This post may contain affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, I may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Read my Affiliate Disclosure.
I've always believed that marriage is supposed to involve more than simply living in the same house, paying the bills, and remembering to ask whether your spouse needs anything from the grocery store.
People want companionship.
They want affection.
They want to feel that the person they married still enjoys being around them.
And I don't think those expectations are unreasonable.
But what happens when that companionship begins to disappear?
What happens when one spouse becomes absorbed in work, while the other feels increasingly lonely?
Or when a marriage becomes so predictable that one person begins wondering whether all the romance and excitement are gone for good?
And most importantly, what happens when somebody else comes along and offers the attention that's been missing?
Two sitcoms explored those questions in ways I've never forgotten: All in the Family and Roseanne.
On All in the Family, Gloria Stivic felt neglected by her husband Mike, whose growing commitment to his teaching career left her feeling increasingly unimportant. She became involved with another man, and by the time her parents discovered what was happening, her marriage was in serious trouble.
On Roseanne, Jackie Harris became pregnant after a brief encounter with Fred, gave birth to their son Andy, and then married Fred. But she quickly discovered that the stable relationship she'd hoped for wasn't nearly as exciting as she'd imagined. She began going dancing with another man and found herself enjoying his attention a little too much.
Now, the circumstances weren't identical.
Gloria's involvement with another man went further than Jackie's.
Jackie recognized that she was crossing a boundary before anything physical happened.
But both women were dealing with something I think deserves serious consideration.
They weren't necessarily looking for someone to replace their husbands. They were looking for feelings they no longer experienced in their marriages.
And that creates a difficult moral question.
We can understand why someone feels lonely without approving of every decision she makes to escape that loneliness.
We can acknowledge that a husband has neglected his wife without making him responsible for her infidelity.
And we can recognize that a wife has behaved dishonestly without pretending her unhappiness is irrelevant.
I think both shows understood those distinctions.
And I wish more people did.
Gloria and Mike Had Built a Marriage That Was Starting to Fall Apart
When I think about Gloria and Mike Stivic, played by Sally Struthers and Rob Reiner, I remember how much they seemed to love each other during the early years of All in the Family.
They argued, of course.
Good grief, everybody in the Bunker household argued.
Sometimes it seemed like nobody could walk into the kitchen without starting a political debate, a family dispute, or another confrontation between Archie and Meathead.
But Gloria and Mike were affectionate.
They were young.
They shared political ideals.
And they seemed to believe they were building a life together that would be different from the marriage Gloria had grown up watching.
Mike considered himself progressive.
He believed in equality and social justice.
And Gloria was increasingly interested in women's rights and being treated as an equal partner.
Yet their marriage wasn't nearly as modern as Mike sometimes liked to imagine.
He could be condescending.
He could become so absorbed in his opinions that he failed to listen to his wife.
And he wasn't always as enthusiastic about equality at home as he was about equality in the rest of society.
I think that's an important part of their story.
Because a person can have admirable principles and still fail to practice them consistently in a relationship.
You can believe women deserve equal treatment and still dismiss your wife's concerns.
You can care about social justice and still neglect the person sitting across the dinner table.
And you can be absolutely convinced that you're a decent husband while your marriage is deteriorating.
By the time the Stivics moved to California and Mike became a college professor, the problems had become serious.
Mike was absorbed in his work.
Gloria felt neglected.
And the relationship that once seemed so affectionate had become increasingly unhappy.
I don't think Gloria was unreasonable for wanting more from her husband.
But what she did with that unhappiness is where I begin to disagree with her.
Gloria Found Attention From Another Man—and the Marriage Reached a Crisis
The two-part episode "California, Here We Are," which aired December 17, 1978, brings Archie and Edith to California for Christmas.
The Bunkers believe they're visiting their daughter, son-in-law, and grandson Joey for a family holiday.
What they don't realize is that Mike and Gloria have already separated.
The couple attempts to conceal their problems, but the situation eventually becomes impossible to hide.
Gloria confides in Edith that she's been seeing another man.
His name is Bud Kreeger, and he's connected to Mike's professional world.
Gloria explains that Mike became so involved in his teaching career that she felt increasingly ignored.
And she turned to someone who made her feel wanted.
Now, I understand her frustration.
