Birth control and the economy (they get along famously)
Wow. We probably don’t need to tell you that birth control has been in the news a lot lately. And though unfortunately we can’t say the attention has been all positive, we’ve actually seen a whole lot of good publicity coming out of the discussion overall. The latest theme we’ve noticed is media attention to birth control and the economy—and let’s just say birth control comes out looking pretty fantastic (no make-up required). A few favorite points in birth control’s favor:
Women benefit. The New York Times published a piece yesterday (which The Washington Post riffed off of) on how the pill has affected women’s ability to contribute to the economy. A teaser:
A study by Martha J. Bailey, Brad Hershbein and Amalia R. Miller helps assign a dollar value to those tectonic shifts. For instance, they show that young women who won access to the pill in the 1960s ended up earning an 8 percent premium on their hourly wages by age 50.
Such trends have helped narrow the earnings gap between men and women. Indeed, the paper suggests that the pill accounted for 30 percent – 30 percent! – of the convergence of men’s and women’s earnings from 1990 to 2000.
Taxpayers benefit.On Sunday, The Times published a piece on “Pregnancy Prevention and the Taxpayer.” The article highlighted a recent study that found that there are a few things the government can pay for that will save taxpayers many, many dollars over the long haul. According to the study, “[t]he biggest savings would come from increasing the amount of subsidized birth control available to poor women. At a cost of $235 million a year, such programs could save $1.32 billion annually.” Sounds like a good deal to us…
Consumers benefit (from more information about their birth control options). Okay, maybe that heading’s a stretch, but we wanted to include an article from U.S. News Money on “The Real Cost of Birth Control,” which sought to be “a guide for people who want to consider the health of their bank account when making their birth control decision.” We love that they wanted to make the cost of different methods easier to understand, though it doesn’t look like they fully accounted for health insurance coverage (or health reform, which will eliminate co-pays on birth control, or other programs to make birth control cheaper or even free…) They also seem to have used slightly outdated effectiveness numbers for the different methods.
Must also note that their conclusion that the diaphragm is the most cost-effective method rings a bit hollow considering that with normal use of it, 12 in 100 women will get pregnant within a year of relying on it—U.S. News quotes that proportion as 15 in 100, which would be even more of a reason not to recommend it for folks who are watching their finances. As the article itself notes, an accidental pregnancy can be harder on a bank account than any method on the market. No offense to the diaphragm intended, but considering that the IUD, for example, is often quite affordable with insurance and also incredibly effective (same story for the implant, which didn’t even get a mention, as well as sterilization), we definitely would’ve picked a different winner.
Insurance providers and their customers benefit. And last but not least, way back in February, TIME published an excellent explanation of “Why Free Birth Control Will Not Hike the Cost of Your Insurance,” complete with illustrative anecdotes:
Think of it this way: If my married daughter lays out a $15 co-pay for birth control pills, she doesn’t save a dime. True, she protects herself against the emotional cost of an unwanted pregnancy, along with the hefty costs of raising a child. But in terms of the costs to give birth to the child, she is not much better off, because if she does become pregnant, her insurer, like many, would pay the bills above and beyond the co-pay.
By contrast, if an insurer makes birth control totally free for all of its customers, it avoids having to reimburse them for countless unplanned pregnancies and births. Overall, then, it’s cheaper for the insurer to pay a little upfront to save a ton down the line.
Sex on TV: Premature Engagement
A note from Lauren: Please excuse my absence this week, but trust in the fact that I’ve left the “Sex on TV” duties to a guest blogger who will not let you down. Plus, like I learned from television, the younger and cuter girl is always more desirable. So I present to you the musings of our intern, Roxanne, who still has the positive and ambitious attitude of a college student. The cynicism will come soon and fast, my dear.
*****
Although I graduated from college this past December, I won’t feel like it’s official until I walk the stage and receive my “diploma” (we all know they just hand you a blank piece of paper). As graduation day approaches, I notice myself getting anxious about my future and I think rightfully so. I have absolutely no idea where I am going to be or what I will be doing in June. Every time I think about my future I feel my stomach churning.
Recently during an episode of Glee, Finn struggled with decisions about his future. He is lost, just as most high school seniors are, but the difference between him and most other students is that he decides love is his number one priority. So he proposes to his girlfriend, Rachel. And for Rachel, growing increasingly nervous about her own future as she watches her friends get accepted to college and make plans while she’s still in limbo, she decides to accept Finn’s proposal. Is this really the way to get control over your life?
