Subject:
|
Polyamory (was: Religion and Science)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 14 Dec 2000 16:29:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1156 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Low writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> This makes sense, but I'm not sure the grandparents/coparents analogy holds.
Well, I think the role of grandparents in that family model is certainly
different than the role of extra 'parents,' but I'm not sure that the
difference is important. At least not to my point, which is that more adults
is more of a buffer for child-rearing, conversation, finances, interest
sharing, sexuality, etc.
> Note: this is all off the top of my head, feel free to throw in some real
> data.
Nah, why do that. Actually, I don't have any other than annecdotes.
> Grandparents are an inevitability (if they're still around when the
> third generation is born), and are automatically bonded to their children
But not inevitably around. I never lived with any of my grandparents.
> Relationships within
> conventional families can get pretty tangled, and I think polyamorous(?)
> families, especially those with multiple sexual relationships, might have
> much more complex and complicating family loyalties.
Maybe, but the reports from those who've done it dont suggest so. It seems
more (from the successes at least) that everyone loves everyone and that the
family as a whole takes responsibility for the kids, with less consideration to
genetic relatedness. Even my son has four parents (in two houses) and reaps
benefits as a result.
> Also, I'm not sure if it's wrong for some/most people to be scared
> and possessive.
What do you mean by 'wrong'? It seems unhealthy, but I wouldnt call it immoral
or anything.
> I'm sure that polyamory is very threatening to many people
> who seek commitment and exclusivity in a relationship ("How absolute is your
> commitment to me when you're sleeping with Sean or Sharon?"), and I'm not
> sure that such monogamous desires are necessarily neurotic.
I guess I'm not willing to say that I'm sure of that, but I think it's so. I
think that people seek exclusivity because they think it's the only way to get
commitment. But it isn't.
> (tangent: would widespread polyamory facilitate gays and lesbians
> having children?)
I suppose it would. OTOH, the homosexuals who want kids, arrange to produce
them now, so I'm not sure that would be a clear benefit.
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Religion and Science
|
| (...) This makes sense, but I'm not sure the grandparents/coparents analogy holds. Note: this is all off the top of my head, feel free to throw in some real data. Grandparents are an inevitability (if they're still around when the third generation (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
198 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
