Being Alone with Attractive People

[JulietEcho]

After reading Hemant's post about Christian attitudes towards being alone with members of the opposite sex, I thought I'd open up a thread here for discussion. There's a lot to discuss.

The latest article Hemant linked to on this topic was from Jon Acuff's blog "Stuff Christians Like," and essentially concluded with the assessment that it's better to be safe than sorry. Apparently getting a ride to the airport with someone of the opposite sex (like in all the posts on his blog, Acuff refrains from acknowledging the existence of non-straight sexual orientations), would be too compromising of a situation, or too tempting, or too dangerous somehow, for a Christian man.

This was a familiar theme in the churches I attended growing up. And even as a teenager, it struck me that the taboo against unmarried men and women (which includes, of course, men and women who are married but not to each other) created a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. Churches where sex is a bit of an obsession (in youth group, in sermons, in teachings and practices for the congregation) actually infuse sexuality into situations that *aren't* sexy or tempting for non-members.

For instance, if you grow up learning that you're a hopeless sinner, and one of your inherent sinful urges is lust, and only following God can save you from sin, and lusting itself is a sin, and being alone with someone you're attracted to is highly dangerous because it can provoke lust and lead to affairs, then when you eventually *are* alone with someone you're attracted to, the situation is likely to be very sexual and tempting for you.

Yes, spending a lot of time with one particular person you're attracted to can lead to an eventual affair - if you aren't neglecting your primary relationships or recognizing warning signs from the other person. Affairs don't happen in a vacuum, and it's incredibly over-the-top to insist on such extreme safety precautions. As some of the commenters on the FA blog pointed out, what about bisexuals? Can they have *no* friendships? Are they safe to be alone in a car with anyone besides their significant other?

The comments on the TCL blog, however, surprised me (although maybe they shouldn't have). Many were from Christians who had a history of affairs (sometimes more than one), and/or "pornography addiction" (which in my experience is usually, although not always, code for "I enjoyed looking at pornography and kept looking at it regularly despite my Christian guilt!") and were firmly in the camp of "better safe than sorry." Apparently there are people who have learned so thoroughly to distrust themselves that they intentionally live their lives in strict segregation from the opposite sex.

You'd expect Christian groups who practice this sort of Puritanical separation to have lower rates of affairs and divorces, if their methods worked, but I've only ever read studies that concluded that divorce rates (not sure I've read anything on affairs that's specific about religion) are the same (or slightly higher) for Christians as for the general population (maybe Chal can help with tracking some of this down, as it seems like his specialty).

I would guess that those who are going to have affairs are going to end up having them - no matter how they try to segregate themselves from temptation - because simply being around someone you're attracted to or being good friends with someone of the sex you're attracted to isn't enough to trigger an affair. Something else is going on, and the affair is usually the symptom - not the underlying cause of relationship problems. And I think it's rather warped to teach maturing teenagers that they shouldn't be alone with members of the opposite sex. It's sending the message that they can't trust their own self-control before they've even had a chance to try it out and strengthen it.

So, for everybody, how do you feel about spending time alone with someone of the sex you're attracted to (if either you or they are married, or both, and not to one another)? How did you come to that decision (experiences, books, advice, teachings)? Do you think that religious groups that encourage gender segregation are doing their members (and especially their younger generation) a favor or a disservice by sparing them the "temptation" of situations where they might be alone with someone attractive?

[Chal]

You'd expect Christian groups who practice this sort of Puritanical separation to have lower rates of affairs and divorces, if their methods worked, but I've only ever read studies that concluded that divorce rates (not sure I've read anything on affairs that's specific about religion) are the same (or slightly higher) for Christians as for the general population (maybe Chal can help with tracking some of this down, as it seems like his specialty).

I'm a Google front-end! XD

OK, well after looking around for a bit, I couldn't find anything terribly conclusive. There's the 2000 Barna study which showed Christians as having significantly higher divorce rates. The major flaw I see with this study is that it's comparing the ratios of people in each group who have been divorced as opposed to the ratio of people in each group who had ever been married and then divorced.