I wouldn't want to be married to someone who behaved as though his career were the only important thing in his life.
Marriage requires attention.
You can't simply assume your spouse will remain emotionally satisfied because you still share an address and a last name.
But I also don't believe that feeling neglected gives someone permission to begin another romantic relationship while remaining married.
Being unhappy in a marriage is a problem that deserves attention. Betraying the marriage is a separate decision that deserves accountability.
And Gloria made that decision.
This wasn't simply an innocent friendship that her parents misunderstood.
The episode presents her involvement with Bud as an affair, and it's one of the reasons she and Mike are separated.
That's why I wouldn't put Gloria's situation in precisely the same category as Jackie's.
With Gloria, the marriage had already suffered a serious betrayal by the time the family learned the truth.
With Jackie, we watch someone recognize the danger while she's still approaching that point.
And that difference matters.
Mike Was Neglectful, but He Wasn't Entirely Innocent of Temptation Himself
Here's something I think we have to remember before turning Gloria into the sole villain.
Mike had experienced his own temptation years earlier.
In the 1975 episode "Gloria Suspects Mike," Gloria is pregnant and feeling insecure about her appearance.
Mike has been tutoring an attractive young woman named Linda Galloway, played by Bernadette Peters.
Gloria becomes suspicious.
And unfortunately, she has reason to be.
Mike and Linda become attracted to each other and kiss.
Mike stops the encounter and leaves rather than allowing it to progress further.
I think that's an important distinction.
He didn't carry the encounter as far as Gloria's later affair.
But he did cross a boundary.
And I don't want to overlook that simply because Mike is the injured spouse in the California storyline.
A husband's earlier mistake doesn't excuse his wife's later betrayal. But his wife's betrayal doesn't erase the husband's earlier mistake, either.
Both were capable of behaving badly.
Both were capable of feeling dissatisfied.
And both needed to take responsibility for their own choices.
I also find it revealing that Mike, who could be so passionate about how other people should behave, wasn't always particularly good at recognizing his own shortcomings.
He could explain the moral failings of society at considerable length.
Sometimes I'd have liked to see him devote half that energy to understanding Gloria.
But Gloria also needed to communicate honestly rather than seeking comfort elsewhere.
A marriage can't improve when one person refuses to listen and the other begins giving up on the conversation.
And eventually, that's the situation the Stivics found themselves in.
Archie Wanted Someone to Blame. Edith Understood the Marriage Was More Complicated.
One of the most powerful parts of the California episode is the contrast between Archie and Edith's reactions.
Archie initially assumes Mike is responsible for the separation.
After all, he's spent years considering his son-in-law an idiot.
Blaming Meathead probably seemed like the easiest explanation in the world.
But when Archie learns that Gloria has been unfaithful, everything changes.
Suddenly he's defending Mike.
He's furious with Gloria.
And for once, he seems to believe his son-in-law deserves better than the treatment he's received.
Now, I don't think Archie was wrong to recognize that Gloria had hurt Mike.
She had.
But I dislike the way his outrage turns into condemnation of his daughter.
Because there's a difference between telling someone that her behavior was wrong and treating her as though she's no longer worthy of love or dignity.
And this is where Edith demonstrates the kind of wisdom I've always admired in her.
She doesn't have to approve of Gloria's choices to recognize that Archie is making a painful situation worse.
When Archie insists that the matter is God's business, Edith essentially tells him to leave the judgment to God.
I love that.
Because Edith recognizes something Archie often misses.
You can believe someone has behaved badly without appointing yourself the final authority on that person's character.
Gloria needs to take responsibility.
Mike deserves compassion.
But neither benefits from having Archie scream at his daughter.
Accountability can be necessary without turning someone else's marital crisis into an opportunity for public humiliation.
That's the balance I appreciate in Edith.
She understands that the marriage has problems.
She understands that Gloria has made mistakes.
And she wants to help the couple consider whether there's still something worth saving.
I think that's far more useful than simply choosing a villain.
Jackie Harris Wasn't Looking for a New Husband. She Wanted to Feel Excited Again.
Now let's move from the Bunker family's Christmas crisis to a rather different marriage in Lanford, Illinois.
Jackie Harris, played by Laurie Metcalf, was never exactly lucky in love.
