Re: [UUPoly-L] Open Marriage--Polyamory

["Earthfather" <Earthfather@cfnc.us>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kelly Cookson
> 
> Divorce surged to its 50 percent rate from the 1960s to the 1980s. Many
> sociologists attribute this surge in divorce to the impact of increasing
> individualism on views about marriage. 

It can also be attributed to the growing economic independence of women, and
the awareness that came with the women's movement that the facades of the
50's and earlier were not real, and that they didn't have to put up with the
humiliation, the degradation, the abuse, the status of being an appendage to
a man, and second (or third) class status as a citizen and human being.

> People today typically view marital
> relationships as a vehicle to get personal satisfaction, to experience
> personal growth, and to have personal needs met. They are quick to blame
> "being with the wrong partner" when problem periods occur, and they are
> quick to divorce if they feel their marriages are not providing the
> satisfaction and growth they expect.

This may be true for some; I don't know that it is a description of many,
and certainly not all.  Most of the divorces I have seen involve people that
should have never married each other (or maybe anyone) at all.  

> This puts enormous pressure on marital
> relationships. Add to that pressure the fact we don't really train couples
> how to make marriages work. Our social scientists have learned a lot about
> things like bonding, attachment, conflict management, and jealousy, but we
> don't use this information to develop programs to educate people in
> relationship skills. It's no wonder we have such high divorce rates when
> we have such high expectations and such weak skills to follow through on
> those expectations.

Which might argue from discouraging people from marrying in the first place.



>  If you are
> politcally liberal, and feel the individualistic philosophy that became
> dominant from the 1960s to the 1980s brought with it some freedoms you'd
> like to keep, then the 50 percent divorce rate argues for improving
> relationship skills and searching for new ways to help people stay
> together.
> Read "Marriage, A History" by Stephanie Coontz to learn about this
> perspective. Both of these books give an account of the rise in
> individualism in the last part of the 20th century.

What's missing from these perspectives is the glorification of longevity for
its own sake.  I don't have any interest in "keeping my relationship
together."  I have an interest in making each of my relationships as deep,
loving, caring, energizing, and growthful as possible, one day at a time.
And if the loving thing to do is to encourage my partner to try out
something that precludes our continuing our connection on the same daily
basis, I want to be able to do that with a full heart.

I think that many people would benefit from seeing their relationships as
something to be made extraordinary *today*, rather than a maze to be run,
looking for longevity.  

I'm not saying that I *don't* want to have a long-term relationship; I'm
only saying that the longevity is not a factor in my decisions about my
connections.  All too often, I hear that the benefit of a long-term
relationship is that it is "comfortable".  If that is someone's value, I
have no problem endorsing their choices.  But it is not a primary value for
me, or for those with whom I am most deeply connected.

Michael Rios

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/882 - Release Date: 6/30/2007
3:10 PM