For example, if there are 100 Christians and 50 of them have ever been married, and half of those marriages ended in divorce, Barna would have reported that as 25% divorce rate, while if there are 100 atheists and only 10 of them have been married but all of the marriages ended in divorce, Barna would only report that as a 10% divorce rate. Or at least, that's how I'm interpreting it.

There's also this somewhat sketchy paper which correlates higher religiosity with lower divorce rates. I'm calling it sketchy because of how the data gets stripped down; I'm not sure about the logic, but it seems decent.

Christian Science Monitor has some interesting stats on opinions on divorce.

While the survey reveals that 71 percent of Americans believe "God's plan for marriage is one man, one woman, for life," only 22 percent say they see divorce as a sin. Even among religious conservatives (Protestant or Catholic), only about one-third say divorce is sinful. Protestants are more likely than other groups to get married, but they are no more likely to stay married.

Finally, there's Marital stats from the Pew Forum's USA Religious Landscape Survey. People currently divorced seems roughly equal across religions, with Hindus being significantly lower than the norm and "other Christians" being significantly higher.

So that's what I could find on divorce, there was less material available on affairs, with this paper as the best I could find. It claims that extramarital affairs are significantly more common among the non-religious, though interestingly enough, that religiosity had no discernible effect within the religion. The huge difference bothers me, though. The numbers it gives are 17% of "religious" people admitting to extramarital sex, but 61% of "not religious" people. That strains belief a bit too much for me.

There's also this which I'm not even going to try to interpret, since the format bugs me and it's getting late.

So, yeah... I'm not sure what any of this means anymore. My best guess would be that increased religiosity does not increase affairs or divorce and possibly actually leads to a decrease. There just doesn't seem to be much good data going either way, though.

So, for everybody, how do you feel about spending time alone with someone of the sex you're attracted to (if either you or they are married, or both, and not to one another)? How did you come to that decision (experiences, books, advice, teachings)? Do you think that religious groups that encourage gender segregation are doing their members (and especially their younger generation) a favor or a disservice by sparing them the "temptation" of situations where they might be alone with someone attractive?

I honestly have no problem with it (possibly on account of the fact that I'm permanently single...) I'm not worried about losing control and going too far (since that doesn't seem likely), and I'm definitely not worried about a girl losing control over me (since that also doesn't seem likely, though it would be awesome ) Not sure if I'd have the willpower to dissuade a girl who was interested in me while involved with someone else, though.

Interestingly enough we were covering panic/anxiety disorders in Psychopathology today, and basically all the treatments that have worked well involve the patients acclimatising themselves to the stimuli that cause them to panic, with a key step being when they realise that the "catastrophic event" that they most fear just won't happen. ie. You aren't going to be so deprived of air on a subway that you'll faint. A major feature was that many sufferers greatly overestimated the probabilities of things going wrong. A lot of the situations seemed to involve self-fulfilling prophecies, where someone was so terrified of suffering a panic attack that could lead to a heart attack that they paid far too close attention to their body and started panicking whenever things were outside of some "normal" range, this just caused things to get worse, which made them more panicky, etc.

I think this is somewhat analogous to these people who are worried about being in a car with someone of the gender you're attracted to. It's important to get exposure to the situation so that you realise that this catastrophic event of committing adultery is not going to happen so easily. Further, these warped views can act as a self-fulfilling prophecy, as if you expect that being alone with someone attractive is going to lead to an affair, it's easy to interpret conversations and actions as supporting that.

I'll try bringing some of this up on the course discussion forum, and see what kind of responses I get.

[happycynic]

I actually find this topic pretty relevant; i'm in a situation where I'm around some pretty attractive (and almost universally taken) young women often, and in close proximity. By which I mean i'm one of two male cheerleaders on my college's team, and also ended up getting recruited for a ballet (I guess they figured I already had experience throwing girls). And of course I'm single and generally the ratio here is 3:1 against me. So yeah, it's... interesting times.