Over the years on Roseanne, she'd been involved with men who were unreliable, unsuitable, or downright abusive.
She wanted a decent relationship.
She wanted affection.
And eventually she found herself with Fred, played by Michael O'Keefe.
Fred wasn't glamorous.
He wasn't especially adventurous.
And he certainly wasn't the type of man who seemed likely to surprise Jackie with an impulsive evening of dancing.
But he was responsible.
He loved her.
And after the birth of their son Andy, they married.
You might think that would be a welcome change after some of Jackie's earlier relationships.
And in certain respects, it was.
But Jackie soon discovered that being married to a dependable man didn't automatically make her happy.
Fred was predictable.
He liked routines.
And he didn't seem particularly interested in adding excitement to their romantic life.
In "Lost Youth," which aired February 15, 1995, Jackie explicitly complains that their intimate life has become predictable.
Fred, meanwhile, seems perfectly content with the arrangement.
And there lies the problem.
One spouse's idea of a comfortable marriage can be the other spouse's idea of a terribly lonely one.
Now, I don't believe Fred needed to become a completely different person.
There's nothing wrong with enjoying a quiet life.
There's nothing wrong with being dependable.
And I certainly wouldn't encourage someone to marry a responsible man and then spend the rest of the marriage complaining that he isn't a reckless romantic adventurer.
But I also believe marriage requires some consideration of what makes the other person happy.
If Jackie wanted more spontaneity and affection, those feelings mattered.
And if Fred believed everything was fine simply because he was satisfied, he was overlooking an important part of the relationship.
The trouble was that Jackie wasn't particularly good at addressing the problem directly, either.
And that's where Pete entered the picture.
Jackie Went Dancing With Pete—and Dan Saw What Was Happening
In "Single Married Female," which aired February 22, 1995, Jackie begins going out dancing.
She initially accompanies Stacy, a waitress at the Lunch Box, who has a date with a man named Pete.
Jackie and Pete discover that they enjoy dancing together.
And before long, they're spending time together without Stacy.
Now, I don't believe a married woman commits adultery merely by dancing with another man.
That's ridiculous.
Married people can have friends.
They can pursue hobbies their spouses don't enjoy.
And they shouldn't have to abandon every independent interest simply because they're married.
But context matters.
Jackie has been unhappy with Fred.
She's frustrated by the lack of excitement in their marriage.
And she's secretly enjoying the companionship of another man.
When Dan encounters Jackie and Pete at the Lobo, he immediately realizes that something isn't quite right.
Jackie insists they're only friends.
She points out that Pete happens to be male and that they're in a place that happens to serve drinks.
Well, Jackie.
Technically, yes.
But that doesn't explain why Fred doesn't know what's happening.
Dan isn't convinced.
And I think he has a legitimate reason to be concerned.
Not because a woman can't have male friends.
But because Jackie is concealing a relationship that she knows might upset her husband.
There's a difference between privacy and secrecy.
Privacy allows people to maintain healthy individuality. Secrecy can become a way to avoid accountability for something they know threatens a relationship.
And Jackie is beginning to cross that line.
Dan Suggested Romance. Fred Wanted Honesty.
When Dan tells Fred what he's observed, Fred is understandably upset.
He wants to know whether anything physical happened.
Dan doesn't believe it has.
And he begins wondering whether Jackie's behavior is an attempt to get attention.
Perhaps she's unhappy.
Perhaps she feels neglected.
Perhaps she wants Fred to recognize that their marriage needs something more.
So Dan suggests that Fred start courting Jackie again.
Take her out.
Show her a good time.
Make her feel appreciated.
I think that's reasonable advice.
A marriage shouldn't become a relationship where the partners stop making an effort because they've already secured one another's commitment.
People still enjoy affection.
They still want to feel attractive.
And they still benefit from knowing that their spouse wants to spend time with them.
But Fred has a response I also respect.
He believes that Jackie is an adult.
If she's unhappy, she should tell him.
He shouldn't have to interpret secret outings with another man as some elaborate request for romance.
And I think Fred is right about that.
Your spouse has a responsibility to care about your needs. But you also have a responsibility to communicate those needs honestly.
Expecting someone to guess what's wrong is unfair.
Especially when the supposed clues involve spending time with another potential romantic partner.
