turquoiseb: > Since I'm having fun rapping about this subject, and > because I suspect it'll push a few buttons here ( and > you know how I love that :-), > So, it's all about sex, Uncle Tantra. LoL!
> I'll continue to use up > my posts for this week early before heading into > Amsterdam for the day. > > In retrospect my made-up word "monogamaphobes" was > ill-considered, and probably should have been something > like "polyamoraphobes." I *have* met a few monogamaphobes > among my extended family's polyamorous friends -- those > who look down on monogamy as much as monogamists look > down on polyamory -- but I have very little tolerance > for them, as do my housemates. We're more of the > "different strokes for different folks" and "live and > let live" persuasion. > > Why this whole polyamory thing appeals to me is the some- > what remarkable degrees of *honesty* I've found in some > people who practice it. That and the lack of one of the > afflictive emotions, jealousy. They tend to believe that > requiring a romantic partner to "love only them" makes > as little sense as feeling that one cannot love one's > parents or friends if one has a wife or husband. (Or, > obviously, that one cannot love one's primary spiritual > teacher if one visits others.) That's just "love as > property" thinking. Icky. Low vibe. > > Most of the sad history of planet Earth has been the > result of people raised by nuclear monogamous families. > That doesn't seem to me to be a great commercial for > the concept. :-) >