Anyhow, if I didn't trust myself to keep my nose out of trouble, I wouldn't have put myself into the situation. I'm not exactly Rico Suave with the ladies, so there's little chance of them throwing themselves at my feet--and of course most of them are taken already. And while there's a lot of rather close physical contact (try catching a falling girl 20 times without brushing up against something that's technically improper ) I know that I can trust myself to keep it professional. It wouldn't do to have the rest of the team think I'm a creeper--especially when anything meaningful will have to based on a friendship first, anyways.

But if I couldn't trust myself to keep my hands to myself? I don't think I'd be willing to risk creeper-dom. On the other hand, if you never test yourself you'll never know how far you can trust yourself. So yeah, idk.

**On a related note, I've recently been set up with a new stunting partner and there seems to be a statistically improbable amount of random physical contact. Could be nothing, but like I said... statistically improbable amount for just being random. What to make of this? Just my imagination? And if not, at what point would I be willing to compromise my "professionalism"? Ah, the drama....

(I really should be more careful about posting @ 2:30 AM. I end up writing stuff like this.)

[hoverFrog]

Ugly people have sex too. Men and women who aren't underwear models also have the same desires and hopes of sex, each to differing degrees. I find it incredibly shallow that people would be jealous of their attractive friends to such an extend that they assume that any trust they have built up with their partner or spouse will be thrown out just for a quick (or not so quick) tumble. Is there no (I hesitate to say this) spiritual connection between these people that they trust them enough to do something as simply as give a friend a lift?

I wonder if this is a symptom of the whole "born a sinner" thing that some churches do. Is the assumption that people are inherently shallow and untrustworthy so ingrained that even the possibility of being alone with someone will automatically lead to "sin"? What a tenuous way to go through life.

I also wonder how far the "stain of sin" and desire to appear pious limits the ability and willingness of these Christians to communicate with their partners. I know that I am often attracted to women who I am not sleeping with. Hil is also attracted to some men. So what? We're both adults and are capable of making adult decisions. We can talk about our attractions and incorporate things we like in others into our sex life. I think that's enough detail. Suffice it to say that our normal human desires can be channelled in such a way as to keep our relationship vibrant. If I were obsessed with appearing "pure" I don't think I could have these sort of conversations without losing the illusion of purity and piousness. Nor could my partner respond to them without breaking that puritanical taboo.

What a mess they've gotten themselves into.

[JulietEcho]

Ugly people have sex too. Men and women who aren't underwear models also have the same desires and hopes of sex, each to differing degrees. I find it incredibly shallow that people would be jealous of their attractive friends to such an extend that they assume that any trust they have built up with their partner or spouse will be thrown out just for a quick (or not so quick) tumble.

I think the title of the post is accidentally misleading. I didn't want to reuse the "Being alone with the opposite sex" title, because that ignores the very real existence of bisexuals and homosexuals. But I also didn't want to use, "Being alone with people you potentially find attractive" because that's long and weird-sounding. So I used the word "attractive" to mean "attractive to you, personally" rather than "good-looking by media/societal standards." Sorry about the confusion.

[hoverFrog]

I'm being overly pedantic. Even for me.

However I do think that there is some bias on distrusting the better looking person. Perhaps they represent a greater temptation for the jealous person? If anything the shallowness of such thinking is quite astounding. Are Christians more insecure than atheists in this regard? I've not given it much thought but I would have thought that we'd be about the same.

[jasonorlandohawk]

Hmm... as the resident pastor with two very strong, but purely platonic friendships with women, this is an interesting scenario for me. I have discovered that while basically no one assumes I'm fooling around with either of them, almost everyone assumes that I will eventually marry one of the two. In a weird twist, everyone thinks I'm strong enough to resist sexual temptation for now, but I'm not going to last forever.

Mostly, I just use it as a source for potential laughs.

The other day, I walked past one of the ladies pushing for a marriage to friend #1... with the girl I'm currently seeing. I got a rather annoyed glare from the encounter. She apparently thinks that I am "cheating" on my friend, despite the fact that the friend in question has actively encouraged me to pursue my newest relationship. I have an open, honest relationship with my friend, and there isn't an ounce of jealousy between us. In fact, the only demand I have made on my friend is the right to perform her wedding, when & if she ever does decide to marry.