It seems like we’ve moved away from the cliché “after prom sex episode” (since now most programs are showing characters having sex throughout high school, not waiting for prom night) and instead towards the life-changing marriage proposal. My first memory of this prolific moment comes from Boy Meets World. Does anyone else remember watching Topanga propose to Corey while the rest of their classmates throw their caps in the air to celebrate their high school graduation? We all know how it ends… they decide not to get married right away and end up getting married during college (I know… so much more realistic).
We then move onto one of my favorite shows, Gilmore Girls. As Rory is about to graduate from Yale, Logan (her boyfriend of a couple of years) decides to pop the question. After some deliberation, Rory says no to Logan because, let’s be honest, there is a lot she wants to do before tying the knot. And really, who can blame her?
Even in comedies like That ’70s Show, the teenagers turn to proposals. When Eric is worried about his future with Donna at the end of high school he jumps to proposing. Even though his friends tell him it’s a bad idea, he does it anyway. And guess what… the wedding doesn’t happen. Obviously TV has to make things over the top and dramatic, but does it always have to be this all or nothing nonsense?
Now, before you say I don’t know what I am talking about because I have never been in a serious relationship and when you are in love age doesn’t make a difference, you should all know I have been with same person for almost 5 years. I can also tell you that as I try to figure out my life after graduation, I am not considering marriage. I am 22-years-old and not ready to get married, but that doesn’t mean I want to break-up with my boyfriend or that he isn’t a factor in my decisions. Obviously I can’t speak for him entirely (hope things don’t get awkward when he reads this), but I’m pretty sure we are on the same page.
So what’s wrong with me? According to TV, I should be picking out china patterns and planning my first kid by now. Apparently once a couple has had sex, the next step is marriage. Look at Finn and Rachel—they had sex earlier this season and now we have a proposal. But before they walk down the aisle, they should probably keep in mind that teen marriages are twice as likely to fail as marriages in which the woman is at least 25-years-old.
I’m not saying that teenagers and young adults should give up on love, but it’s important to remember that a relationship, or sex for that matter, doesn’t define you. Who knows if the Finn/Rachel wedding will actually happen, but it’s wrong that just because the two feel lost they made such a drastic decision. An engagement at 18 doesn’t make life less scary or complicated. You need to know who you are before making that type of commitment.
“Engagement ring” image by Tela Chhe.
*****
Lauren Mann works in The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy’s Entertainment Media department. She’s been blogging about sex, love and relationships among twenty-somethings since she first joined the Campaign as an intern in 2009. Check out her personal blog at whatjewtalkingbout.tumblr.com.
Closing Off to Opening Up: One Girl’s Journey
Originally published on SexReally.com on June 16, 2010.
Everybody’s sick for something that they can find fascinating—everyone but you and even you aren’t feeling well.
-
-Amanda Palmer
This lyric, penned by one of my greatest musical inspirations, hits the nail on the head in terms of my own experiences and the observed experiences of my friends in all range of confounding, agonizing relational duress. There are some that argue that in this day and age, in which many of us live much longer than past generations and have many more geographical, professional, and emotional transitions, monogamy is unnatural and will inevitably lead us to frustration and a lack of fulfillment. I cite this particular Amanda Palmer line because I think it speaks to this lack, the frustration, the scurried looks around for the next big or better thing—including partners. I’ve thought a lot about the challenges inherent in all variety of relationship styles—long-distance, short-distance, queer, straight, monogamous, nonmonogamous, coupledom, singledom, marriage, domestic partnership, you name it. There was a point at which polyamory, at least conceptually, did give me pause, for several reasons: 1. I was brought up to question everything (even monogamy!); 2. As a result, polyamory struck me as worthy of exploration and thought; 3. Many practical factors, having nothing to do with ideology, affect relationships and should be taken into consideration; 4. Simply put, hearts are complicated. Especially hearts I’ve loved.
In theory, I can get behind polyamory—the practice of concurrent plural romantic and sexual relationships—even though my gut, primal instinct is towards monogamy. Like many of my friends, I read The Ethical Slut and a host of other critical (and not so critical) dialogues around nonmonogamy. It makes sense that people (yes, men, women, and those who ascribe to neither label) crave sexual, emotional, or intellectual variety in partners. Let’s face it—attraction is complex, confusing stuff. Often the people we want to sleep with are not the people we want to depend on. Often someone we are really attracted to is not someone with whom we could imagine spending any prolonged period of time, let alone sharing domestic or psychic space. All of this is hard to sort out.
Polyamory in practice, though, is a different story. Any good relationship, including a monogamous one, is going to have its share of challenges, but there are a certain interesting stressors brought about by different relationship structures such as marriage, living together, dating and living apart, or being single but sexual, to name a few.
The structure of a nonmonogamous committed relationship is, for many, the terrain of unknown variables. It can bring out the best and the worst in people. Pressures from society to couple monogamously, marry, and reproduce combined with a lack of societal, communal support to temper isolation can make it to difficult to navigate both monogamy and polyamory. There are a range of mitigating factors to be sorted out when you add extra people into an equation, and even those who think they can handle it all and are prepared for accompanying emotions may experience feelings and sideswiping they never knew they would. The truth is that one partner in an open relationship may have an easier time finding other partners due to charm, attractiveness, circumstance, or geography. Additionally, finding a partner does not mean that the physical or emotional experience of the new person will necessarily be what you had in mind. If you choose to introduce multiple partners, there is no way to control how one relational dynamic will affect the dynamics of your other relationship(s).
Some of these various issues come out in the book Kink, by Kathe Koja, which tells the stories of two partners who are each having an affair behind the other’s back—with the same woman. Of course this scenario is not the same as honest, forthright nonmonogamy, but it does engender contemplation of themes of fidelity, attraction, and orientation—as well as who has power, security, or an accurate view of their own relationship. It also drives home the reality that whether monogamous or polyamorous, two people can have wholly different perspectives of relationships and events—even those they experience together.
I am lucky to have some really inspiring polyamorous friends who are thoughtful, critical, engaged, challenging people—and they do have their struggles in relationships, but they try to deal with them creatively and compassionately. This includes honoring “secondary” partners’ lives and realities as much as those of their “primary” (I use the terms primary and secondary loosely because I consider them inherently problematic—they afford one partner a space of greater urgency, validity, and security, and to my way of thinking that cannot be a comfortable place for a secondary to be. Furthermore it seems hierarchy-driven, and hierarchy doesn’t strike me as a useful way to approach love), not dating another person who makes their primary partner uncomfortable, and thinking about how to allocate time and effort to value and respect all the people they are involved with. Unfortunately I have also experienced polyamorous people who have poor communication skills, who choose to triangulate and breed competition and misunderstanding between partners, make unethical sexual decisions (as many “monogamous” people do), and centralize themselves as the most important narrators in the drama of life, with others merely serving as peripheral players. In a word, snore.
This isn’t to say that monogamous relationships don’t have their fair share of communication issues, emotional laziness, lack of passion, solipsism, and selfishness. But different relationship structures require different strategies to deal with problems. And a different lens for analysis.
Adding other ingredients into a soup gone wrong doesn’t fix the soup—it just makes it a crazy soup with more ingredients. If you are struggling in your relationship, new partners may serve as a temporary distraction or relief, but won’t fix your problems long-term. Then again, there are all kinds of soups and ways to enjoy them—and we as a culture could stand to think about and embrace that a little more.
Relationships—sexual or not, monogamous or not—require engagement, contemplation, selfishness as well as selflessness, nurturance, and challenge. While monogamy is what makes me feel happiest and healthiest with the right person (someone who feels that the same way and not as if it has been foisted upon them), I will also fight for a world that allows freedom to consider all options and choose mindfully what best fits each of us individually. I like coming to my monogamy as an elected, thought out, feeling-and-thinking-based process rather than a paradigm default. I want a world in which people are respected regardless of gender, age, relationship structure, or orientation—and are empowered to make decisions that are best for them without fear of castigation or reproach.
And a world with its own fair and healthy share of ongoing critique, natch.
*****
Katy Otto is a social justice activist, writer and musician who grew up in the DC area. She works in nonprofit management and development.
The Single Girl’s Guide to Surviving the Holidays
Originally published on SexReally.com on December 22, 2010.
Ahh…the joys of the holidays. While visions of sugarplums dance in your head and Jack Frost nips at your nose, you may have a few other things on your mind. Like being single during the Most Wonderful Time of the Year. Which can include a variety of scenarios such as: big family dinners while you’re still carrying tissues around after a recent breakup, questions at the holiday party about that nice guy you brought last time, or pointed statements regarding your need to settle down in the near future.
Of course plenty of people are single by choice and perfectly happy. And then there are some who are quite brokenhearted about entering into the New Year without partner or prospect. No matter where you fall on the spectrum, seasonal gatherings can feel like a very uncomfortable game of Twenty Questions about your love life.
