Newsgroup: it.comp.console.playstation
Titolo: qs-Marital Variations

Greetings,
Interesting discussion guys.  I find it interesting that topics involving 
the LDS church and it's effect on politics seem to always revolve around the 
issue of same-sex marriage.  There have been many news stories lately 
regarding the issue of polygamy in Utah.  It would seem to me that any 
modification in society's view of what constitutes a marriage, would have to 
impact both plural partner relationships as well as gender harmonious 
relationships.  I just don't see how it would be possible to grant validity 
to one, while denying the other.
Actually, I have pondered the idea of combining both marital variations:  A 
union of two men -- either one bi and one gay, or both bi -- and one woman.  
From a purely economic standpoint, this arrangement would make sense, as it 
would allow for a two-income family, while still allowing for a full-time 
stay-at-home-mom, if that were her choice.  The challenge, of course, would 
be in finding a woman who would go along with it.  In my experience, most 
women would be jealous of their man having any sexual relationship with 
another person -- even if it was another man, and even if the woman was 
having a sexual relationship with multiple partners too.
Still, allowing for such an arrangement through legal sanction, would 
undoubtedly result in it being tried -- as well as allowing for some rather 
intriguing storyline possibilities on "Friends"...
I'm almost certain that I'm the only one (here anyway...) who thinks about 
things like this.  Am I wrong again?
happy jack
_______________________________________________________________
Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit 
http://www.msn.com
--
Posted from [209.63.65.166] by way of 
majo...@vector.casti.com
 [199.181.80.100]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - 
http://www.mailgate.org

 be in finding a woman who would go along with it.
    That's not necessarily a problem.  A year or so ago I attended a meeting in
which the speakers were a bisexual man, and gay man, and a straight woman.  The
three lived as a family.  They had two small children.  The idea of non
monogamous relationships is really pretty old. While it isn't very conventional
in a middle-class, American society, it does happen and it appears to work just
fine for the cohabitants.  These folks had been together for quite a while.  I
don't remember how long, but it seemed to me they had been together between 5
and 10 years.
    jay stevens
--
Posted from 
majo...@vector.casti.com
 [199.181.80.100]


 Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit 
http://www.msn.com


 Hayward, CA


In a message dated 6/22/99 12:52:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
hap...@hotmail.com
 writes:
<< Greetings,
 
 Interesting discussion guys.  I find it interesting that topics involving 
 the LDS church and it's effect on politics seem to always revolve around the 
 issue of same-sex marriage.  There have been many news stories lately 
 regarding the issue of polygamy in Utah.  It would seem to me that any 
 modification in society's view of what constitutes a marriage, would have to 
 impact both plural partner relationships as well as gender harmonious 
 relationships.  I just don't see how it would be possible to grant validity 
 to one, while denying the other.
 
 Actually, I have pondered the idea of combining both marital variations:  A 
 union of two men -- either one bi and one gay, or both bi -- and one woman.  
 From a purely economic standpoint, this arrangement would make sense, as it 
 would allow for a two-income family, while still allowing for a full-time 
 stay-at-home-mom, if that were her choice.  The challenge, of course, would 
 be in finding a woman who would go along with it.  In my experience, most 
 women would be jealous of their man having any sexual relationship with 
 another person -- even if it was another man, and even if the woman was 
 having a sexual relationship with multiple partners too.
 
 Still, allowing for such an arrangement through legal sanction, would 
 undoubtedly result in it being tried -- as well as allowing for some rather 
 intriguing storyline possibilities on "Friends"...
 
 I'm almost certain that I'm the only one (here anyway...) who thinks about 
 things like this.  Am I wrong again?
 
 happy jack >>
Happy is wrong.
Back in the early 1980s, I fell hard for a Bi Guy in Affirmation who had a 
live in girlfriend who later became his wife.  Affirmation friends attended 
his wedding.  He and his wife were both Affirmation local leaders.  We three 
lived in the same town and we socialized regularly.  I thought often about, 
and spoke in Affirmation meetings (without naming names) about the 
possibility that 2 men could be in a serious life long relationship that 
included a 3rd, a woman, who would be the mother of their (all 3) children.  
That would mean of course that the 2 men were in love with each other, and 
each with the woman, and that the woman was in love with each man.
As the years went by and as I grew more comfortable with being a gay Mormon 
guy, I came to realize that my fantasy about that kind of 3-way life was 
based in the hope that I was "just Bi" and not fully gay.  Some people go 
through a period of saying they are Bi and not Gay as they fully accept that 
they are truly Gay.  As I came to accept fully that I was 100% gay then the 
idea that I could comfortably live with both a man and a woman grew less 
appealing and desirable.  It took some time to work through the 
indoctrination that I had from the church and society at large, that I had to 
be involved with a woman and have a "family."
Two truly Bi men and a unique woman could pull it off, but it isn't for me.


 Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit 
http://www.msn.com
--


Not quite.  My wife has been infavor of polyandry (?) in theory for
sometime.
I wouldn't have any problem with Design for Living, as long as I got to
sleep next to my man every night.  Who knows, I might find-out I'm not the
six I think I am.
