This whole Courtney Cox and David Arquette break-up has become a very divisive issue around my various groups of friends (seven weeks in LA, and I’m proud to boast not one but three unique sets of people whose houses I know how to get to and park at).

For those not tapped-in to the celeb gossip ring, David and Courtney were having issues in their marriage caused in large part (according to David) by Courtney’s sexual dry spell, which was caused in large part (according to Courtney), by David’s immaturity. I’m butchering the real story here, but that’s fine for the purposes of this conversation.

So to help resolve the issue, Courtney told David he could have a freebie – or something like that. A “freebie” – I now know – is the official term for letting your significant other sleep with another person, once. This is not to be confused with an “open relationship” in which you let you significant other sleep with another person, always. These terms will become important.

So Court gives David a one-girl pass. David finds one girl (whoooo looks exactly like Courtney). They have sex one or more times (I think the story goes that David can’t remember if it was once or twice, which is like yeeahh, I bet… You don’t remember if it was 20 or 21 times but you remember if it was just one time or another time after that just one time. Whatever.)

Which brings us – finally – to today’s discussion: can a freebie save a relationship?

Let’s forget about the back story in this specific situation, and the back story in any specific situation. Can slash does the tactic of allowing a partner to sleep with another person if slash when there is sexual frustration or disconnect in a relationship help that couple’s own sexual and emotional relationship?

I have zero experience in this realm, thank god, as do the various friends in my various groups, so we took the theoretical approach. Here are those different theories:

1. The freebie appeases the frustrated member of the relationship while the sexually dormant member works through their issue. It’s a, “sorry, but here’s something to bide your time” arrangement. You love someone, you want them to be happy, so if you can’t give them that happiness personally, you give it to them tangentially. They’re happy, you’re less guilty – problem solved. Thoughts on this include:

• How can you be sure one freebie is going to be enough? What if the dormancy continues indefinitely? Does the partner get another freebie? And then how does that work? For every 6 months without sex one freebie is earned? And, does the problem partner have to offer the freebie for it to be fair? Or can the frustrated member request the freebie making a case for the fact that all it will take is one for them to be happy in the relationship? Seems like a very slippery slope …

2. The freebie appeases the frustrated member of the relationship while igniting a fierce jealousy in the sexually dormant party resulting in what I guess you’d term “jealousy sex.” John suggested this theory, and Avia and I both agreed that a jealous girl can be inspired to do just about anything. So this might further excite the originally frustrated party bringing their relationship – both sexual and emotional – to a heightened state and solving the issue. Thoughts here are:

• If raging jealousy is the only way to restore passion to a relationship, isn’t there a bigger issue there? When does that jealousy go away? What if the thought of the freebie becomes something the jealous party can’t get over? Or, what if the intention is for the jealousy to restore the passion but the jealousy doesn’t happen? What if the person realizes they really can live with their guy/girl being with another girl/guy? Would that just put the nail in the coffin? “Unless you’re both incredibly strong people,” Avia said, and everyone nodded with a hint of I-could-never-handle-that, in it.

3. The freebie is an agreement reached after so much fighting that both parties are beyond caring what happens at that point so long as there’s a cease fire in the arguing. I don’t really have additional thoughts around this other than, you’re both screwed.

“But how is it any different than an open relationship?” someone appropriately asked.

The way I see it – an open relationship is a state of being. You decide as a couple that both of your sexual needs require that you sleep with more than just each other. You then set ground rules permitting both people to sleep with other people at any time (or however the rules read). It’s not a “gift” of extra sex or a tactic to help one party get back to wanting sex, it’s a permanent state of openness about sexual partners making it incredible different than the “freebie fix.”

I’m going to come out and say that I don’t believe one freebie can save most relationships. The idea of it just doesn’t make enough logical sense to seem like something I’d try given all the potential trouble it could cause. To each their own, of course, but given the scenarios, I don’t think I’d agree to it.

But, if for some reason I did, I’d make damn sure I included a clause preventing my partner from doing any radio appearances before, during, or directly after the event…