Andy Borgmann's Blog
Where The Producer Gets the Mic
Category: Marriage
We did a show the other night on the 7 lessons of the Tiger Woods affair. But Allen missed one important one: IF you are going to cheat, use a call girl instead of a mistress.
How's that for controversial?
It should be stated for the record that I vehemently appose cheating - both personally and in principle. Some have questioned me on this from time to time because I seem liberal on some of my theology pertaining to sexuality. Despite this assumption being irritating to no end, it isn't the focus of the post. However, let's make something clear: Tiger was wrong.
But this post isn't about cheating. It is about confidants. While reading an article in the New York Post, I came across Ashley Dupree (remember: Elliot Spitzer's call girl) lashing out at the 6 7 mistresses of Tiger. Saying that: "Here you have all these girls accepting gifts, money, trips from Tiger in exchange for sex -- all the while knowing he is married. And now they all can't wait to tell their stories in exchange for even more money from the tabloids? And I was the hooker? At least I kept my mouth shut." There you go folks: hookers jumped past grocery baggers for the number 4 spot of people I trust.
- Attorneys (attorney-client privilege)
- Doctors (doctor-patient confidentiality)
- Priests (notice I didn't say Pastors)
- Hookers
- Grocery Baggers (bagger-shopper confidentiality)
In college I got into an argument in one of my Pastoral Leadership classes on what to do when someone confesses that they had abused a child. California law requires that you turn them in. I took the unpopular (and right) view that I would not turn them in, and suffer the consequences, because I viewed a pastor-parishioner confidentiality trust to be sacred and necessary for the betterment of the individual and culture as a whole. Why?
Living in a culture where attorneys are the only people we trust with our secrets does not produce healthy people that are empowered to change and better themselves. Many of the problems we face in relationships, marriages, and the like are due to the secrets we carry around.
The purpose behind the sacred trust of attorney-client privilege is that no one would tell their attorney anything if it weren't there. And just as this is necessary for a good defense, having a trusted confidant is necessary for personal and spiritual growth.
It probably seems a bit odd - given that I live so publically - but I take privacy and secrecy very important. People in my life have confessed to a myriad of past inequities - including cheating, abortions, serious drug use, and the like. Stories and circumstances that I will take to my grave. The relief you see in someone's face from the cathartic release of a burden being lifted by openly discussing past transgressions in an open, honest, and non-judgmental environment only speaks to the importance of such exchanges.
So in an odd turn of events, society could take a lesson from Ashley Dupree. When entrusted with private information, keep your mouth shut.
Recently I got into a fairly surprising discussion with someone on what we really wanted out of life. And I don't mean like wanting to be famous, or wealthy, or a Senator. But when all is said and done, what is it that we really wanted? Or in other words: what is it about being famous, or wealthy, or a Senator that we think will be beneficial to our life?
I even surprised myself a little with the simplicity of my answer (which I am not going to share). But I'll leave it at there are really only two things I want out of life. That's it. Two.
I have since had this conversation with a few other people to decide whether or not I am crazy. The verdict is mixed. But most agree that "knowing me" they don't believe my simplistic answer.
When I was in college, a relative of mine sent me a book to read titled Running on Empty: Contemplative Spirituality for Overachievers by Fil Anderson. There are two things I remember about this book.
- How super offended and hurt I was that this person sent me the book. It sounds a bit overly sensitive (and looking back it probably was), but nevertheless it had some larger context to the feelings.
- More importantly, the story of the fisherman and the businessman.
It's a bit long, but I read it 5 years ago and I still can't get it out of my head. There was once an businessman who had finally taken some time off work to go on holiday with his family, whilst taking a walk on the beach one day he saw a fisherman rowing a small boat towards the shore and noticed that the fisherman has caught quite a number of big fish. The American was really impressed and asked the fisherman, “How long does it take you to catch so many fish?”
The fisherman replied, “Oh, just a few hours.”
