closed relationship that I thought he meant. Refresh my memory on this one. At any rate,they were kids and it has taken four agonizing years to get here.They are adults now and you have made Matt a truly impressive individual so why not give them their chance now to be together in a different way? You are saying it is what Wade always wanted yet you have set him up with two sexual relationships. As I said before, I'm kind of acting like Snopes for this thread, trying to bring different points of view into things. In actuality, the last chapters are already written, so you'll find out in the next six chapters which way I went with this. 1
Headstall Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 Usually, the reason I speak up in this forum (besides it being fun) is to inject some context and objectivity into the discussion. That's what I'm doing with Wade. Or perhaps Wade is just trying to look at things factually and logically, which actually makes sense for him, since he just came out of his infatuation-induced haze. It actually plays no factor in this at all. Tying the series together was convenient and interesting, but not part of my master plan. That is even more true when I consider that I don't even have a master plan. You make a very good point here, and I think that if I were Matt, I would feel the same way. I can see how Matt would fall into that "second best" mindset, and how it would make him very insecure as he moves forward with Wade. Matt voiced this pretty clearly to Wade, when he told Wade he felt like he was just a dick to get Wade off (more or less), and Wade's answer wasn't overly compelling. In this situation, I'm going to agree with you, in that this is probably just you. I don't think it's reasonable to expect that people adhere to someone else's definition of love, or what is a proper relationship. If monogamous works for you, that doesn't mean it will work for a different couple. And that doesn't mean that monogamous love is stronger or more beautiful than non-monogamous love. Wade has every right to be skeptical of Matt's assertion/offer to be monogamous. He's actually done that, for the most part, in his relationship with Matt, even when it was OK for him to mess around with other guys. In the past, Matt has flat our rejected that kind of committed relationship. When Matt made that proposal to Wade, Wade was unwilling to trust his battered psyche and emotions to Matt. He was seeking some distance, probably trying to give Matt a chance to evolve into a post-college adult, and trying to give both of them a chance to recover from their post 9-11 wounds. Casey pointed out to Matt that he basically needed to stand on his own before he could be part of a couple again, and I have to believe that was driving Wade's attitude. Their progression as a couple, from Wade's point of view, must look something like this: They started out as two guys who had broken up and weren't even really friends; they re-kindled their romantic attachment and tried to work back into that friendship; the friendship expanded as their romantic feelings reemerged; and then the love they felt for each other blossomed again. And now Wade is essentially back to the same kind of relationship they had prior to 9-11, where they are committed to each other emotionally, but allowed to have other partners/relationships. Matt told Wade he was ready to go to the next step long before Wade even got to this point. He made a huge leap across a couple of those steps, which is typical of Matt, but completely out of character for Wade, who is much more methodical. Ouch I have always respected other's choices and their right to them...I did let my bitterness out and with a lot of life experience we all have our opinions. I got my hopes up for a relationship that I could identify with in CAP world. That was a mistake because that is never how it works. I adhere all the time to someone else's definition of love and what constitutes a proper relationship...I do that with my devotion to CAP.And I have never said one was more beautiful than the other. What is so wrong with me hoping for ONE gay relationship to be different from the CAP norm? I want to take one thing back. I don't think it is just me who finds the exclusion of a monagamous gay relationship disappointing.Of course that is my supposition...Your success speaks for itself and you don't need my input .I have been enlightened.But I will not apoligize for my romantic nature or what I might have wished for. I will just temper my expectations.
Headstall Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 You may be right, but I doubt it. I think that Matt was able to slide that whole part of their initial relationship aside, and write it off to part of Wade's molestation experience, and how that forced him to stay in the closet. If you notice, Matt never brings that up, but Wade does. I think it weighs heavily on Wade's mind, but isn't an issue at all for Matt. Carl Haupt. Refresh my memory on this one. As I said before, I'm kind of acting like Snopes for this thread, trying to bring different points of view into things. In actuality, the last chapters are already written, so you'll find out in the next six chapters which way I went with this. Sorry Mark but I am emotionally drained and exhausted so I don't have it in me to go back and find pertinent info about the monogamy offer and Carl Haupt... A lot of CAP history I can pull out of my head but not today ...It was my last point that mattered to me (about them being grown ups now and my question to you).