That doesn't mean Fred should ignore Jackie's dissatisfaction.
It means there should have been a conversation long before things reached that point.
Jackie could have told Fred that she missed excitement.
Fred could have taken that concern seriously.
And perhaps they could have discovered whether there was a way to make their marriage satisfying for both of them.
Instead, Jackie was finding her excitement with Pete.
And Fred was discovering the problem through Dan.
Hardly an ideal arrangement.
One Little Word Made Jackie Realize She Had Crossed a Line
The moment that makes "Single Married Female" especially memorable comes during Jackie's time with Pete.
They're dancing.
They're talking.
They're enjoying each other's company.
Pete is pleasant.
He isn't pressuring Jackie into anything.
And the atmosphere feels easy and affectionate.
Then he casually calls her honey.
And Jackie reacts.
Not because the word is offensive.
Quite the opposite.
She likes it.
She likes hearing it from him.
She enjoys feeling wanted and appreciated.
And suddenly she recognizes that the relationship isn't as innocent as she's been telling herself.
She's a married woman.
She has a child.
And she's developing feelings that don't belong in the supposedly harmless friendship she's been describing.
The remarkable thing is that Jackie stops herself.
She acknowledges that what she's doing amounts to cheating on Fred, even though she and Pete haven't even held hands.
Now, I think that's an important scene.
Because Jackie recognizes that a romantic betrayal can begin before physical intimacy.
The issue isn't simply where Pete's hands have been.
It's where Jackie's emotional investment is going.
The warning sign isn't always a kiss. Sometimes it's realizing that another person's affection is becoming something you're deliberately seeking because you're not receiving it at home.
And I give Jackie credit for recognizing that.
She doesn't take the relationship further.
She doesn't insist that nothing could possibly be wrong because nothing physical happened.
She understands that she's been approaching a boundary.
And she pulls back.
But unfortunately, recognizing the problem doesn't erase the consequences of having concealed it.
Fred Left Jackie Even Though Nothing Physical Happened
When Jackie returns home, Fred already knows about her outings with Pete.
He tells her he's leaving.
And Jackie is stunned.
She tries to explain.
She insists that nothing happened.
But Fred doesn't accept that as a complete defense.
From his perspective, Jackie broke the rules they'd agreed to when they married.
She spent time with another man without telling him.
She concealed what she was doing.
And she damaged his trust.
I understand why he's hurt.
Because fidelity isn't necessarily limited to avoiding sexual contact with someone else.
For many couples, it also involves honesty, boundaries, and not cultivating another romantic relationship behind a spouse's back.
But I also think Fred's decision deserves examination.
He and Jackie have a child.
Their marriage is already struggling.
And rather than having the difficult conversation Jackie should have initiated earlier, Fred walks out.
Now, I'm not suggesting he was obligated to stay in a marriage that made him unhappy.
He wasn't.
Nor do I think being married means someone must tolerate repeated dishonesty.
But leaving in anger doesn't automatically solve the problem.
It may simply create another one.
And when children are involved, the consequences extend beyond the adults.
Fred has every right to feel betrayed.
But he still has responsibilities toward Andy.
And Jackie has responsibilities, too.
Being justified in your hurt doesn't relieve you of the obligation to handle that hurt responsibly.
That's a lesson both characters needed.
Fred Was Hurt. Jackie Was Unhappy. And Neither Had the Whole Answer.
In the later episode "Husbands and Wives," Fred is still living apart from Jackie.
Dan tries to persuade him to return home.
But Fred isn't ready.
He feels betrayed by the woman he trusted.
And he fears losing the person he loves.
I find that sad.
Because Fred isn't simply a boring husband who deserved to be abandoned.
He's a man who loves his wife and doesn't understand why the marriage he believed in is falling apart.
Meanwhile, Jackie is struggling with her own feelings.
She regrets the dishonesty.
But she's also beginning to confront the possibility that she may not be happy in her marriage to Fred at all.
That's the part I find especially important.
Sometimes people seek excitement outside a relationship because they've neglected to address problems that could be repaired.
But sometimes they do it because they're beginning to recognize that the relationship itself may no longer be right for them.
Those situations require different conversations.
And neither can be resolved simply by forcing the unhappy spouse to stay.
I don't think Jackie owed Fred a lifetime of marriage merely because he was a decent man.