Has this situation ever happened to you? You attend some type of family function, everyone is sitting down for a lovely dinner, and your Aunt starts asking questions about your “prospects.” Or, your mother tells you that you aren’t getting any younger. Or, a cousin who has brought along her significant other asks if you have had any dates followed by the, “I’m so sorry” pity face when the answer is “no”. A friend once told me that at a holiday function with family, her 4-year-old niece came up to her and said, “Mommy and Daddy are praying for you because you don’t have a boyfriend.”
The horror!
There are a number of reasons why our families are so darn curious about our relationship status, and why they make it fodder for conversation at seasonal gatherings. Understanding the reasons behind the questioning and having a plan of action for how to respond can make the holiday less stressful and more fun for you and your loved ones.
1. Your family still sees you as a child.
To some family members you will always be the 7-year-old angel running around the backyard wearing a tiara. It’s not based in malice or a desire to patronize you. Remembering those times may bring the people who have known you since birth immense joy. But if they still view you as a kid, it can be hard to enforce boundaries regarding your private life.
My friend Janine had this idea highlighted when her niece came up and said, “Aunt Janine, sometimes I think you’re not a grown up because you’re not married.” Even though it was a little one who voiced the opinion, there may be similar feelings involved in larger family dynamics.
If it happens to you:
You are an adult. You have the right to a private life and can decide whether or not to share information regarding your relationships or anything else. It doesn’t have to mean that you want to shut your family out of your life. A simple, “Thanks for asking, but I don’t feel like talking about it,” said without attitude and followed by a change of subject might be enough to shut them up. Be prepared, though, to try this tactic more than once if they aren’t ready to listen.
2. Talking about your relationship status may be the only entry point into your life that your family can come up with.
Just because your relatives are connected to you doesn’t mean that they truly know who you are. Thus, asking about your love life may serve as a conversation starter and a way to show they are interested in you. Even though you have lots of opinions and interests, it may not occur to Auntie to ask, “What do you think of Obama’s healthcare reform plan?” (Or maybe she thinks politics is a riskier subject!)
If it happens to you:
Families can be complex, and the inner workings of how different members communicate can be tricky to navigate. Just because they don’t know the grown-up version of who you are doesn’t mean they are opposed to learning. They may not know where to start asking questions. Also, they may be sincerely lost when it comes to, “what young people are doing these days.”
Give your Auntie the benefit of the doubt and see if you can start a conversation you’re comfortable with. If she asks about dates, you can respond, “You know, I haven’t been on a formal date in awhile, but I did take myself out to see Black Swan last week. Have you seen it? Do you like the ballet?” Talking to your Auntie about something you are interested in gives her a starting point and a clue to your inner life. and could lead to a deeper conversation.
3. Family members use your single status as a way to make you feel inadequate.
It blows my mind when people put others down because they are single. Being single can mean freedom, time for things that you want to do, and not having to answer to anyone. Singleness is an adventure.
So why are there always those annoying people who will nag you because you aren’t part of a couple? It is especially confounding when those lobbing hateful comments are family members. This happened to a friend who was point-blank asked by his cousin, “What’s wrong with you? You are the last one who isn’t married in the family.” He got a chuckle out of it and decided not to fire back a snotty comment about the cousin’s latest round of drama with her ex-husband.
If it happens to you:
Remember that being in a relationship doesn’t automatically mean life is rosy. When half of all marriages in the United States end in divorce, coupledom is obviously a difficult road.
If a family member tosses out a comment about you being single yet again you can respond, “Well, are you happy?” It’s a cheeky comeback, and it puts the other person on the spot. But, you were put on the spot. The turning-of-the-tables may be enough to end the conversation.
If the offending party comes back with a quick, “Yes, of course!” you can always say, “Well, maybe yours will be among the 50% of marriages that make it!” Again, it’s a mischievous retort, but you have the option of being a bit sassy to that relative who just will not let it go.
4. Your family is sincerely interested in your love life because they think it equates to happiness. And they really want you to be happy.
This situation is tricky, because in this scenario your family is truly coming from a place of love. It also may touch a raw nerve if you genuinely want to be in a relationship but things aren’t happening on that front right now.
The thing to remind your family—and yourself—of is that a relationship does not necessarily mean total life happiness. A joyful life is much more multifaceted and intricate than purely your relationship status.
