Comments on: Ask Richard: Considering an Ultimatum to Her Intolerant Family

By: philbob

philbob — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:48:17 +0000

I’ve known people in these relationships and I think it is as hard to generalize about them as it is about anyone else. Here’s my two cents: For most of human history we have worked out social relations that preserve peace in a culture at a particular point in time. Practices like monogamy were preserved because they worked. But in some parts of the world serial marriage, polygamy or tolerance of affairs was the norm.
These cultural practices change over time in response to new technology and new patterns of living. Until 1850 slavery was pretty much okay anywhere in the world, to cite one example. As humans began to exploit oil, they no longer had to exploit other humans to accomplish work.
We’re probably now undergoing a huge change in sex and marriage. Marriages no longer have to stay together out of economic necessity, because the thousands-of-years-old power imbalance between men and women is ending. People live longer, and they don’t live all of their years in economic desperation as in earlier generations. They want to be themselves. The notion that our descendants, living to be 100+ will all want to have 80-year monogamous marriages, seems to me to be a debatable. Even today, 50 percent of marriages don’t last. For all I know, in a society where women have sexual and economic “freedom” polyamory and fluid marriages may ultimately be more socially stable.
Which is all a way of saying, it’s complicated. Julietecho should not make hasty ultimata. There does come a point in life where you might have to say “I don’t care if my mother (or brother) ever calls me again.” But you don’t have to be the one who cuts off the relationship. Continue to keep your heart open. Anger is like sticking a knife in yourself and hoping the other person feels it.

By: JulietEcho

JulietEcho — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:44:55 +0000

Thanks, selfification. I really like your analogy about oncologists. I’ll have to use that one sometime, as it makes a nice, concise response to the people who somehow think that something difficult should be discriminated against simply because it’s difficult.

By: selfification

selfification — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 03:40:01 +0000

JulietEcho: Don’t argue with her. She just defended the sanctity of traditional marriage hiding under the veil of a liberal. I’m sorry… the rules of marriage are not some immutable moral code that no one can violate. The concept of marriage is a religious one and hence carries the same irrational belief systems at its base regardless of how useful it may be as a social structure.

For the naysayers:
A redefinition of marriage to include only the commitment factors and remove any of the other prejudices from it would open it up to polyamorous relationships (and in fact, to any arbitrary undirected social graph — undirected being crucial here). This would of course complicate legal issues like tax laws, but that is a whole other discussion (and one that was had in the previous thread).

And as for the other comment about “polyamoury being a choice” — really? Do you “choose” who you fall in love with (hint: the answer is always ‘it depends on the context of choose’). Poly people choose to have multiple partners in exactly the same way that non-vegetarians choose to like meat. Surely they could refrain from eating meat. Surely they should be considerate about their deviant behaviour when the larger community around them considers them sinners for it (actually true in India). Surely breaking the norm here should deserve ostracism and intolerance (for the sarcasm impaired, the last three lines were… yeah). And the old and tired arguments of “It doesn’t work out for most people. Hence it can never work” is just as stupid as “Most people don’t have the mental faculties, discipline or drive to be oncologists. Hence, it is impossible to be an oncologist.”.

So really — quit with the judgmental posts and actually help her work out this disagreement with her parents. I for one support her in her journey towards that end.

By: JulietEcho

JulietEcho — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:21:20 +0000

Atheists aren’t a big group that identify together based on anything besides the fact that none of them believe in any gods. Period. Plenty of them do form groups and identify through those groups, which have different goals (and often involve fighting for separation of church/state and supporting science).

The reason that I came to Richard, an atheist advice columnist, for advice about this is because I know he doesn’t harbor any religious prejudices against what you call “deviant behavior” that harms no one and is simply mostly hidden.

The whole reason that polyamory is considered so “deviant” is because the hundreds of thousands of poly families in the US hide in the closet for fear of losing their jobs, their kids, their reputations, etc. People like you, who have no concrete objections to us other than that you find us offensive and imply that we don’t have “good judgment” are the people we are afraid will discriminate against us.

Plenty of people are horrified by the public acceptance of homosexuality and call that “deviant.” Should homosexuals keep their love for their partners private in order to make sure no one is offended? Absolutely not. They’ve been brave, and instead we’ve seen increased tolerance and acceptance to the point where they’re getting marriage rights.

Why am I married to one of my partners? Because I met him first, we fell in love, and we wanted the benefits and social acceptance that marriage brings in this country. We’re not going to get divorced simply because we’ve added another partner that we both love. Why would we? If, someday, it’s possible for all three of us to be legally bound in marriage or something similar, we’ll do that.

You don’t have to accept us “with a smile.” You just have to realize that your personal disgust or offense is only valid for you – it’s not a remotely sufficient arguments against polyamory – and that you might one day have to get used to seeing more and more poly families go public and eventually gain acceptance as healthy, loving family units.

By: Ninive

Ninive — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:55:34 +0000

Juliet, my daughter would not engage in such arrangement. She has good judgement. You need to understand how awful this is to your parents. Very few people, even the most open minded I know, would accept this with a smile. Furthermore, let’s not think that atheists approve of more deviant behavior.

By: Ninive

Ninive — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 04:48:39 +0000

Hey Neon, people have to be responsible for their actions and respect that others may feel uncomfortable with their choices. Why be married? Just date 2 men, period. And no, I don’t care what people do in their private lives, but don’t impose it on me nor force me to accept it.

By: JulietEcho

JulietEcho — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:22:54 +0000

Ninive, I’m quite glad you’re not my mother then. She may be a consevative Christian, but at least she doesn’t seem to have the fixation with sex that you do. We don’t engage in group sex, and even if we did, we’d hardly share that with our families. We’re not inviting anyone into our bedrooms!

I have hope that my mom will come to accept my boyfriend just as she does my husband, because we love him, he’s family, and he’s a great guy – not because we want some weird endorsement of out private sex lives. My boyfriend’s and husband’s families love and accept all three of us without any problems, and it’s because they’re adults who focus on what’s actually being shared (love and family) and not on sex details.

By: Neon Genesis

Neon Genesis — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:53:44 +0000

Let’s try something

Sorry Juliet. I am open mostly liberal and an activist atheist, but I could not accept your lifestyle. I have seen couples who engage in gay sex or whatever name you want to call it, and someone always gets hurt at the end. If you were my daugter, I would continue having a relationship with you because I loved you, but I would refuse to socialize with you and your lesbian partner. There are limits to everything Juliet, and this would not be ok with me. I think you are asking too much of your family, and trying to force something quite shocking for most people down their throats. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You need to make an option. If I were you, I would stop trying to “work” them. I know that would never succeed with me. Yes, I can accept my daughter being a white woman and married to a black man. Being “married” to someone of the same sex? Why get married? This kind of arrangement really undermines the concept of marriage, which is commitment to ONE WOMAN AND ONE MAN

Lay off your folks. This situation is shocking even for liberals like me.

Ooh, “liberals like me!” because liberal magically means open minded and non-judgmental expect for stuff that you can conveniently be judgmental and bigoted towards and don’t try to understand when you feel like it.

By: Ninive

Ninive — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 15:43:42 +0000

Sorry Juliet. I am open mostly liberal and an activist atheist, but I could not accept your lifestyle. I have seen couples who engage in group sex, polymory or whatever name you want to call it, and someone always gets hurt at the end. If you were my daugter, I would continue having a relationship with you because I loved you, but I would refuse to socialize with you and the 2 men. There are limits to everything Juliet, and this would not be ok with me. I think you are asking too much of your family, and trying to force something quite shocking for most people down their throats. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You need to make an option. If I were you, I would stop trying to “work” them. I know that would never succeed with me. Yes, I can accept my daughter being a lesbian and married to a woman. Being “married” to two men? No. By the way, why even bother being married to the first guy? Why get married and just not have two lovers? This kind of arrangement really undermines the concept of marriage, which is commitment to ONE person.

Lay off your folks. This situation is shocking even for liberals like me.

By: JulietEcho

JulietEcho — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:53:51 +0000

Ninive, this isn’t about exposing our sex lives to our families – it’s about gaing the inclusion of a loved one. Sure, people can guess that there’s sex involved in the relationship, but we would never talk about it to our families! People are often grossed out by gay and lesbian couples because their own minds jump to imaging the sex involved – but letting such gut reactions define the way you feel about the relationship is immature and does a disservice to the people involved – who love one another in many ways that have nothing to do with their private sex lives.

Sharing details of your sex life with your family is inappropiate. Sharing your loved ones and wanting them to be treated warmly by your family is normal and healthy, even is there’s more than one.