Being dependable doesn't automatically make two people compatible.
But I do think she owed him honesty.
If she was unhappy, she needed to say so.
If the marriage wasn't working, she needed to confront that reality.
And if she wanted to leave, she needed to do it without beginning another romantic relationship in secret.
You don't have to remain in a marriage that isn't working. But you should be honest about the marriage you're in before starting to behave as though you're already out of it.
I think that's the standard I'd want both women and men to follow.
Gloria Went Further Than Jackie, but Both Marriages Had Problems Before Another Person Appeared
When I compare these storylines, I don't want to pretend Gloria and Jackie behaved identically.
They didn't.
Gloria became involved with another man, and her marriage to Mike had already reached the point of separation.
Jackie became emotionally drawn to Pete but recognized what was happening and ended the connection before it became physical.
Those differences matter.
But the stories have something important in common.
Neither marriage suddenly developed problems because another person appeared.
Mike and Gloria were already growing apart.
Jackie and Fred were already struggling with differences in their expectations of married life.
The outside relationships revealed problems that hadn't been addressed.
But they also created new problems.
And I think both realities need to be acknowledged.
Marital dissatisfaction may explain why someone becomes vulnerable to an outside attraction. It doesn't make the resulting betrayal inevitable or justified.
That's where personal responsibility enters the picture.
If someone feels neglected, there are choices available.
She can raise the issue.
She can ask for counseling.
She can explain what needs to change.
And if the relationship cannot be repaired, she can consider separation.
None of those choices guarantees a happy outcome.
Marriage can be terribly complicated.
Sometimes people try to repair a relationship and discover that their efforts aren't enough.
But beginning another romance in secret adds dishonesty to an already difficult situation.
And I don't think that usually helps.
Is Every Close Friendship With Someone Else an Emotional Affair?
Here's where I want to be careful.
I don't believe married people should be forbidden from having meaningful friendships outside their marriages.
That would be unreasonable.
A husband can have female friends.
A wife can have male friends.
People can talk about personal problems, work, family, and ordinary life without necessarily betraying their spouses.
And I wouldn't want someone to become suspicious every time a partner enjoyed a conversation with another person.
That's not a healthy way to live.
But there are situations where a friendship begins changing.
A person starts looking forward to the attention in a romantic way.
She begins hiding how frequently she's seeing the other person.
She discusses feelings she doesn't want her spouse to know she's sharing.
And she finds herself imagining a relationship that goes beyond friendship.
Not every close friendship involving secrecy is an affair, and different couples may draw their boundaries differently.
But when romantic attraction, concealment, and growing emotional intimacy come together, I think it's time to examine what's happening.
Jackie recognized that when Pete called her honey.
She hadn't kissed him.
But she realized that his affection was beginning to matter in a way she couldn't honestly dismiss.
And that self-awareness was valuable.
Gloria's storyline demonstrated what could happen when an outside relationship went further.
I think the lesson is to pay attention before reaching that point.
A boundary doesn't become meaningful only when someone has already crossed it. The purpose of a boundary is to help us recognize when we're approaching something we shouldn't pursue.
And that requires honesty with ourselves as much as with our spouses.
The Unhappy Spouse Deserves Understanding, but the Betrayed Spouse Deserves It Too
There's something I particularly dislike about discussions of infidelity.
People often seem determined to choose one person whose feelings matter.
If they sympathize with the unhappy spouse, they minimize the betrayal.
If they sympathize with the betrayed spouse, they dismiss the unhappiness that preceded it.
I don't think either approach is fair.
Gloria deserved to feel valued by Mike.
Jackie deserved to feel that Fred was interested in her happiness.
But Mike also deserved honesty from Gloria.
And Fred deserved to know that Jackie was developing an attachment to another man.
All four people had legitimate feelings.
And all four had responsibilities.
Now, I don't believe that means everyone was equally responsible for every problem.
Responsibility isn't something we divide into neat percentages.
One person might have neglected the marriage.
Another might have responded dishonestly.
And both might have contributed to a relationship in which neither felt understood.
But the particular decisions still belong to the people who made them.
A spouse can be partly responsible for an unhappy marriage without being responsible for the other spouse's affair.
I think that's an important distinction.
