Though I know that his story is specifically about a plural relationship, I must say I think Grayson's thesis about fidelity is highly prejudiced and quite reductive. Two people (or for the purposes of this story, three) pledging fidelity to one another need have nothing to do with fear, and everything to do with the energetic, psychological, spiritual, and emotional components and connections of a relationship, and their strengthening through sexual congress. Yes, sex at its core is a physical activity, but at its highest expression, it carries with it connection of a very particular sort. This connection is one that, nurtured, continues to feed and support a relationship. It has been scientifically shown that there is a chemical component that comes into play as well.

All this said, there are very good reasons, then, for wanting your significant other to invest their sexual energy into the relationship, and not squander it outside of that union, and fear doesn't come into the picture. However, if fear were the subject, certainly the prospect of bringing a disease home to the one you love the most would be a logical one, both for the bringer (guilt) and bringee (if you will). There is nothing so freeing, so connected, so relationship-affirming, as completely unencumbered, concern-free sex. I do not want to have to protect myself from my partner, ever. Only through fidelity is that assuredly possible.

But above and beyond all of that, fidelity, and the pact upon which it is created, is much simpler. It is about integrity and trust. If one accepts to be faithful to a mate (or two), the breaking of that trust is a clear indication of the breakdown of the relationship, as it is breaking the most fundamental element of any relationship. This, in fact, puts the lie to Grayson's final point, which is that asking for and expecting fidelity means that one can abuse one's mate with impunity. I would say that is completely backwards: a couple who is faithful has every reason to act for each other's highest good, and to keep the relationship foremost in their minds and actions. The primacy of the relationship demands that integrity, and abuse or inattention to that would likely put the relationship at risk.

And of course, if fidelity in a relationship is not one's cup of tea, then so be it. I have certainly heard anecdotal stories about open relationships actually working. Be that as it may, it does not prove that fidelity, on its face, is impossible, undesirable, nor borne out of a selfish fear.

So, while I believe our erudite fox has many good things to say about culture, and bon vivant living, I think he is sadly very mistaken on this subject.

I am enjoying this long-awaited story from you, Tris. I don't comment much anymore, as I rarely have the energy or inclination for most authors. But for you, I rally now and then.

-TGU.

Noooo. I just found this story a couple days ago and I quickly fell in love with it. Are you going to continue this offsite anywhere?