Anonymous
correspondent:
Just
want to be sure I was clear on my position of guests. If invited to
someone's house for dinner, the guest shouldn't have to
make it and spend the entire evening in the kitchen prepping and cleaning-up--anyone can
do that in his/er own home. However, being a houseguest is an entirely
different horse color. When one is an over-night guest, one must pitch
in and do everything a normal resident would do--make Christmas cakes,
replace the host's tires, etc.
Tom:
Okay,
good as far as you've taken it, but there are complications.
What
about when person A invites person B to dinner because they want to
sleep with them. Does person B then become a houseguest, in which case
they might be required (on top of possibly sleeping with person A) to
do such tasks as washing up and/or baking a Christmas cake. However,
if this is indeed the case, then there is a distinct possibility that,
when presented with those additional tasks, person B might decide that
they don't now (and perhaps ever) want to sleep with person A, in which
case they can be considered not to be a houseguest, and kazam, said
houseguest tasks disappear, and the possibility of sleeping with
person A may become an option once more. Cycle repeats itself, person
A and person B are caught in endless sex-no-sex loop, and the evening
degenerates into arguments that make the whole affair appear as if person
A was married to person B. So, we've just determined underlying reason
why marriage might be pursued as an option for person A, why person
B gets turned off sex, and why marriage subsequently breaks down.
Notes
Person A and person B are fictitious
people of no defined sex, with or without physical and/or mental disabilities,
and of no particular ethnic group, skin color, sexual orientation, etc.,
etc.