If it happens to you:
Take some time to think about happiness in a holistic way. What happened in 2010 that brought you joy? What went on with your friends, job, spiritual life, and creative endeavors? If you traveled this past year, take out pictures from your journey to recall everything you learned about yourself and others through that excursion. Think of your victories—those moments that made you feel proud and full of bliss.
Then, write all of those things down and put the piece of paper/collage in a place that is accessible. Better yet, bring it to your family dinner to share, or to leave in your back pocket as a reminder. That way if anyone starts down the, “Why aren’t you in a relationship?” road you can confidently state, “I’m not in a relationship right now, but I’ve had such a full year!” It’s a gentle reminder to your family that deep joy comes from a variety of life experiences.
All in all, remember your family is your family. You can’t get rid of them; they are yours forever. So this holiday season keep your sense of humor, give people the benefit of the doubt, and breathe deeply. Love, relationships, and sex are all normal parts of life that can be magnificent, but they are also matters that everyone struggles with (including married couples!). As 2010 turns into 2011, remember that the relationship that matters most is the one that you have with yourself.
*****
Kaarin Moore is the owner of Closet Caucus, a fashion consulting company located in Washington, DC. Her goal is to help clients express who they are through the medium of clothing. You can reach her at www.closetcaucus.com or on twitter (@closetcaucus).
I love kids, but I’m not ready to have babies yet. If it happens, so be it, but I’m doing what I can to make sure it’s a timely event. And what I mean by “timely” is that I would like to be married first, because that’s just what I envision for myself – even if it ends up being a shot-gun wedding (Che is aware of this shot-gun wedding mandate should a baby Che come unexpectedly). Basically, I’m in no rush right now.
Are Stayover Relationships the Wave of the Future?
Originally published on SexReally.com on September 29, 2011.
When my friend started dating a new dude this past summer, he didn’t think things would get serious. My pal’s a law student; the new dude studied fashion. The two made a seemingly unlikely match, yet before long, they were dating exclusively and spending every other night together. It felt natural and convenient, especially since they only lived a mile apart. But while a traditional dating book might tell you that the next stop on their road to commitment would be to move in together, neither is even interested in approaching the topic of cohabitation. For now, they’re happy enjoying each other’s company while maintaining their own apartments, where they each live with friends.
What the two of them have isn’t just a fling, but it definitely doesn’t follow the linear model we’ve come to expect of relationships. So what do you call it when you really like someone, spend the night together all the time, but don’t necessarily want to shack up? According to a team of University of Missouri researchers, that’s a “stayover relationship,” and it’s becoming a popular dating model for young adults. After interviewing 22 students and recent graduates who keep separate residences while sleeping together several times a week, the researchers concluded that the stayover relationship is “a stopgap measure between casual dating and making more formal commitments.” Some couples do later move on to cohabitation and marriage; for those who don’t, however, there’s no need to split silverware or negotiate joint custody of the dog upon break-up.
When I asked a female friend if I could talk to her about her thoughts on her own stayover relationship, she told me, “I’ve never heard of this term … i thought that’s just what couples did.” And indeed, plenty of people—not just young folks—do use the stayover model today with no fanfare. A couple generations ago, however, it never would have existed, at least not without some serious controversy. What changed in between? For one, women nowadays enjoy greater economic equality and no longer have to choose between living with their parents and moving in with their husband. It’s socially acceptable and economically feasible for them to live on their own, while simultaneously, the taboo against premarital sex have loosened. Young people today are also getting married later, in part because of higher education. That’s why those aged 18 to 29 are being referred to as “emerging adults”. As one University of Missouri researcher put it, many “are students who will soon be facing a transition point in their lives,” just like my friend and his fashion-major boyfriend. Given their inability to predict what the future might hold, long-term planning is infeasible and short-term compromises appealing.
Though we’re used to judging relationships based on when the “big question” is popped, don’t be fooled into thinking that commitment can’t coexist with the stayover model. Folks may not be getting married as early or as quickly as they used to, but even non-cohabitating couples exhibit all the traditional signs of commitment. Many regularly spend time together, share emotional intimacy, and more often than not practice sexual exclusivity. They might not share bank accounts or grocery lists, but they undoubtedly care for the other party—otherwise, why would they go through the trouble of leaving or opening up their own home for another person night after night?
Besides, while most people do view the decision to get married as the next logical step in adulthood, there are many folks who like their alone time, their own physical space, and their independence. Relieved of economic pressure and social stigma, young adults now have greater freedom to explore their relationships, their sexuality, and their own goals and interests. And some of them might very well decide that they like life better as singletons. The institution of marriage isn’t for everyone (just look at the divorce rate!), but it’s also not in danger of going away. Though the marriage rate has been declining since the 1970s, the majority of American adults still choose to get hitched. Perhaps it’s a sign of progress that those who don’t now have a few more options.
