From: ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T. Murphy)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Exclusive relationships (Re: Morality)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 09:50:27 EST
Organization: Ailanthus Project

cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
> 
> The only problem with this is that, when you work from such a premise,
> you must realize that you are starting in the hole with most people.
> This culture prizes monogamy, at least in theory.  I've seen people
> talk about how Monogamy Is Not Workable, and how they get involved in
> other relationships with people who Feel The Exact Same Way, and then
> somehow the old demon jealousy creeps in despite both people calling
> themselves Open-Minded Liberal Modern Lovers.  When you go into a
> relationship with this in mind, I think you MUST:
> 
> 1) be as entirely honest with the person as you can.  (I'm not aiming
> this at you, radzy.)  People who agree with you may simply be doing so
> to prove to themselves how liberated they are, but when the chips are
> down will go back to their old habits.
> 
> 2) be selective.  Many people again will not understand the implications
> of this system in a relationship 
> simply because there are nearly no role models,
> and if you think that someone is not
> mature enough or doesn't full appreciate the consequences of
> non-exclusivity, it is your responsibility to bow out.  (Think of it
> this way -- if you saw someone walking in front of a truck, wouldn't you
> warn them?)
> 
> 3) be honest with yourself.  I've also encountered in my journeys more
> than a few young guys who get married, and three years later they're
> suddenly talking about How Monogamy Is Not Workable In Modern Times.
> They, however, fail to mention this fact to their wives and keep right
> on having affairs IN SECRET.  If this is the way you feel, admit it to
> yourself.  Only by being totally honest and acknowledging what you feel
> will you be happy with yourself and keep from hurting other people.  
> 
these are pretty good rules.  a complete list of nonmonogamy rules gets 
posted on sappho and soc.motss every once in a while.  those three are 
among them.  also, if you are going to be non-monogamous, what does it 
mean?  you can't define a relationship by a negative.  for me, 
non-monogamy means potential polygamy.  i hate cheap sex, and only haved 
bad experiences with it, therefore i prefer to have some form of 
committed relationship with someone before it reaches the sexual level. 
for some people, sex outside of the primary relationship MUST be cheap, 
by the rules of teh committment.

> I haven't met many women (two at last count) who feel this way.  Women
> still have a hard time being independent without having a man attached
> to them, and since the only alternative to monogamy that most people are
> familiar with is polygyny, women aren't fond of leaving the prescribed
> track, on the whole.  The only familiar alternative to monogamy in many
> women's minds is even worse for them. 
> 
this is in error, but janis couldn't know, because radical non-monogamy 
and such are things of the lesbian community.  for a while, monogamy was 
a patriarchal tool and destinctly uncool.  i myself am a polygamist by 
philosophy, as i think having to break up with someone just because you 
have fallen for someone else is damned silly.  and wasteful.  i believe 
in adding ties, not subtracting them.  (unless one person is abusive or 
somethign, that is...)

> I should say here that my own opinion is that the best thing nowdays is
> probably the old group-marriage idea.  There's enough variety to satiate
> most people (if not, blaze a new trail), and the people involved can get
> to know one another well.  It also gives a nice, stable emotional cast
> for any kids growing up.  For myself, though, I'd prefer monogamy now.
> I greew up in a culture that encourages it, and I also grew up with a
> very successful example of it -- my parents were deliriously happy with
> each other; I generally hit the parent lottery jackpot.  Also, it's
> taken me 25 years to find ONE guy I enjoy being with.  So far, I just
> don't WANT anyone else in the slightest.
> 
yup, that's the one i like too.  requires a big house though.  especially 
since to be really workable, every adult needs their own bedroom.  and 
any adult may potentially add another adult to the household.  funfunfun, 
eh?  i don't think that everyone has to be sexually active or interested 
in everyone else in the household, tho...  be impossible for the group to 
grow, and leave people frustrated as the person they are newly attracxted 
to may not be OKed by the rest of teh family, or interested in the whole 
rest of the family.  especially important if this group includes bis and 
lesbians and gay men...  B)

> Oh, well.  One person's opinions.  
> 
make that two...

> Blessings,
> Janis
>  
> 
                                      -ailsa

ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com   or   io81409@maine.maine.edu
 
are you on fire         what will replace the rent with the stars above,
from the years,         replace the need with love,
what will you give      replace the anger with the tide,
for your kid fears?     replace the ones, the ones, the ones that you love?