Westie Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 I was probably that guy. I was never very good at posting. My friends used to give me a bad time, telling me that I either had the horse walking or at a cantor, with no in-between. I knew it! I always suspected that if you got a nice young stallion between your legs, you wouldn't be able to ride it properly 2
sat8997 Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 Dang, you people take your fiction way too seriously. Ain't it wonderful?? And its my sincerely held belief that Matt's an ass, has always been an ass, and more than likely will continue to be an ass in any future story. So there! Oh...and while I'm at it, Will is the most awesome teenager ever!!!!! Even when he disrespects every known adult in the world. That's just how he rolls. 5
Kitt Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 What is so wrong with me hoping for ONE gay relationship to be different from the CAP norm? While it did take several LTR's each and the better part of 30 years, JP and Stef have settled down to a basically monogamous relationship. They do once in a while play with someone new - but for the most part it is each other they prefer. Stef may have been flirting outrageously with people around him, but how many has he actually had physical relations with lately? 3
Henson Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) While it did take several LTR's each and the better part of 30 years, JP and Stef have settled down to a basically monogamous relationship. They do once in a while play with someone new - but for the most part it is each other they prefer. Stef may have been flirting outrageously with people around him, but how many has he actually had physical relations with lately? Honestly, doesn't this speak to some level of authenticity? Let's be blunt - perfectly monogamous gay relationships are rare in an urban environment. I don't speak to the morality of this, it just is what it is. All of life is negotiation, and people - including these characters - have a right to negotiate the arrangements that are fulfilling for them. Not for you; for them. And I feel that the progression we've seen, where these men who were extraordinarily promiscuous in their day, settle down as age creeps up, rings true. It is infinitely more reasonable for an older, established man to find a monogamous, lifelong partner than it is for someone not-quite out of adolescence. I won't apologize for thinking that a strictly monogamous relationship may not be healthy at the age of 22. It leads to cases of the "I wonder if's" and the "I wish I would'ves," which in turn cause resentment. Let the young men in this story be young men. I'm confuzzled that anyone could read Mark's body of work to this point and anticipate that at any point a male/male primary couple in a story of his would be strictly monogamous. Edited July 15, 2014 by Henson 2
Bucket1 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Tim, I wrote my above post before I saw yours - it wasn't a reply to you. The short version is, I love the story, love the writing, and think Matt needs to give Wade a wakeup call. He needs to follow Will's advice, grow a set, and tell him, "hey, I love you. I'm always here for you. But until you get your shit together, quit bothering me and tearing my heart apart. It's not what you do to someone you love." ... and then fuck his way across Chicago. It's always good to sleep on these things and then find someone has already made the post that you wanted to make. If I was Matt, I would be taking Casey and Will's advice and leaving Wade well enough alone. Matt has clearly grown as a person, Wade has not (or at least not enough to see Matt for who he is now). Mark can give Matt the ride of his life in Chicago (Matt deserves some fun) and then in a future episode they can get back together (crossing fingers). As Mark pointed out, Matt has tended to make big leaps in development where as Wade takes the slow and stead approach. Once again Mark, thanks for writing such rich characters (I'm a fanboy - guilty as charged). I think Wade's infatuation with Alex is an overreaction to the instability in his life - he has broken up with his soulmate, almost lost their friendship too, lost his father and the rest of the 9-11 disaster. He is looking for comfort not a life partner. Stability rather than happiness. This is similar to his affair with Brad. Wade needs to feel grounded. Old Matt didn't really offer that at a time when Wade wanted it. New Matt could offer this but at this stage I don't think he should. Wade still sees him as second best and until Wade realises that Matt is more than that, any future relationship will be fatally flawed (but might make a good story). Matt needs to have another conversation with Casey (or me) and work through some of Wade's behaviour. During 9.11, Wade was growing up and Matt was still thinking he was a freshman (slightly unfair but you get the point). In Flux, Matt has made the leaps in development and I think grown more than Wade has (each has a different style as befitting individuals). Unfortunately in life, in relationships and in the world of CAP, timing is every thing. At the start of Flux, I thought Matt needed to grow up and Wade did the right thing by giving them some space. Well I guess it worked. I was firmly in the Matt/Wade forever camp but now I think that Matt needs to give Wade the chance to grow as a person and stand on his own two feet - no more mind blowing sex for Wade!. It is now time for Matt to say "thanks i will always love you (even if you do rip out my heart), you are important to me but I can do better". Wow did I really just write that? 1
Bucket1 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 On a sort of off-topic comment, I find this part of the story the hardest to read. 6 chapters to go and I really really really want to know what will happen but I don't want the story to end. 2
Mardi614 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Once again I did something to not give a review. Thanks Mark for again writing a great chapter. To me, Matt and Wade are the younger Brad and Robbie. Brad and Robbie went through a lot. Most was Robbie's doing, but Brad was not innocent by a long shot. I am glad you did a chapter from Wade's perspective. I know Matt caused a lot of shit, but he didn't do what Wade did in Paris. I, being rather obsessive, picked on what Wade said about Alex getting a free place to stay. Both Matt and Wade don't have to worry about money and that again makes me believe that Alex may not be what he seems. I hope that Matt is negative. I totally forgot about Matt's earlier positive. Thanks again for a great chapter. 2
methodwriter85 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 That is an excellent point, one that us career dads appreciate! I was thinking that when Riley goes to baseball practice, Matt's more likely to be in the stands than Wade is, although I'll be Wade makes it to the games. There really isn't anything quite as boring as watching a little league game of 5-6 year olds. If anything, Matt would probably try and become the over-eager Little League dad-coach. I can tooootttalllllyyyy see Matt becoming the guy who becomes over-involved in their kid's sport lives, although not to unhealthy Jeanine or Wally levels. Although what about Maddy and her soccer games? Wouldn't Matt and Wade want to be involved with that as well? Girls play sports, too. Come on, don't be a sexist. In all seriousness though, Wade doesn't seem to relate to Maddy as a father figure. I think he consciously or sub-conciously avoids that in deference to Cody, although if Cody stays the long-distance dad through Maddy's childhood I think he'd eventually feel obligated to provide a father figure to Maddy. 1
Mark Arbour Posted July 15, 2014 Author Posted July 15, 2014 If anything, Matt would probably try and become the over-eager Little League dad-coach. I can tooootttalllllyyyy see Matt becoming the guy who becomes over-involved in their kid's sport lives, although not to unhealthy Jeanine or Wally levels. Although what about Maddy and her soccer games? Wouldn't Matt and Wade want to be involved with that as well? Girls play sports, too. Come on, don't be a sexist. In all seriousness though, Wade doesn't seem to relate to Maddy as a father figure. I think he consciously or sub-conciously avoids that in deference to Cody, although if Cody stays the long-distance dad through Maddy's childhood I think he'd eventually feel obligated to provide a father figure to Maddy. OK, didn't you just point out a few posts ago that we don't always get to see the interaction with the kids because it's boring? If that's the case, it's hard to conclude that Wade doesn't see himself as a father figure to Maddy. I think Wade will try to be as involved with Maddy as he is with Riley, but I think he'll fail, because the genetics are important to Wade, even though he probably wishes they weren't. Regardless, I think that whether Cody, Matt, or Wade step up to the plate and try to be a father figure for Maddy, their impact on her life will pale in comparison to the influence Will is going to have. That being said, you're right, in that I should have mentioned women's sports too. That really is a big deal. And I think there's a decent chance that if Maddy or Riley show any great athletic talent, that Matt will be a pretty driven parent. I don't see him being negative like Wally, but I do see him pushing the kid pretty hard. 1
Mark Arbour Posted July 15, 2014 Author Posted July 15, 2014 Once again I did something to not give a review. Thanks Mark for again writing a great chapter. To me, Matt and Wade are the younger Brad and Robbie. Brad and Robbie went through a lot. Most was Robbie's doing, but Brad was not innocent by a long shot. I am glad you did a chapter from Wade's perspective. I know Matt caused a lot of shit, but he didn't do what Wade did in Paris. I, being rather obsessive, picked on what Wade said about Alex getting a free place to stay. Both Matt and Wade don't have to worry about money and that again makes me believe that Alex may not be what he seems. I hope that Matt is negative. I totally forgot about Matt's earlier positive. Thanks again for a great chapter. I'm sorry the review system blanked out your review. I can see why you'd think that Matt and Wade are the younger version of Robbie and Brad, but I think there are some stark differences in their personalities that make them significantly different. 2
mmike1969 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 (edited) Going to make this point re: Matt From 9/11, chapter 70 “That’s your decision,” I said, so annoyed with him. “You still planning to fuck everyone on campus?” “No,” he said. “I’ve been really extreme. That ends now.” “So what are you going to do? Are you still going to sleep with other guys?” “You want to be monogamous, for us to be exclusive?” he asked, and seemed shocked that I’d want that. I felt the anger surging, and I almost laughed at how Will thought I was unemotional. “Nothing has changed, nothing at all,” I said, shaking my head. Instead of Matt asking Wade if he wanted to be monogamous, he should of said "let it just be us"... which is part of what Wade wanted in the first place. A commitment and maybe a sacrifice on Matt's part without being told what to do. You know, like a decision being made by a grown-up. Edited July 15, 2014 by mmike1969 3
Headstall Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Honestly, doesn't this speak to some level of authenticity? Let's be blunt - perfectly monogamous gay relationships are rare in an urban environment. I don't speak to the morality of this, it just is what it is. All of life is negotiation, and people - including these characters - have a right to negotiate the arrangements that are fulfilling for them. Not for you; for them. And I feel that the progression we've seen, where these men who were extraordinarily promiscuous in their day, settle down as age creeps up, rings true. It is infinitely more reasonable for an older, established man to find a monogamous, lifelong partner than it is for someone not-quite out of adolescence. I won't apologize for thinking that a strictly monogamous relationship may not be healthy at the age of 22. It leads to cases of the "I wonder if's" and the "I wish I would'ves," which in turn cause resentment. Let the young men in this story be young men. I'm confuzzled that anyone could read Mark's body of work to this point and anticipate that at any point a male/male primary couple in a story of his would be strictly monogamous. Hey Henson I am responding to your post for a number of reasons. Firstly, I let some pretty powerful emotions get away from me in the last few days and made comments that did not come out right and I do feel bad about that. Yes I am monogamous by nature and that has worked for me my whole life and yes I would enjoy characters in CAP that would have that work for them. I admit that it would give me a feeling of inclusion in the CAP world I love so much, because it would be something I could relate to a little more personally. But I don't need that. I love these characters and have always accepted them as they are (even Robbie, who was sometimes a challenge for me).I do SO agree withyou about your negotiation point. It is really important that couples negotiate honestly about what is right for them and set about to make that work. It doesn't matter to me how someone else choose their relationship to be. I worked part-time in a very popular gay bar on and off for about six years(Part of my investment plan).You see a lot of things and get to know a lot of people when you work in such an environment.It was my observation that later in the evening tou see a lot of hooking up and interaction,oft times involving couples.But late afternoon and early evening, I got to meet and interact with a LOT of monogamous couples who lived in the urban village. They definitely exist and they come in all ages. In fact most of them were younger , as in twenties and thirties.These guys opened up to me about their relationships quite often firstly because they knew I cared but I think mostly because the patrons in general knew it was a waste of time to hit on me because I was totally commited to my partner in a monogamous relationship. So my experience makes it impossible for me to agree with you that non-open relationships are rare in an urban environment (Toronto is a pretty big environment). As well I don't think it is unhealthy at any age to be monogamous if that is a choice you willingly make. For some it is actually a need and no more wrong than someone who needs an open relationship. I have witnessed many young couples thrive in their closed relationships, although I won't pretend, like in any relationship, that they were always happy endings and sometimes infidelity was the the catylyst. But back to Flux. Wade has always wanted a monagamous and stable relationship and this is something Mark has referred to many times. It has taken Matt four years to get there but it would appear that that is what he now wants with Wade. This scenario become extremely important to me because I wil admit to being almost obsessed with these two characters from the beginning and as we all know it has been a really rough long road for both them and us readers who care about them. I hade pretty much given up on them until Mark rekindled their fire and consequently my hope for them. I don't think there is anything wrong with Wade needing what he has said he needed in a stable closed relationship...so when he ended up choosing Alex, and Matt as a backup I became angry and frustrated. I had been hoping for Wade to get that with just Matt because it is what I concluded that they both wanted. Frankly, an open relationship had contributed to their downfall in many ways and was the basis for many of their problems. So that is why a monogamous relationship for them was important to me. I saw it as their best chance to get it right this time. But they are trying to work something else out for them now (negotiate, if you will). I accept that. Personally, however, I think this situation is doomed because I don't think Matt will be able to handle his "role" sucessfully for very long and Wade will end up getting his closed relaionship most likely with Alex, who wants the same thing apparently. Again, who knows in the CAP world. One thing for sure, Mark always takes us on a helluva ride and even though it may waver a little from time to time because I am prone to emotional overload, I have always had the utmost faith in where he ultimately takes us. I just want to end by saying that, no matter how I came across, I really do not sit in judgement of the relationships in Mark's stories as to whether they are open or closed...I just tend to root for what each character really wants. I do admit to getting carried away after this last chapter, and I feel bad and apoligise for that...I was a hurtin unit. I blame Mark for some of that though because he creates these characters so damn real that they feel like a part of my day to day life :worship: .Cheers to everyone...Gary 1
davewri Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 It's something to think about that we 'know' these characters better than most of the people in our real life. We don't know the innermost thoughts of other people around us in the same way we seem to have insights on all of Mark's characters. I have read every posting of Mark Arbour and I can say that I don't always like the characters and the direction of the story, but I do enjoy very well written stories. ( I don't enjoy reading about 'fisting' so I just skip over those parts.) With six more chapters I hope for a happy, happy ending of FLUX and waiting for the next series in CAP. 3
methodwriter85 Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 Isn't Canada generally ahead when it comes to gay rights? They had universal gay marriage in 2003. The U.S got it ONE state in 2004, and Massachusetts wasn't joined by other states until 2008-2009. We're in 2002, and the public image of gay life still resembles the go-go dancers and bed-hopping of Queer As Folk. (Which was ironically filmed in Canada but still set in the United States.) It wasn't until gay marriage and gay adoptions/surrogate pregnancies started happening in the U.S. with more frequency that I started hearing more about gay guys settling down in monogamous relationships and setting up family units. Before that, the only gay guys I knew who were settled tended to be the 40-something/50-something types who had adopted kids and were aged out of the club scene. 25-year old American gay guys announcing they were settling down for life with a partner was still pretty damn rare during this time period. I mean, in 2010, I had a straight friend joke to me that I might find a husband in grad school. I didn't, of course, but it really made me think about the fact that when I came out circa 2001, having a "husband" would've been a foreign concept to me. I could've had a "partner" that I had a Vermont civil union with, but it's still kinda different. A 15-year old gay boy growing up in 2014 America would have the concept that he could get married and could have a husband pretty much in his consciousness, especially if he's growing up in one of the 19 states that allow gay marriage now. Adam Phillip's wrote this autobiographical novel called Cross-Currents, and he had this scene with a bisexual narrator who talks to a gay person about what it means to be a gay guy who wants a committed relationship. I thought it was very true to the time period of the late 1990's/the very early 2000's- He rolled his eyes. "You guys with your women. You can fuck around like crazy, then decide to get serious with one and it all works out.""So?""It doesn't always work that way with gay guys," he said. "Hardly ever, in fact."He grimaced. "Gay guys fuck around like crazy too, and that's all they ever do. Nobody ever thinks about the long-term. With you breeders, it's like some interior signal goes off, and you start finding one another and having babies. But with gay guys, it's just one trick after another. And somewhere along the road they get old and ugly and it's too late. They're alone. You ask any gay guy over thirty-five how easy it is to find love if they haven't already found it. It's not their fault, really, it's the way this damn society forces gay people to..." he trailed off. "Oh, never mind. You don't wanna get me started on all that. I'm just sayin' I want something different. I won't get it with you." I thought it just kind of nailed that "circuit boi" era mindset of the Y2K years, when gay guys stopped being scared of AIDS but didn't really have a lot of examples showing off that settling down into a family as a monogamous gay couple was possible. Wade and Matt do have the example of settling down into family units, but neither Brad/Robbie nor Stefan/JP are examples of perfect monogamy. To me, Matt and Wade are the younger Brad and Robbie. Brad and Robbie went through a lot. Most was Robbie's doing, but Brad was not innocent by a long shot. I missed that, but I have to really disagree with this. There's nothing similar in their dynamic- Robbie was the nouveau rich raised in the house of a man who had crawled his way to respectable middle class from serious white trash roots and Brad was the Golden Boy of an incredibly rich, old-money family. There was always this imbalance with them- Robbie was always this impulsive, insecure guy who needed to buy friends and show off his incredibly shaky wealth, and Brad could, in a sense, hold the card that he could've destroyed Robbie financially if he wanted to. Brad had all the control in the relationship and they were never really on equal footing. Matt, meanwhile, grew up in an affluent, well-respected family and has the confidence that went along with that. While the Carrswolds are nowhere near the wealth of the Danfields, Matt's never had "trying to prove himself" syndrome that nouveau-riche people like Robbie seem to get. I've never gotten the feeling that Wade and Matt weren't equals with each other. I think Wade will try to be as involved with Maddy as he is with Riley, but I think he'll fail, because the genetics are important to Wade, even though he probably wishes they weren't. It's a very Southern thing, I think, of knowing "who your people are." Which is probably why Wade relates so much to Alex because Southern culture resembles English culture in that regard- the whole "cavalier gentry" thing. And I think there's a decent chance that if Maddy or Riley show any great athletic talent, that Matt will be a pretty driven parent. I don't see him being negative like Wally, but I do see him pushing the kid pretty hard. I think it's just a function of the whole affluent class that Matt comes from. I mean, you probably saw this with your son's friends because I figure you're somewhere close to Matt's socioeconomic class- parents expect very high achiever trophy kids, which is why they're under so much immense pressure. Which was an interesting contrast to someone like Will, who does well in school but isn't pressured to be a National Honor Society, varsity-sport letterman, valedictorian candidate like some of the kids I grew up with. He's not under expectations by his family to get a job that will help him move up a social class or at least maintain the one he's in, because Will's already at the top, and his family wealth pretty much guarantees that he doesn't have to worry about any real financial setbacks. 2
Henson Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 I came of age in the gay culture you tried to describe. Dude - you have GOT to stop watching TV shows as though they were documentaries. I think it's a matter of extremes and outliers. Circuit boys are outliers, but so are the committed, 200% monogamous couples who chat it up with the bartender during the day when the bar is deserted (note that there are WAY LESS PEOPLE in the bar during that magical daylight hour when the committed couples come out to drink). The rest of us are somewhere in the middle: partying through our twenties, but not destructively; dating both seriously and not, trying to negotiate what our relationships mean in terms of balancing; learning to love the man more than the ideal of a "perfect" relationship itself; and eventually outgrowing party culture to take on responsibility. We party, life happens, and we move on. 2
methodwriter85 Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Well, I'm not saying Queer as Folk was 100 percent accurate, but it did reflect something, as did the exchange between Andy and Kyle Kessler in Cross-Currents, which wasn't fictional. Anyway, I was actually trying to back up what you were saying about how it's more the reality for urban gay people to not be monogamous. I was agreeing with you there, man. Geez.
