From: Cynthia Nolan
Subject: Re: love and freedom (was Re: poly-wired?)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:54:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug21.164255.11596@Princeton.EDU> macarthr@dae.Princeton.EDU
(Karen M. Macarthur) writes:
(in response to Joe W.)..
>Similarly, there are people who have a concept of what constitutes
>a "love relationship", which includes the intensity and depth
>of knowing only each other to the deepest degree of
>intimacy.  These people don't care who are your friends, but they
>feel that the intimacy (sexual and otherwise) of the "couple"
>relationship is something so special and unique that there can only
>be one such phenomenon at any given time.  (Okay, so I"m not
>explaining it very well because I don't subscribe to it; I still have
>a general idea of it).  ...
>I don't think monogamy vs. polyamory lies in a bunch of
>"rules" ("No sex with anyone else!") which some people need
>to re-examine; rather it's a very complicated issue involving
>what a given person believes constitutes a relationship.
>"Committment" and "fidelity" are very important concepts, which
>even us polyamorous types have our own versions of.

Karen, 

This makes perfect sense to me.  I really appreciate the way you seem to
understand that not all people SHOULD feel the same or have the same view of
relationships or even for that matter reality.  You're correct when you say
that even poly people have their own versions of commitment or fidelity (to use
that mono-loaded term!) and SO VERY CORRECT, in my view at least, in what you
seem to be implying about the OK-ness of either monogamy or polyamory, as long
as THAT'S WHAT THE PARTNERS WANT. 

One of the real dangers of living a piece of life outside the mainstream of
society is that one can become rather smug about the difference and almost
disdainful of those who do not share similar views. Then you get the whole
thing about the poly person who refuses to have mono friends, and the mono
person who refuses to speak to their poly neighbours, and then who ever really
gets a chance to connect with anyone!?  

I really like the way you seem to be saying "let people who view monogamy as a
vital component of intimacy go ahead and feel that way, don't assume they're
simply rule-driven, restricted, un-evolved individuals because they don't have
the same versions of commitment and fidelity that a poly does"  (and how do you
like the way I put words in your mouth! - sorry - I guess I'm paraphrasing to
make the point and if I didn't understand your general view, please correct me
on it)  

Sure, the big problem comes when there's one of each type in a relationship,
trying to make it work because they want to connect on more than just a
superficial level, and it seems to me that's where this thread started so I'd
better not go over it all again.  But I think you've defined the view of
monogamy very clearly, and have also presented it in the best possible way -
with understanding and insight and acceptance of the views of others as having
as much value for them as yours do for you (and consequently being just as
important as yours in the grand scheme of things)

Well!  does this make any sense at all?  Thank you all for the bandwidth, and
I'll be away for a week so will look forward to comments (if any) when I
return.

Love you all, 
C. 
 

Organization: Junior, Biology, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA