More Loving
I believe that I received a solid college education. I came out the other end of a liberal arts curriculum without any readily applicable vocational skills, however I was challenged to deconstructed many of my personal beliefs and reconstructed them with a solid, reasoned understanding of them.
One the best classes I took was my sophomore honors forum. It was supposed to be about the social construct of gender. With only 5 students in the class, my former Haight and Ashbury hippy professor took us on a different route. She told us intimate stories of her "experimental" group marriage in the '70s, in where else but the city of San Francisco. For two years she was married to two other women and three men in a large Victorian mansion. Together, all six of them shared meals, sex, love, bills, laundry and house cleaning. It only lasted one year, they argued and cried for the other.
"People like to couple up" she said in deep awe of a long ago epiphany.
She does have a point because it is interesting and mystifying why people prefer monogamy. Throw in the theory evolution, and we're still puzzled. A strong argument can be made that people couple up and combine resources to best support their offspring. A couple can provide better then a single, and so we are "hard wired" to pair up and begin nesting. Still, another solid argument could be made that a group can provide more resources and nurturing. It is in the male of any spices interest to spread his seed far and wide to increase his offspring and his dominance.*
As a class we came to the compromise that monogamy is a learned behavior. A social construct that may be limiting to our times. A relic of an all to Christian era. At the time, if given the opportunity, I think I could have run off with a commune or entered a group a marriage. Why limit your potential for love and sex? A friend of mine from Boulder, CO had a gay or bisexual brother that had been living for the past five years in a threeway marriage (two guys and a girl) that made him exceptionally happy.
Today, as I know a little bit more about myself and my nesting tendencies, I could never enter into such arrangement. I would go insane. But that's just me. Perhaps it's my socialization, but I want a white picket fence and a two dad household. But too further piss of the religious right I'm sendng these links
The Ethical Slut
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1890159018/qid=1120903430/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/103-2647596-6371047?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
A fascinating read for anyone- but be warned that one of the authors is now proudly monogamous, and while still support polyandry, is not a pactioner
And a national magazine for those into polyandry
MORE LOVING www.lovemore.com
*While I am an artist, art historian, and educator, I do not claim any scientific expertise and I ask anyone who can to provide a good argument
posted by Jeff @ 2:31 AM
9 Comments:
I first heard about polyandry when I read a book called Learning From Ladakh. The idea fascinates me, but at this point I can't even deal with one dude let alone more than one.
I wonder if polyandy wasd part of the offical curriculm back at the fort. I had to read Learning from Ladakh for 2 classes.
Hmmm, dunno. I read it in high school...
wow, that cool. I read it in lower level anthro classes
Gee, maybe we should start out own commune.
umm, that's ok. While In college I visited one outside Gateway, Colo. The sanitary conditions of the facilities and the people left much to be desired. I would rather be a shut in with a 1000 cats in a studio apartment in Salt Lake City with a view of the tabernackle a commune. I bet my litter box of an apartmetn would smell better at least
we wouldn't have to be dirty.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
There's only room for one in my Dirty Ride sidecar
Post a Comment
<< Home