Headstall Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Well, I'm not saying Queer as Folk was 100 percent accurate, but it did reflect something, as did the exchange between Andy and Kyle Kessler in Cross-Currents, which wasn't fictional. Anyway, I was actually trying to back up what you were saying about how it's more the reality for urban gay people to not be monogamous. I was agreeing with you there, man. Geez. I wasn't going to weigh in on this but what the hell...these forums are supposed to be fun so...I understand the words you are using but I don't really get what you are saying. I actually watched some of Queer As Folk being filmed as we lived in the gay village where it was filmed. My group of friends never took it seriously...for the most part we found it was so over the top...it was a parody...but it was fun. Gay life as we lived it was really not like that at all.I love Americans...they are usually great tippers and generally nice people. So not to generalize because most of them were in party mode when they came in the bar...and I don't want to start a war...but some of them tended to be a little more agressive sexually than my Canadian patrons..I just know that that statement is going to piss someone off...it was nothing terrible to deal with...it is just that if they had a few drinks and decided they were interested...it often took more than one NO. Because of this topic, I am wondering if there is a difference in our two gay cultures. Maybe a lot of Canadians act the same when they go on vacation to the states. I wouldn't have thought there would be much difference but who knows.My gay experience is all Canadian so I have nothing to compare it to.Just some food for thought. I am not sure Method, but it seems like you equate monagamy with being settled down...even with kids et al. If that is the case, I differ here. To me you can be anything from dating, to boyfriends, to living together, to not living together, to married with kids. Monagamy to me is just being sexual with that one person you are with...there doesn't have to be a real relationship as yet, and there may never be.You can see a person once every couple of weeks and still be monagamous. It is a commitment to not screw other people while you are screwing your boyfriend or lover or what ever he is to you. And that commitment is the important thing to those of us who want to make it. I don't understand getting aged out of the club scene either. In the village we have a large number of dance club/bars and at my age I still feel comfortable in every one of them.I don't go as often as I used to but I still go(I am extremely fit) and dance my heart out. Maybe it's a Canadian thing or an "our village"thing but there are always guys of all ages at these clubs. I am really quite confused at the notion that monagamy is extreme or rare. Gay men come in every size, shape, inclination, values, wants and needs, just like straight people do. We don't just go to bars during daylight or congregate in secret clubs,and we don't need to be a certain age. Some of us can choose to be monogamous in one relationship and then choose to be open in the next one.Some guys can be with one man their entire life and others can go through many and still be monogamous. I have a great number of friends of all ages and the honest truth is that the majority of them are either in a monagamous relationship, have been, or want to be. I do have a number of friends who are bitter about their bad luck in their love life and have given up trying to find "that one". At should at this point mention that I am kind of a Dear Abby to a lot of my friends and they tend to be very open with me about their life and feelings.When I was 48 my boyfriend was 24 and we had an amazing relationship for 16 months(don't judge me...it was real and he chased me and wouldn't give up). We are still good friends. The thing is, at his age, monogamy was very important to him. When he first approached me to dance and then more, I told him I didn't do one night stands...he said neither did he anymore. This was in 2003. We can only go by what we see and experience, so I don't see that part of me as extreme or view myself as an outlier and I am surprised others do. Maybe I shouldn't be surprised though because we all live in different places and maybe it is just different everywhere. At any rate it is an interesting subject and it really doesn't matter how others view my choices or what I myself know to be true...cheers...Gary 1