“Love” image by Daniel Dale.
*****
Lena Chen is a blogger, writer and speaker on sex, gender and feminism. As a Harvard undergrad, she authored the blog Sex and the Ivy and her writing has been featured in The New York Times and Newsweek. She currently blogs at The Chicktionary.
The Ex Files: Are There New Rules of Engagement?
Originally published on March 14, 2011 on SexReally.com.
“The only time you should contact your ex is if you get engaged or you get a STD.” – Paul
My friend Jackie found out about her ex’s engagement in a very theatrical way: she read about it in The New York Times. She happened to be browsing online and stumbled upon Brian’s picture with his soon-to-be wife.
When Jackie relayed this information to me I was surprised. She’d ended her relationship with Brian only a year before and since then he’d managed to a) recover from their breakup; b) start dating someone else; c) become engaged to that someone; and d) marry her. My, what a difference a year makes. But, sometimes I guess that’s how love works. One year you’re ending a relationship and the next year you’re saying, “I do”.
Statistics show that women are waiting till later in life to marry. In the United States in the 1960s, the average age a woman got married was 20. As of 2007, that age was 26. With all that extra time, it makes sense that we’d be experiencing more relationships in our 20s. Getting married later means we have more time to date a variety of people and, hopefully, learn about love.
Yet more exes also means new questions about behavior and etiquette. For example, should we expect a phone call, email, or conversation over coffee when an ex gets engaged? Do they owe us one? Or, if you have an engagement ring on your finger, is there a need to call up the guy who you thought might be “the one” until things went sour?
I came up with four working theories on why an ex might be in touch about upcoming nuptials:
- 1. Out of courtesy. The advent of social media has changed the playing field in terms of how news gets around. Now all it takes is a change in relationship status on Facebook – one click of a button – and the whole world knows. Your ex wants to make sure you hear it from the source, rather than in such an impersonal way.
2. To rub it in. This scenario is likely to play out if the relationship didn’t end well. It’s the I’m-doing-so-freakin’-well-without-you call.
3. To see how you react to the news. Your reaction could be an indicator of how much the relationship meant to you. Or, it could be a way to gauge whether you still have any romantic feelings.
4. S/he is crazy happy and just couldn’t resist. Your ex is calling everyone s/he can think of because the joy cannot be contained.
In my own experience, I’ve received two phone calls about engagement. Jackie’s story made me think back to those conversations. Was I glad they told me? What exactly were my exes hoping to accomplish by letting me know? Is it better that I found out from the source rather than through the grapevine?
I had many questions about exes and engagement etiquette, so I decided to do something crazy. I called up one of my exes to ask why he’d called me about his engagement. Our conversation went like this:
Me: Thank you for letting me call to ask you questions about our past! I know it must be weird to know that it will be in a column for Sex Really.
Paul: (Laughing) That’s okay!
Me: When you got engaged you called to tell me your news. Why did you decide to call?
Paul: Part of it was because I thought it was something you were supposed to do. I was contacting people that I really liked and were friends. It would feel weird to tell everyone else and not let you know.
Me: Did you call any of your other exes? If so, what were the reactions you received?
Paul: Yes, I called two other people. Those two were married and I thought I would get a reaction like, “that’s great to hear.” But with you I wasn’t sure what kind of reaction I was going to get.
Me: How would you describe my reaction?
Paul: Upbeat, positive, excited.
Me: What did you think of that reaction?
Paul: I wasn’t sure if you were putting on a brave face or not. Not that it would ultimately matter anyway. When I hung up with you I thought to myself, “I hope that is how she really feels, because that would be great.”
Me: I have some theories on why people call their exes to tell them about an upcoming engagement. Can you respond to each one?
Paul: Sure.
Me: First – people call to let their exes know out of courtesy.
Paul: Yes, that was part of it. I really thought it was a thing you were supposed to do. Like, a social norm that had popped up around weddings. I’m not sure where I picked up that social clue. Maybe it was movies, or TV, or just having other friends do it.
Me: Next theory – people call to rub it in.
Paul: (Laughing) Well, for us that wasn’t part of the phone call. But, one of my friends, Tom, did call his ex to tell her that he was getting married. There was a bragging aspect of it. In his mind I think he got an emotional high from showing his ex how great his life turned out.