“Then why don’t you stay longer at sea and you could catch even more?” The businessman was astonished.
The fisherman replied, “This is enough to feed my whole family,” he says
The businessman then asked, “So, what do you do for the rest of the day then?”
The fisherman replied, “Play with my kids, take afternoon naps with my wife in the hammock, go out in the village in the evening with my friends for a drink where we play the guitar and sing.”
The businessman offered a suggestion to the fisherman.
“I am a specialist in business management. I could help you to become a more successful person. From now on, you should spend more time at sea and try to catch as many fish as possible. And when you have saved enough money, you could buy a bigger boat and catch even more fish. As you go on, you will be able to afford to buy more boats, recruit more fishermen and lead a team of your own. Soon you will be able to set up your own company, your very own production plant for canned food and do direct selling to your distributors. At that time, you will have moved out of this village and to the City, and then expand your operation to around the world, and finally you can set up your HQ to manage all your other branches.”
The fisherman asks, “So, how long would that take?”
The businessman reply, “About 15 to 20 years.
The fisherman continues, “And after that?”
The businessman laughs heartily, “After that, when the time is right, you can go public and float your shares in the Stock Exchange, by then you will be rich, your income will be coming in by the millions!”
The fisherman asks, “And after that?”
The businessman says, “After that, you can finally retire, you can move to a house on an island, play with your kids, take afternoon naps with your wife in the hammock, go out in the village in the evening with your friends for a drink where you play the guitar and sing” The point is that a lot of the time we think we are working hard towards a life that we want, only failing to realize what we really want might be right in front of us and attainable.
It's a question I ask myself almost everyday: what is it that I am working so hard for and how does that fit into what I want out of life?
What about you?
(And if you don't want to share your own, feel free to try and guess mine)
2 Comments •
20s Travel Marriage Friendship
•
463 Words
•
Sunday, August 23, 2009
The month of weekenders continues. This past weekend's destination: Portland and McMinnville, Oregon. I'll blog about Portland later this week. But of course the highlight and purpose of the trip was my good friend Lissa's wedding in McMinnville.
Things that were awesome/fun/hilarious/embarrassing about the wedding: - Thanks to Laura (matron of honor / ex-girlfriend of mine) I held Lissa's purse for a good chunk of the ceremony. Nothing like being in a nice wool suit and carrying around a bright pink purse. But it's cool, I am comfortable with my masculinity. <smile>
- The view at the vineyard where the wedding was held was breathtaking
- Spending an afternoon with Laura's mother at an aviation/space museum, seeing the Spruce Goose, and catching up
- Discussing Fort Wayne politics with Dan so animatedly in our hotel room, that Lissa (who we hadn't seen yet) recognized our voices from the hallway and decided to knock on the door knowing it was us.
- Catching up with Laura, Tasha, and Rebekah at the rehearsal dinner
- And as cheesy as it sounds, seeing someone I love (Lissa) very much incredibly happy and full of life
Working weekends for the past four years meant that I regrettably had to check the "will not be attending" box to the 30+ weddings I have been invited to. Even some that I planned on going to, got canceled fairly last minute because of work (which I got an earful about one in particular this weekend).
Though as my plane banked and began its descent over Memphis, I found myself staring out the window and thinking back to a conversation I had with Allen a year earlier about balance. And how because I implemented balance into my life this year, my descent "back home" felt more like coming back home than it did after my March weekender.
But in classic "Andy blog honesty," I also freely admit that while this trip pointed to one area of balance I was glad to be growing in, it also brings to light another area of balance I still am missing.
Weddings are of course incredibly joyous occasions for me, but also a bit of a reminder of my own discontent and loneliness. I freely admit that.
I don't think I am alone in this with other 20-somethings professionals that try to use the excuse that they are focusing on their career over their love life. But at 27, a full 6 years beyond when I thought I would have been at my own wedding, here's to my sincere and honest wish for Lissa and her husband to experience a full and happy marriage. And here's to me in continuing to try and figure out the balance needed to find a full and happy marriage of my own.
The rest of the weekender photos can be seen here
Next weekend: Lake Barkley in Kentucky to visit Angela.
Tonight I met up with a professor of mine from college who was in town for a conference. Dick wasn't just a professor to me though, he was a mentor, and most importantly: a friend.
At one particular point in my life, when I was at a cross road on who I was to become, I looked around at all the people I respected and came to the conclusion that 20 years down the road my life would be the most fruitful and fulfilled if it looked like Dick Pritchard's. Needless to say I have an extreme respect for the man.
So amidst Shrimp Purloo, Peacan Pie, and a waiter that probably wished we hadn't taken a seat in a small, Midtown restaurant for 2.5 hours: tonight we discussed everything under the sun.
As the meal was wrapping up - but still an hour before we would leave - we began to discuss communication and relationships.
When I was in Dick's class, he assigned a book called " The Contemplative Pastor" by Eugene Peterson.
I didn't read it.
Dick knew I didn't read it (as with pretty much most of my assigned reading).
But I very much remember it's content and the discussion that came from it.
In the book, Peterson makes the point that we learn three languages in order:
intimacy, naming, and persuasion.
From our first moments in life we learn words of love - which in reality have little to do with actual words. We then proceed on to "naming" - it is here we get an understanding of possession. With possession understood, we finally complete our verbal development with "persuasion" - or the language needed to persuade in order to attain that which we want to posses.
It should be noted that this isn't just in romantic relationships. It translates to all relationships: parents, friends, co-workers, mentors, mentees, customer service agents, the homeless man on the street. Everyone.
The irony I pointed out is that I have essentially fallen into a profession that is hyper-focused on persuasion, opinions, belief systems, and world-views. And I think it is precisely because of this that for a while now I have felt a heightened struggle with most of human language in contemporary society being focused on persuasion. Something that if I would have read Peterson's book, I would have probably dealt with 4 years ago.
Unfortunately though, the causality of this sad state of affairs is intimacy.
I blogged about this before, but it bears repeating. I think one of the most powerful movie trailers I have ever seen was for the movie Crash. The line that hit me was, " ...nobody touches you...I think we miss that touch so much that we crash into each other just so we can feel something."
When we remain stuck with persuasion in our relatinoships, intimacy gets thrown aside. But our desire to fulfill our lives with persuasion and attaining that which we have named, unfortunately only leaves us emptier for it.
 By now I am pretty sure everyone has heard of Carrie Prejean - aka "Miss California" - aka "The Girl Who Got Figuratively Bitch Slapped by Perez Hilton Regarding Gay Marriage."
We did a show on it. CNN has covered it. MSNBC ridiculed it. FoxNews has offered her a job. And I hear her and James Dobson are dating. Ok, those last two might be made up (or ARE they?)
Yet nobody made the statement that I have been from the very beginning: Carrie Prejean is the reason nobody takes the anti-Gay Marriage movement seriously.
Before - did I mention before - TheDirty.com released this photo of a 17 18-year old Prejean modeling for some awesome panties, I had a conversation with my brother about how this Miss USA situation is a joke and perfectly illustrates the irrelevancy of the anti-Gay marriage movement.
Then when TheDirty.com released the photo to the right all I could think of was: YES!
Now I don't take any issue with the photo. Future wife: please use Carrie as "clothing" inspiration. But then again, I freely admit I am liberal when it comes to "modesty." I also know I am liberal when it comes to Gay Marriage (reference: this post).
But two questions come to the surface:
1.) Am I the only one who thinks her boobs were better before the implants?
2.) Why are the religious right "excited" to have her as a spokeswoman?
As stated before, I think gay marriage should be legal because we don't illegalize divorce and pornography. Two things that are equally as "Biblically morally wrong" as homosexuality. And the fact that we scream at the top of our lungs about one, and not the others, makes us worse than hypocrites, it makes us irrelevant. And not irrelevant in the trendy way hipster Churches talk about being relevant. I mean irrelevant in that nobody gives a damn what we have to say not just about homosexuality - but about anything.
But I tell you the real tragedy in this whole situation is that The Associated Baptist Press - yes The Associated Baptist Press - had the best article I have read on this issue. Not per se because I agree with the conclusion, but for at least questioning the absurdity of the situation.
And even after Prejean has come out and apologized for the shoot, saying she regrets doing it and won't do it again, I have to think: who cares? Why? Because this isn't about her. It is about us!
The Church's mission will not return to it's key mission of creating disciples of Jesus Christ until our interaction with the world we live in is a consistent one.
9 Comments •
Sex Marriage
•
500 Words
•
Friday, April 17, 2009
I have been wanting to use this first clip in a blog for almost a year. But it wasn't until this past new episode of Scrubs that I finally found my muse for writing.
Andy's Worst Nightmare
Followed By: Five Years Later...
Ladies, here's the deal: whether you like it or not, most men do equate sex with love. And you can sarcastically demean that feeling away, but just as we don't like it that most of you cry sometimes for no reason, or that all you need sometimes is for us to affirm that you are beautiful in order to provide security that the relationship is alright, equating sex with love is ingrained in who we are.
Shaunti Feldhan wrote a fantastic chapter in her book For Women Only detailing this. And since I probably am not writing this with enough sensitivity, I would highly advise all married women - or planning on getting married someday - to read it. But I am going to try, so here goes...
I find two things interesting about the clips above.
First is the expectation that after the husband has been "bagged" in marriage, sex then becomes a tool at the woman's control. What if communication were used like that? What if Scrubs cut over to Turk and JD and JD said, "you know what is great dude, you only have to talk about her day when you actually want to?" (Cue: big hearty laugh)
How positively does that portray marriage?
Second: listen to some of the verbiage Carla uses in the second clip. Notice how she says "I still make sure you get sex at least once a week."
Feldhan makes a comment in her book about how men would rather not have sex, than have sex with someone they feel is doing so out of obligation. And I have to agree with her.
It isn't about "making sure he gets sex." It is that she wants to have sex with him. That is what is equated to love in our DNA. That is what when a "mommy" forgets she is also a "wife" is painful.
Now I am not saying this gives men the right to expect sex "every night" - like Carla exaggerated in her lament. Every relationship is different and that is fine. From most of the conversation I have with married men, it isn't even the lack of quantity of sex - although they wouldn't mind having it more often - but rather the fact it doesn't feel desired.
Trust me. I know more than a single guy should how hard it is to be a mom. It is literally a 24/7 job. There is no time off. There are no vacations. I have the utmost respect for moms. And I am certainly not advocating that post-children sex life needs to look like the newlywed sex life.
What I am saying is that it is going to be a tough marriage if sexual needs aren't being honestly discussed and attempted at being met. Because for men, sex does in fact equal love.
It was six years ago I came to the same conclusion Douglas W. Kmiec and Shelley Ross Saxer - two law school professors at Pepperdine Law School - recently came to in a San Francisco Chronicle article that was picked up by Time. Conclusion: the government needs to get the hell out of the marriage business.
The truth of the matter is that marriage licenses weren't required until the early 1900s in (successful?) attempts to keep black people from marrying white people. It wasn't until Loving v. Virginia in 1967 where the Supreme Court ruled this unconstitutional - but unfortunately the government's authority of marriages stuck around.
I have said it before but the government should only have two roles: 1.) protect us from others - including things like physical harm (murder, rape, etc...) and all other forms of harm (financial laws, contract disputes, etc...) - 2.) do that only which the government can do (build highways, defend the country, etc...).
Sanctioning marriage does not fall into either of those categories.
I am sure someone right now is saying, "ohh but won't someone PLEASE think of the children." And while I would like to say no, frankly, I am sick of thinking about the children, I also realize that isn't going to convince anyone who does "think of the children" of anything. So here's another approach.
I don't think growing up with a mom as a stripper is particularly healthy. I am sure there are some great stripper moms out there, but on the whole, I am going to say that strippers usually do not make good mothers. However, there is nothing illegal about stripping - despite it's questionable morality - thus there is no reason for the government to intervene.
If we take the "think of the children" philosophy of governance, why not make it illegal for strippers to have kids? Or pornographers? Or casino owners? Or politicians? Or anyone else with "questionable" morality.
Likewise, it makes absolutely no moral, legal or logical sense to continue the racist-roots of the Government being involved in the marriage business.
If the government wants to make it easier on families for tax purposes or if they want a method of finding census data, fine, have civil unions for all. All the same benefits - regardless if it is heterosexual or homosexual relationships. There is no second class tier system where the government gives heterosexuals "marriages" and homosexuals "civil unions." In the governments eyes, we are the same.
Let religious organizations hold on to their traditions and vernacular like they have had for thousands of years. Nobody needs to redefine any terms. Marriage becomes a religious ceremony like baptism.
Think how much less contentious this society would be if we could come to that agreement. Conservatives/Religious folks compromising on detheocritizing an already detheocritized government, and Liberals/Gays compromising and letting religions keep their tradition.
No more fighting. No more constant hatred by both parties. We become like most other groups in society where everyone's rights are protected, and we agree to disagree.
Then all we would have to dispute is abortion.
I often feel like the least forgiving place in this world is the place that should be the most. As the saying goes, "the church seems to shoot their wounded."
This saddens me how few people recognize how imperfect we all are, and how all sin is equal in the eyes of God. When will we try to be as forgiving as God.
I know I can't post them all, but if you follow Post Secret, you will be astonished how many of them are about carrying around guilt and shame years - sometimes even decades - after something happened.
...Women who are vegans because egg yolks remind them of their abortions
...Men who feel bad about the way they treated people in high school
...First time sexual experiences that were not what they expected
...Mothers missing their daughters because they don't speak after and event
...Fathers knowing they should never have left their kids
...Business deals that fell through
...Friends mistreating and taking advantage of other friends
Stop carrying the guilt around with you. God forgives - even if we don't.
Be sure to visit Post Secret for more interesting looks into the human condition.
Andy is looking for both of these in his future wife. However, Andy is willing to compromise on #2 if #1 is true.
Also, I have a surprise third post-secret for this post but it is in response to a comment that I feel is looming by Sarah (probably) or Erik (maybe) or Allen (long shot). But don't leave it up to them - as all three might fail. It will only come when expected comment is said.
Be sure to visit Post Secret for more interesting looks into the human condition.
It's a surprisingly cold March evening in a city much further north than Atlanta. Two teenagers find themselves in a cheap, Pontiac Grand Am - that is at least a decade old - after a high school sporting event. She had been there to cheer the team on to victory; he was suppose to take her home afterward. But neither of them really wanted to go home and - since there was no school the next day - they went for a drive. The two had been dating for sometime, and as teenagers often to do, they thought they were in love.
It was one of those drives that as they get older they will have less and less. Drives that really have no purpose - just an excuse for spending more time together until curfew. A drive that always ends too soon, but a drive that lasts forever in the memories reserved for the "good times."
On this particular drive, one thing lead to another on the starless night, and the two made love. It was the kind of love that those older and more experienced wouldn't call great, but it was all that they knew, and it was great for them. And just because the greatness might have been lacking, the mechanics worked the same, and against all odds, one of the million sperm released found its way to its destiny. It was a sperm that would change everything. And the only witness to this unexpected world changing moment was a moose...