Bucket1 Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 I am not sure Method, but it seems like you equate monagamy with being settled down...even with kids et al. If that is the case, I differ here. To me you can be anything from dating, to boyfriends, to living together, to not living together, to married with kids. Monagamy to me is just being sexual with that one person you are with...there doesn't have to be a real relationship as yet, and there may never be.You can see a person once every couple of weeks and still be monagamous. It is a commitment to not screw other people while you are screwing your boyfriend or lover or what ever he is to you. And that commitment is the important thing to those of us who want to make it. I love the English language - sometimes the simplest words can mean so many things to different people. I do like this version Gary and realised that I have been monogamous more often than I thought. Sometimes for as little as 3 weeks while my partner/lover/friend and I have sorted out where our relationship has headed (or not) and we did that without "distractions". As for QAF, this may be a part of being a (trend-setting) suburban gay man rather than an urban one but Queer As Folk was pure entertainment and said nothing about my life as I experienced it. I guess I could have been Justin if my folks hadn't been so damn accepting of a gay son. 2
Headstall Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 I love the English language - sometimes the simplest words can mean so many things to different people. I do like this version Gary and realised that I have been monogamous more often than I thought. Sometimes for as little as 3 weeks while my partner/lover/friend and I have sorted out where our relationship has headed (or not) and we did that without "distractions". As for QAF, this may be a part of being a (trend-setting) suburban gay man rather than an urban one but Queer As Folk was pure entertainment and said nothing about my life as I experienced it. I guess I could have been Justin if my folks hadn't been so damn accepting of a gay son. Thank you Bucket...for getting this very important (to me ) part of what I was trying to say. Being with one person at a time "without distractions" (I loved how you summed that up) is not an extreme or weird thing to me. But different strokes for different folks. Speaking of folks, I loved QAF but I often feel that it did us ( gay people) a bit of a damage in how some in the straight world saw us.Like you said it represented nothing about my life either, yet it was the only window into the gay world that a lot of straight people got to see up to that point. Thankfully, there are a lot more windows open now. And no, I am not on a soapbox about it...it is just an observation. The world has changed a lot in the last 50years and we are fortunate to be in the here and now. I try to always remember the guys and girls that didn't get to be themselves and the suffering they endured...cheers and thanks...Gary
Henson Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Crossed wires here? I see a difference between long-term monogamy and serial monogamy. 1
Headstall Posted July 16, 2014 Posted July 16, 2014 Crossed wires here? I see a difference between long-term monogamy and serial monogamy. No crossed wires here...the key word is monagamy...there is no guarantee in any relationship that it will be long term and sometimes people have to keep trying and behave in any manner they feel comfortable with. I don't know what the issue is here, Henson but obviously there is one. Do you want me to concede and say it is wrong to be who I am or discount my own life experience? Not going to happen. This all started with a stupid post from me that I screwed up. I admit that. I didn't read my post before I posted it and that was stupid. I was actually in my mind referring to what Wade was proposing with Matt with regards to keeping him around for sex while having a full relationship with Alex...In my thoughts I was saying that what Wade was proposing was not what you do to someone you profess to love and that I for one, found it insulting,,,and because I was stupidly upset, I screwed the whole post up and mixed it all up and didn't read what I said before posting. I apoligise again for that and own it. Now I am in a position of defending my personal lifestyle and what has always worked for me and am being questioned about what my life experience tells me. I should never brought up monogamy and probably never would have if the whole Wade/Matt dynamic wasn't about Wade wanting it from Matt all along and then getting monagamy from Alex. According to what you have posted it is wrong for Wade and Alex to want such a thing at their age and you consider it unhealthy. You are entitled to that opinion and I even respect it. But because I don't agree with it, doesn't make me wrong. Your sarcasm has not been lost on me and I have obviously have pissed you off...I get that but what more can I do? You are not a fan of monagamy at this stage...and I have absolutely no problem with that . I admit that I let my emotions get away from me for a bit and I feel bad about that. I am NOT the poster boy for monagamy but I am who I am and I am tired of having to defend that. When you said Matt should cut Wade loose and fuck his way across Chicago...I had no problem with how YOU felt about the situation. I don't know what else to say...Mark's amazing writing got me fired up and I am sorry I " confuzzled' you that ,after four years, I hoped for Wade to finally get what he truly wanted for all that time, with Matt. It was a stupid romantic notion on my part but it was only because I cared so much...that's something I think we are all guilty of...
Recommended Posts