Otherwise we end up telling betrayed people that they somehow caused the infidelity by not being sufficiently attentive, romantic, or entertaining.
And I don't agree with that.
A husband should make an effort to appreciate his wife.
A wife should make an effort to appreciate her husband.
But neither should have to live with the threat that unless they remain constantly exciting, their spouse is entitled to find someone else.
That's not a reasonable standard for marriage.
Edith Understood Something About Marriage That Archie Didn't
I keep coming back to Edith Bunker.
Because I think her response to Gloria's crisis is one of the strongest moral moments in the story.
Edith doesn't need to excuse Gloria.
She doesn't need to deny Mike's pain.
And she doesn't need to pretend the marriage is healthy.
But she recognizes that a family crisis requires more than anger.
Archie wants a verdict.
Someone is guilty.
Someone is innocent.
And everybody needs to know where he stands.
Edith is more interested in understanding what's happened and whether the relationship can be repaired.
I think that's wisdom.
Not because moral judgment is always inappropriate.
Sometimes people need to be told that their behavior is wrong.
But there's a difference between condemning an action and deciding that a person is beyond understanding.
There's a teaching in Pirkei Avot 2:4 that cautions us against judging another person until we've stood in that person's place.
I don't interpret that as permission to excuse everything.
It doesn't mean Gloria's affair was acceptable because she was lonely.
And it doesn't mean Jackie's secrecy was harmless because Fred was predictable.
But it does remind me to consider circumstances before reducing a person to a label.
Someone can behave wrongly while experiencing genuine pain.
And we can acknowledge both.
There's also the teaching in Pirkei Avot 4:1 about the strength involved in mastering our impulses.
That seems particularly relevant here.
Because being tempted isn't the same as being compelled.
People encounter attractions they didn't plan for.
They experience dissatisfaction.
And sometimes they enjoy attention that they know may lead somewhere inappropriate.
But maturity involves recognizing those feelings and deciding what to do with them.
Understanding temptation should make us more thoughtful about people's struggles—not less serious about the choices they make.
And I think that's the balance both sitcoms invite us to consider.
What I'd Want Gloria, Jackie, Mike, and Fred to Understand
If I could sit these four characters down for a conversation, I wouldn't begin by asking who was the villain.
I'd ask what each person believed a marriage was supposed to provide.
Gloria wanted attention and companionship.
Mike wanted to pursue his career and apparently didn't recognize how disconnected his wife felt.
Jackie wanted excitement, romance, and spontaneity.
Fred wanted stability, predictability, and a relationship in which he could trust his wife to speak honestly about problems.
None of those desires is automatically unreasonable.
But they aren't automatically compatible, either.
A marriage requires two people to consider each other's needs rather than assuming that their own preferences should determine everything.
Mike needed to recognize that professional success didn't eliminate his obligations at home.
Gloria needed to address her loneliness without becoming involved with another man.
Fred needed to understand that a comfortable routine for him might feel emotionally empty to Jackie.
And Jackie needed to understand that her dissatisfaction wasn't something Fred should be expected to discover through another man's attention.
I'd also tell them something else.
Not every marital problem can be solved.
Sometimes people discover that they've changed.
Sometimes their priorities no longer align.
And sometimes even genuine affection isn't enough to make a relationship sustainable.
But if that's the case, they still owe each other honesty.
Especially when children are involved.
Joey and Andy shouldn't have to carry the emotional consequences of adults refusing to address their problems responsibly.
They deserve stability, love, and parents who don't turn marital disappointment into a burden for their children.
A marriage may not always survive. But the obligation to treat one another decently doesn't disappear simply because the relationship is struggling.
That's what I'd want all four adults to remember.
This Is Why the Melissa Peterman Comparison Belongs in a Different Article
There's a related but different question in the two television roles Melissa Peterman played.
As Barbra Jean on Reba, she portrayed a woman whose affair with a married man resulted in pregnancy and remarriage.
As Brenda Sparks on Young Sheldon, she portrayed a woman who developed an emotional connection with married George Cooper, but whose relationship stopped short of a physical affair.
I explored that contrast in Melissa Peterman Played the Other Woman Twice, including why audiences can enjoy morally flawed characters without excusing their behavior.Those characters raise questions about the responsibility of the outsider, the married person's obligations, and why television can make morally flawed people so likable.
