The absurdity of platonic relationship

Kevin Mokento | Monday May 16, 2022 03:17

The evolution of the English language has birthed portmanteaus such as bromance, sismance and womance to reflect a non-sexual intimate bond between people of the same gender. However, the focus of this article is on platonic relationships in heterosexual settings. In these relationships, an element of infatuation exists but is typically played down because of the non-existence of carnal attraction. Are these relationships realistic? Probably! I for one won’t deny that professional and emotional connections with people of the opposite sex can enhance appreciation of life and enrich the soul.

But it would take a phenomenal degree of self-control and self-discipline to maintain such relationships in the long haul, particularly when they are punctuated by many prolonged moments of choosing to be together in privacy. I would not be surprised if rancid salvos were aggressively lobbed at me by judgemental people quick to censoriously dismiss me as a skirt chaser who excels at denigrating women to objects of sexual fantasy and peripatetic bordellos. While I have no issues with absorbing such mean blows, may I lovingly caution, if you are inclined to stoop that low, please remove the mud in your eyes and turn the microscopic lens towards you. Few things are as repulsive as the ingrained culture of grossly sugar-coating the truth at all costs.

In situations where one finds the other unattractive, it might be easier to keep the relationship strictly platonic, even in compromising situations. However, one’s view of beauty can evolve, and a plain person can gradually mutate into an angelic stunner. Purely because bolted to sustainable beauty is not only the physical frame but more importantly, one’s strength of character, personality and disposition. That explains why some people we know and love are married to hideously ugly people, people you would never bother giving a second glance at. After all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Claimants of moral superiority vilified Michael Richard Pence, the 48th Vice President of the United States, for maintaining a strict policy of never having dinner with women alone. Once the business of the day was done, Pence failed to appreciate the need to hang around other women. Far from being misanthropic, his view was that such time must be devoted to his wife and family, and in some quarters, he was hailed as a great husband who prioritised assigning honour to his marriage. The debate on whether platonic relationships are good or not rages on, but what is more important is not the winner of the debate, but how people conduct themselves in such relationships.

In his poem, titled Strange Love, a United Kingdom poet named Vini Cho mentions something intriguing about platonic relationships, “In a strange way, this love cannot be named or understood. It’s sacred, yet resisting of all rational reasoning and integrity...A love of minds from opposite sex, yet free and unmixed with carnal desire but bonded with a burning passion...This love is free from desire of sexual union but I yearn to sleep close to you, to smell your body scent, to knock me out of insomnia...Underneath our platonic love lies a mystical passion beyond my understanding.” That’s a mouthful, and certainly, this speaks volumes about the cockeyed nature of some platonic relationships.

Generally, platonic bonds are acceptable. They are not considered cheating. In settings where the couples involved in platonic relationships have spouses, and their relationships are described in the way Cho did, would you say such relationships are harmless? Are they close to what the Greek philosopher named Plato envisaged when he talked about a special type of relationship that is close to divine ideals? In essence, isn’t a platonic friend a glorified sidekick? Could there be a misalignment between what the mind desires and what the heart secretly craves? With time, can clear lines morph into hardly visible blurry dots?

Could flirting be a common denominator for these relationships? Lurking at subterranean levels, could a hidden agenda in favour of being more outwardly intimate be brewing to the point of fermentation, thus keeping one or both friends awake at night, while ‘innocently’ lying beside their snoring spouse? Can the non-sexual nature of the relationship only be attributed to the fact that an opportunity has not yet presented itself? Should that opportunity avail itself, would one or both friends jump at the opportunity as if it were a welcome answer to their tireless and heartfelt supplication? Such relationships would always be gliding to the edge of marital fidelity.

The truth is, platonic relationships have been glamourised as a higher form of love and exoticised as the type of love that restrains people from keeping up appearances. A platonic relationship is normally extolled as an enduring bond where people can be their real selves with no fear of rejection or being dumped. Venerated as a harmless reciprocal friendship where both parties unselfishly pull together.

Defined as a relationship that has as the bedrock of its foundation genuine honesty unmarred by pretences that suffocate many marriages, that has as its non-permeable walls openness and uncensored communication free of diplomacy-infused etiquettes that naturally govern marriages, that has as its pivotal door crystalised emotional connection, that has as its shatter-resistant windows a permanent and unconditional support structure that is not founded on self-centredness, and that has as its solid roof the esteemed imperative of trust. If this is the case, doesn’t this transform a platonic friend into one’s significant other? Is a platonic relationship simply a fiendish way of legitimising cheating?

Of course, all high-sounding words have been used to ascribe glory to platonic relationships such as: boundaries are well demarcated and not willfully overstepped, expectations for growing the relationships are actively and effectively managed, and that wrapped around such relationships are impermeable sheets of rationality and understanding. Quite revelatory though is what practically pans out. Platonic relationships have often served as a launching pad for romantic relationships.

In many cases where romantic relationships have not been forged, it might be an issue of unrequited love, where the other party is patiently keeping the love platonic while waiting for circumstances to change in their favour. Anyone who gets too cosy in such a relationship should know that carnal attraction might be beckoning.

In cases where the so-called platonic friends have played outside the zone of platonic friendship and toyed with carnal knowledge, some have dared to excuse it by saying, “Though we had sexual intercourse, we did it in a matter-of-factly manner, unencumbered by passionate romantic feelings.” Unless cerebrally handicapped, none are so ego-addled as those who choose to deceive themselves and belittle their intelligence! For our own good, may we resist the tendency to shun the truth as if it were a repugnant concoction!

More fundamentally, if your ‘platonic’ relationship is hidden from your spouse and subsumed in the dreadful and potent cocktail of open flirtatiousness, unsolicited daily texts of good morning and good night, endless moaning about your spouse, devoting more time to thinking more about your platonic friend than your spouse, extreme infatuation, sexually arousing physical contact, wild cringeworthy fantasies, ever-readiness to coerce your friend into sexual intercourse or to be shanghaied into doing the same; and somehow your fidelity radar remains inactivated, you should know that you have entered the realms of blurred boundaries and well on your way to marital infidelity. And no, I’m not cynical and I’m certainly not a victim of political correctness paralysis!