While I can & do maintain healthy friendships with the opposite gender, everyone else seems sincerely shocked that I can be strait, alone with a woman, and not trying to acquire sex (at least, eventually).

I do follow a few rules: I don't visit the dorm room unless there is a 3rd party, or I'm helping move in/out and I don't entertain most women at my house alone (I allow my two best friends an exception since rumors will never quell, one way or another on those accounts).

On a completely random side-note: I am frequently frustrated by one aspect of this social stereotype. For me, I enjoy offering to feed people who go out to eat with me. It is natural for me to offer to buy a person's meal. I hate eating alone (weird, since I'm usually VERY introverted), and if I can get someone to join me, I readily pay for their meal... it's the least I can do for such good company. I do this for men & women. However, I frequently get a "are you trying to hit on me" response from women, that is nowhere near my intent...

Apparently, I can't buy something as simple as a meal for a woman out of sincere friendship! People think I have an alternate motives, and it frustrates me!

So, the point of my rambling post? Probably not much of one, but I guess I can try and offer a few insights...

I don't think this "being alone" stereotype is solely a religious phenomena. I think there are some extreme versions of that stereotype within the church (but there are extremes in any grouping). Overall, I have only met three people who recognized the true nature of my two close female friends... and all of them were Christian. They saw past the stereotype, despite their religion. The frequent incorrect diagnosis occurs from believers & non-believers alike, and I don't think it's a unique issue within the church.

I think it's just expressed in a different fashion.

[Chal]

In fact, the only demand I have made on my friend is the right to perform her wedding, when & if she ever does decide to marry.

So everyone is correct in assuming that you will, indeed, marry her.

On a completely random side-note: I am frequently frustrated by one aspect of this social stereotype. For me, I enjoy offering to feed people who go out to eat with me. It is natural for me to offer to buy a person's meal. I hate eating alone (weird, since I'm usually VERY introverted), and if I can get someone to join me, I readily pay for their meal... it's the least I can do for such good company. I do this for men & women. However, I frequently get a "are you trying to hit on me" response from women, that is nowhere near my intent...

May as well get frustrated when the cab drivers ask you if you need a ride when you wave at them. It's a social convention. A single man offering to buy a single woman dinner is a fairly common sign of a date, and unless she has some reason to believe you're different from the norm, it's fair for her to assume you're acting in accordance with the norm.

[Kaylya]

I think it's silly to not accept (or offer) a ride from people of the opposite sex as a general rule. Particularly for the reason of "I think it might lead to an affair" rather than "I'm afraid of being accused of sexual harassment".

[JulietEcho]

However I do think that there is some bias on distrusting the better looking person. Perhaps they represent a greater temptation for the jealous person? If anything the shallowness of such thinking is quite astounding. Are Christians more insecure than atheists in this regard? I've not given it much thought but I would have thought that we'd be about the same.

I do think that jealous people are more likely to freak out over their significant other spending time with a conventionally good-looking person than they are over someone who isn't considered very attractive by today's standards. This is probably a bad judgment call, actually, because everyone is attracted to something different. There are plenty of people who are especially attracted to the overweight, the handicapped, people with a certain hair color, people with no hair, people who are short or tall or whatever. Someone may actually pose a temptation to your SO but pass right under your nose, because you don't see them as a threat. Many people (especially men) who are attracted to unconventional-looking people keep it a secret as well, and even date/marry people they think they're expected to find attractive rather than people they actually find attractive.

A good example of someone recognizing their SO's unconventional attraction and being savvy about it is the character Phyllis on The Office. Her husband, Bob Vance (Vance Refrigeration!) gets a new secretary who looks a lot like Phyllis - quite heavy-set, wearing bold floral prints and glasses. Phyllis worries that Bob might cheat on her with the new secretary, and it's clear that her suspicions are fueled by her appearance - despite the fact that she isn't beautiful by media/societal standards.