But Gloria and Jackie reveal another side of the problem.
They're not the outsiders.
They're the women inside marriages who have begun seeking something elsewhere.
And I think that distinction deserves its own examination.
Because it's one thing to criticize someone for becoming involved with a married person.
It's another to ask what happens when the person making the marital commitment begins feeling disconnected, tempted, or dissatisfied.
The two questions are related.
But they aren't identical.
And I think treating them separately gives each the attention it deserves.
My Verdict: Feeling Lonely Isn't Wrong. What You Do About It Matters.
I feel sorry for Gloria.
I really do.
I can imagine how painful it would be to move across the country, raise a young child, and discover that your husband had become so absorbed in his career that you felt like an afterthought.
I wouldn't enjoy that marriage.
And I certainly wouldn't want someone telling me that I should be grateful simply because my husband was working hard.
But I still don't approve of Gloria's decision to become involved with another man.
She deserved companionship.
She deserved to be heard.
And she deserved an opportunity to address the problems in her marriage.
But Mike deserved honesty.
And Joey deserved parents who tried to resolve their difficulties without adding unnecessary betrayal.
I feel sorry for Jackie, too.
She'd experienced enough disappointing relationships to make Fred's dependability seem attractive.
Then she discovered that stability wasn't necessarily the same thing as compatibility.
She wanted affection.
Romance.
And the feeling that her husband still enjoyed being with her.
I understand that.
But she needed to talk to Fred.
Not begin going out with Pete while pretending there was nothing to discuss.
Still, I give Jackie credit for something important.
She recognized the emotional boundary before the situation became physical.
And she stopped.
That doesn't erase the secrecy.
Nor does it mean Fred had no reason to be hurt.
But recognizing a mistake before making an even bigger one deserves acknowledgment.
What I appreciate about both shows is that neither story requires us to pretend marriage is easy.
People become tired.
They become distracted.
They feel neglected.
And sometimes they discover that the person they married isn't providing what they once hoped the relationship would give them.
Those feelings are real.
They deserve attention.
But they don't eliminate personal responsibility.
At fifty-one, I believe people owe one another more than the bare minimum of fidelity.
They owe one another consideration.
Honesty.
And a willingness to talk about problems before those problems become impossible to ignore.
I also believe that no one should have to spend an entire marriage begging to be noticed.
But the answer to feeling neglected shouldn't be to create another relationship in secret.
If the marriage can be repaired, both people need to make an effort.
If it cannot, they need to face that reality honestly.
And if someone attractive comes along while everything is unresolved, perhaps the wisest decision is to establish boundaries before a temporary feeling becomes a permanent source of regret.
You can be lonely in a marriage without being entitled to betray it. And you can be the betrayed spouse without being innocent of every problem that existed before the betrayal.
That's the difficult truth I take from Gloria and Jackie.
They weren't terrible women who suddenly decided to destroy their marriages for entertainment.
They were unhappy women who made choices worth examining.
And their husbands weren't simply innocent victims of unreasonable expectations.
Mike had his own shortcomings.
Fred had his own limitations.
But none of those shortcomings made honesty optional.
Perhaps that's the lesson these two sitcoms understood better than many romantic dramas.
Sometimes a marriage doesn't begin falling apart when someone kisses another person.
Sometimes it begins much earlier, when two people stop listening, stop talking honestly, and stop recognizing that the person beside them has needs of their own.
And by the time somebody else makes one of them feel wanted, the marriage may already be in trouble.
That doesn't make infidelity inevitable.
It makes communication urgent.
Because the time to tell your spouse you're lonely isn't after you've found somebody else who makes you feel loved.
It's before.
And I think both Gloria and Jackie learned just how costly that delay could become.
Sources and Further Reading
TV Guide — All in the Family, Season 9: "California, Here We Are"
TV Guide — All in the Family, Season 6: "Gloria Suspects Mike"
TV Guide — Roseanne, Season 7: "Lost Youth" and "Single Married Female"
Want to Watch the Show?
Find your favorite classic TV shows on DVD or Blu-ray at Amazon.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Enjoyed This Article?
Get more TV nostalgia, good laughs, and life lessons delivered to your inbox. Subscribe to CouchDegree.com!