Me: Next theory – people do it to see how their ex would react to the news. Meaning, to see if they get upset.
Paul: For us I think it was more about gauging feelings. It’s about curiosity and how that person feels about you. But the reaction that you gave was one that I hoped for. With Tom he was hoping that it wouldn’t go over well. He was hoping that she would feel like she blew it with him.
Me: Final theory – that people do it because they are so happy that they can’t contain themselves.
Paul: I could really see that as being a reason why an ex would reach out, especially if things ended on good terms. When it comes down to it, I think you should only contact an ex if you get engaged or get an STD.
I’m glad Paul called and told me about his engagement. But it would have been okay if he hadn’t, too. It did make me laugh a little when he said that he hoped I wasn’t putting on a brave face. I expected him to get involved and get married at some point and, by the time his engagement happened, everything between us was water under the bridge.
Does etiquette revolve around timing, then? Paul and I had been out of a relationship for two years when he got engaged. Maybe that one-year mark that Jackie experienced makes the difference. Perhaps the new rule of etiquette should be that if you get out of a relationship and engaged to someone else within the same year, a phone call is in order?
The curious thing about relationships and breakups is going from knowing every nuance about someone’s day to knowing nothing at all. Maybe contacting an ex about your engagement is a way of harkening back, or paying your respects, to an era when your lives were tied together.
As for me, I don’t know if I would do it. My past is in my past for a reason. It’s not that those other relationships didn’t have their time and place, but when you are looking toward the future with a partner, all the other stuff tends to go fuzzy and the road ahead is the only one that matters. The visibility of exes on that road? That probably depends.
What do you think?
*****
Kaarin Moore is the owner of Closet Caucus, a fashion consulting company located in Washington, DC. Her goal is to help clients express who they are through the medium of clothing. You can reach her at www.closetcaucus.com or on twitter (@closetcaucus).
One More Thing to Do Before Moving In Together
Originally published on SexReally.com on November 9, 2010.
A CNN post by Wendy Atterberry of The Frisky about “Things to do before moving in together,” had some pretty solid advice for couples who are thinking about taking their relationship to the cohabiting (or, possibly, married) level. The list includes talking about money, meeting important people in your partner’s life, sharing experiences, and even deciding how you’d handle an unplanned pregnancy (in the #2 spot, no less!). I propose one, IMHO, very important addendum, though: if we’re talking about pregnancy in terms of unplanned, shouldn’t we talk about how we’re preventing unplanned pregnancy, too?
Don’t get me wrong—I think deciding how you would handle an unplanned pregnancy is absolutely necessary. If you’re living together, you’re probably having sex and no method of contraception is 100% effective (unless you’re planning on foregoing sex completely), so it’s good to have a back-up plan. I just want to add that it’s at least as important to have discussed how you, as a couple, are going to work together, tirelessly, every day (or get a long-acting method that does the heavy-lifting for you), to ensure you’re taking all necessary precautions to avoid having to employ the aforementioned back-up plan. While it’s true that no method of contraception is 100%, there are some pretty darn effective methods to choose from, nonetheless. Using one (or several) of these methods carefully and consistently can seriously reduce the likelihood that you’ll need to resort to plan #2.
If you’ll allow me to nerd out for just a moment, cohabiting couples are at particularly high risk for unplanned pregnancy. More than two-thirds of pregnancies to cohabiting women (69%) are unplanned according to The National Campaign’s DCR Report.And according to a 2009 Guttmacher policy review, “About 10% of women in their 20s are cohabiting, the largest proportion of any age-group. Cohabiting women use contraceptives at rates similar to those of married women, but, because cohabiting women typically have sex more often than married women, their rate of unintended pregnancy is more than twice that of married women or of unmarried women who are not cohabiting. It may also be that cohabiting women are not as motivated as other women to use contraceptives consistently over time, perhaps because they are more ambivalent about pregnancy.”
Indeed, The National Campaign’s Fog Zone report explored some of these themes and found that almost two-thirds (65%) of cohabiting respondents thought it likely that they would marry and have a baby with their current partner eventually. Research suggests that’s a lot less likely than they think—for example, The DCR Report shows that more than one-third (35%) of cohabiting women who had a child with their partner as a result of an unplanned pregnancy broke up with their partner by the baby’s second birthday.