Admit it, until you got to the moose part, you thought I was writing about my own experience? But there are no moose in Indiana and this isn't my story. It is the story of Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston - with some creative liberties I am sure.
Bristol Palin is the 17-year old daughter of Sarah Palin - John McCain's running mate. And in a move that caused everyone to rollover in their grave, Bristol Palin is 5-months pregnant, and John McCain knew this and still selected Sarah Palin as his running mate.
My first thought is if you would have told those teens whenever/wherever they were doing it that this event would have national implications, I bet they would think you are crazy. But then I realized what I really should be thinking about is how glad I am the mistakes I made in high school (and beyond) weren't under the national spotlight.
But here is where I am going to make everybody, no matter where you stand on this story, angry. This story both highlights the hypocrisy of Republicans/Christians, as well as the illogic of the Democrats/Secularists.
I am not for politicians, pastors, and leaders stepping down in their roles when they make stupid personal morality decisions. I have been saying so for years. Whether we want to admit it or not, the mindset behind those who think leaders need to be perfect come from those who subconsciously think they are perfect...and that there families are perfect.
But Republicans & Christians a like (not saying they are the same) need to recognize that most of us are hypocrites, but that is ok. That's the point of grace. Life is messy. Families are messier. And we all do stupid things from time to time. The idea that "Sarah Palin can't run her household" or that "Bill Clinton shouldn't have been leading a country" is absolutely ridiculous. Some of the greatest leaders of all time have had huge moral failures in their life, but with out them, this world would be drastically different.
Two Examples (I could list more): The Apostle Peter & Martin Luther King, Jr.
Liberals on the other hand need to stop using this as an example of a woman's and/or family's "right-to-choice." Just because a family chose to keep the baby, does not change the moral question of when life begins, and therefore, the value of not taking that life, one bit.
Those who read this know that I am open to the discussion on when life begins. But the idea that Bristol's situation indicates that we shouldn't defend life is absurd at best, and deplorable at worst.
I will say one more thing that will infuriate everyone even more. Levi & Bristol should not be getting married. A shotgun wedding is taking a bad situation and making it a permanent, worse situation. If the kids are in love and would have gotten married anyways, then fine. But a baby is never a reason to marry. It doesn't make the conception anymore "holy," and it shouldn't make everyone else feel better with the situation.
My sympathies go out to Bristol and Levi. To use a hockey term: who knew two teens slipping one past the goalie would have such large implications on the election of the most powerful man in the world.
On a side note, I have been asked by a few to comment on my feelings about Sarah Palin as VP. I will do so in a blog that will be release on Monday. Enjoy the weekend.
Description
Andy's blog aims to be like a Scrubs episode, mixed with a Chuck Klosterman column, centered around the topic of faith. It is open, honest, raw, and a little embarrassing. It is a place to discuss religion, politics, ministry, pop culture, and well, just life - especially focused on the time of life we call our 20s!
Andy is the Executive Producer of The Allen Hunt Show; a progressive (in the literal sense), talk radio show based in Atlanta, GA aimed at bringing faith back into the public discussion. Andy enjoys travel, aviation, web design, politics, friends, and faith. He holds that the secret to a full life is loving God and loving people - which he fails at constantly.
Andy grew up in Fort Wayne, IN. He now lives in Alpharetta, GA.
More information about Andy can be found at www.2timothy42.org or Andy's Facebook.
P.S. As has been mentioned on air, Andy is horrible at grammar and spelling. Please excuse any mistakes, trust me, he's sorry.
Calendar
|
<<
<
Sep 2010
>
>>
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| | | 1
| 2
| 3
| 4
| 5
| 6
| 7
| 8
| 9
| 10
| 11
| 12
| 13
| 14
| 15
| 16
| 17
| 18
| 19
| 20
| 21
| 22
| 23
| 24
| 25
| 26
| 27
| 28
| 29
| 30
|
2010-09-30 00:00:00 2010-09-30 23:59:59 30
|
Andy's Blog
