Is That An Itch?

I got an SMS from my “internet boyfriend” a few days ago:

You mean you’re too lazy to 2 make an effort 2 b my lover?”

Actually, I meant I’m too lazy to engage in anything that requires activity beyond using my fingers. To type.

It’s truly remarkable how much freedom technology has given us. Offline, I’d never have got to know Internet Boyfriend (let’s call him Rolf instead because…really… all manner of things start rolling at that thought) as well as I do. Rolf moves in corporate circles high enough to induce nosebleeds. Me, I think it’s perfectly acceptable to attend meetings with a Harry Potter band-aid on my finger.

A couple of years ago I was looking through the Music section of the online classifieds for a second-hand violin.

There his ad was.

Innocently offering use of an organ.

And digital accessories.

The double-entendre, shockingly placed in the Victorian-like conservatism of the “Music” section, instead of in “Services” along with the other dubious service ads, amused me no end. I was compelled to “respond” by email. I’ll say it again - the beauty of the Internet lies in its gift of freedom to fearlessly poke a sleeping mad dog. Fortunately, with Rolf, I didn’t need a tetanus shot.

The email exchanges that followed were sparkling, on his side at least. It was months before we met in person one afternoon for drinks at Secret Recipe. All innocence, but with our venue providing the requisite tongue-in-cheek.

Suffice to say, we met again only once after that initial time, and no services have ever been exchanged. It’s never been the point of our “relationship”.

It’s weird to even call it a friendship, because it’s not as if I regard Rolf as a friend. For me at least, it’s all about the conversation. Indeed, that's on a different orbit altogether from what I’m used to. It certainly has a lot to do with the perspective that age (his) imparts. But largely because of the impersonal yet strangely intimate nature of written communication. We interact as equals. Stripped of titles, age, history, physical proximity – all of which lead to expectation - we can afford to be more candid than we’d ever be in real life.

So what do we talk about? Politics, morality, ethics, life, living, literature. And yes, even sex. As a subject matter and not an activity for mutual participation, mind you. Though he does sometimes try to steer from ribald to proposition; witness said SMS. He really does know better, yet there it is.

It’s all about the conversation, without emotional attachments. The intellectual equivalent of illicit sex, I guess – it means nothing, I swear!. Heh.

By my utilitarian philosophy, the value of every experience is in its potential to offer intellectual and emotional growth. In Rolf, I value the intellectual growth that our conversations inspire. I have no need for any emotional context that may be available.

Needs. Therein lies the point of contention.

I fully believe that one person alone cannot satisfy all your needs.

Am I intellectually cheating on Snowie?

Now, before any of you mentally prepares to do battle on behalf of Snowie (who by the way, greatly appreciates the goodwill that’s been flowing to her from this spot), take a minute to think about the logic of that statement, in the context of the real world.

Marriage (and all other species of intimate relationships) in itself does not automatically create a magic force field that keeps Angelina Jolie temptation at bay. It is as easy to distrust as it is to lay down rules like -

I don’t want you to ever have any contact with your ex

Don’t you dare have one-on-one lunches with colleagues of the opposite sex

The much harder thing to do - but surely this must be the point of marriage - is to trust. And to commit.

To trust that commitment will keep human fallibility in check.

One person alone cannot satisfy all your needs. Like it or not, that’s a fact. Divorce wouldn’t be so popular otherwise.

The factor that distinguishes a union from transience is - commitment.

Being committed to making your union work is being willing to forgo the satisfaction of one, or some, of your needs, some or all of the time. Applicable to BOTH parties.

And the pre-requisite for commitment? Respect.

So…back to Snowie and me. I personally don’t even think it’s cheating. For one, ummm…Rolf’s a MAN. But fundamentals aside, he does appear to want to get in my pants despite being fully aware of Snowie. Let’s not trot out that particular male fantasy. Not gonna happen.

Anyway. Not only is there no emotional intimacy, there’s unlikely to be any body parts straining to get out. I for one am too lazy to bother.

Lastly, as much as I enjoy the conversation with Rolf, we both can quite easily do without it. It’s not a need. And even if it were a need, I’m quite sure that Snowie doesn’t even mind.

So why even go into all this here?

Because human emotions are like pests. They buzz about, niggling and naggling. And even after you’ve slapped them away, sometimes, an itch of doubt remains.

This, is my offering of mopiko/applicable generic brand of hydrocortisone.

Which is why if Snowie ever does mind, it's into the trash can you go, Rolf.