If you want to see more about why even couples who are ready to live together should put some major effort into avoiding pregnancy till both partners are totally ready to be three instead of two, check out the sections of The DCR Report on mental health (Section I), relationship quality (Section H), and relationship stability (Section G). If you just want to take my word for it, please add “Talk about how to prevent unplanned pregnancy” to your checklist of things to do before moving in together, okay? Please? Even if you (or your girlfriend) use a long-acting, low-maintenance method, both partners should be knowledgeable and enthusiastic about prevention—science says that helps, too.
*****
Liz Sabatiuk is Social Media Manager for the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. When she’s not blogging about birth control and relationships, she dances and teaches Argentine tango and spends a little too much time on Facebook.
Words to Scrap: Chastity
Originally published on SexReally.com on November 23, 2009.
I’m about to toss another word into my trash bin. It can rest nicely there alongside “wedlock” (marriage is not necessarily a prison); “lost my virginity,” (have you found it yet?) and “practicing abstinence” (let me know when you’ve got it down).
The word this time is “chaste,” defined by Webster’s New World Dictionary as “not indulging in unlawful sexual activity.”
I’m okay with chaste’s first cousin, “abstinent.” Being abstinent implies something you choose to do or not do. You decide whether or not to abstain from smoking, drinking, or sex.
The word chaste, however, describes your moral character. As Webster’s says, it implies “moral excellence manifested by forbearance from acts or thoughts that do not accord with virginity or strict marital fidelity.”
In other words, it is a label applied by others, a reputation to uphold in certain circles lest you fall from grace and become a slut (while we’re at it, let’s toss that word also).
This week’s episode of the Fox comedy “Glee” illustrated beautifully the dark side of the words “chaste” and its more common sister, “chastity”. The parents of Quinn, the pretty, blonde president of the Chastity Club at McKinley High School, learned that their daughter was pregnant - and threw her out of their house.
The alleged father of her baby (although, as viewers know, he’s not the real dad) suffered no such abuse from his mom who, in saintly fashion, took Quinn in. No surprise there. Celibacy – the guy version of chastity – is rarely expected of any man unless he wears a cassock and collar.
The word chaste means pure, the word chastity, purity. Does that make women who have sex outside marriage impure? According to model/makeup artist Jessica Hoffman (and others), it does.
Midweek.com, a news website based in Honolulu, ran a profile this week of Hoffman, 28. Hoffman recently started Pure Beauty Ministries, a business that advises 14- to 34-year-olds on fashion and abstinence. What really got to a friend who read the article, then alerted me to it, was the way Hoffman not-too-subtly described sex outside of marriage.
“The word purity means not to be contaminated with anything,” she told the reporter (my italics).
So all sex other than married sex is dirty? What would the 80% to 90% of unmarried 20-somethings who have had sex say to that? Would it change their behavior, make them feel bad, or just annoy them?
The words chaste and chastity bring to mind a several-hundred-year-old chastity belt I saw displayed in the museum of the Doge’s Palace in Venice. Academics now debate whether such belts, forged from metal and equipped with teeth and keys, were actually used during the Middle Ages and Renaissance.
But as I stood in the palace staring at this contraption I shuddered to think that someone – assuredly a man –even had the idea to clamp a large, spike-laden piece of metal around a woman’s private parts and lock away her “goods” from use by anyone but himself.
And I continue to be puzzled that couples today can and do buy similar devices of torture for sex play. A woman wrote the Ottawa Sun recently, worried about her married sister. She said her sister allowed said husband to lock her up in a chastity belt 24 hours a day. When he wanted to have sex with her, he would unlock it.
“She has no access to the keys, except when he is away,” this woman wrote. “Then he leaves a spare key in a sealed container so that he knows she tampered with it.” Read: her sexuality belongs to him, not her.
So it was as well in the Netherlands during the Renaissance. Hans Memling, an artist of that time, painted an allegory of chastity depicting an ivory-skinned, fully-clothed maiden perched on the top of a mountain, surrounded by a moat and protected by two lions. Her eyes are cast down demurely, her hands crossed in front of her strategic place.
More than 500 years later, women have made their way down that mountain to lie in bed alongside men and enjoy the same sexual freedom that men enjoy. Like men, they sometimes use that freedom wisely, at other times foolishly.
To categorize them - or their male counterparts - as pure or impure teaches them nothing about how to handle the moral complexities they will face in their lives, including their sexual lives.
*****
Laura Sessions Stepp is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, formerly with The Washington Post, who specializes in the coverage of young people. She has written two books: “Unhooked: How Young Women Pursue Sex, Delay Love and Lose at Both,” and “Our Last Best Shot: Guiding Our Children through Early Adolescence.” She is a consultant to The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
