From: oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil)
Subject: Re: Polyamory again (was Re: last night...)
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 12:08:32 GMT

tuff@ellis.uchicago.edu (Geoff Tuffli) writes:

>In article noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) writes:
>>
>>Our relationship has gotten closer because of it since ours is not built on
>>some stupid idea of possession and exclusive ownership, but one on giving.
>>I can't be all things to her, and she can't be all things to me.  I choose to
>>love her unconditionally - that is the best form of love, imho.  I will never
>>put the requirement of monogamy on my romantic partners - trying to restrict
>>another person on the matters of love is *not true love*.  It can never deep
>>down lead to any kind of trust - it is an inherently untrustworthy act to
>>demand monogamy - do you want to build a close relationship on such a
>>foundation? 

>	Monogamy is not, I feel, a matter of possessing your partner, nor
>is is a matter of trust even, as you correctly, I think, pointed out, trust
>should not require that you be looking over one's partner's shoulder --
>such is hardly what can be construed as trust.
 
Indeed.  To me, monogamy requires trust.  If there is no trust, there is
no relationship since the suspicion will tear away at the foundation of the
love.

>	To me, at least, I prefer monogamy, demand it in any long-term
>relationship I might undertake or have undertaken, simply because it is a
>matter of rapport, or, to put it another way, complete and utter focus
>in that aspect of one's life. One can certainly love any number of people;
>as it has been stated, the more people you love, the more you CAN love,
>but rapport or focus is by definition a thing that can be done with only
>one person at a time. This is not love, per se, though it generally requires
>love; it is not "becoming" the other person, it is matching the other
>person.

It is for this reason that I also prefer monogamy in a *long term* 
relationship.  (I do enjoy dating a number of people when I am not 
involved in a long term relationship.)  When I am in a long term 
relationship, I think I would find it very difficult to change my focus
from one person to another.  Perhaps it would be easy for another person.
But it would not be for me.  

>	People need and want and desire different things in my experience
>(think Myer-Briggs as a good example of this, for those who know of it),
>and what I described above is what *I* want and desire. For others, it is
>irrelevant, and love alone is perfectly satsfactory. For some, even that is
>not desired on any deep level. Matter of taste, matter of personality. The
>upshoot is, tho' polyamory is perfectly fine, moral, what-have-you, I feel
>it is unfair to label monogomy in the terms you have.

Polyamory is fine, if a person is mature enough to handle it.  If you
can't deal honestly with the feelings of those with whom you are involved,
you don't have any business indulging in it.  When you're dealing with
being involved with more than one person, feelings can get very complicated
indeed and I think it's a lot easier for someone to get very hurt.  Folks,
do what you want, but make sure that you treat your partners with dignity
and respect.

Sharon
oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu

--
Sharon L. O'Neil
oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu