Recently I stumbled upon a fascinating little bit of writing that got me riled up about relationship anarchy. The piece I read is a summary of things that happened at a relationship anarchy conference. For years I have identified myself as polyamorous, and while that is still technically correct, it isn't the best possible descriptor of how I view relationships. Relationship anarchy is definitely a better box for me to be in. Polyamory, in the sense of multiple loves, is definitely true... but it also doesn't cover just how much I want to change the way people do relationships.
I don't buy into everything the document says. The writers have lots of views on economics that can be charitably viewed as highly optimistic, or realistically viewed as naive and absurd. However, their views on the way monogamy is intertwined with consumerism, colonialism, and religious oppression are right on the mark.
As the years have gone by my attitude towards monogamy has continually shifted. Initially I saw it as the only way to be, then as the most practical way to be, then as the easy default. Eventually I stopped doing monogamy and I saw it as not my style, then as a troublesome concern, then as a disaster. These days I largely see monogamy as simply wrong.
Don't misunderstand - I don't think anybody needs to love or have sex with lots of people. Any number of partners is fine, from zero to all. The problem is forcing someone else to have a specific number of partners. The older I get the more angry and intolerant I get of doing that to anyone.
I have said it before and I will probably say it again - if you told someone they were not allowed to have other friends, or other relatives, or other people that have any sort of relationship, you would be widely viewed as abusive, delusional, evil, or all three. The same would be true if a friend insisted that they had the right to dictate how many romantic/sexual partners you have. Certainly people would agree that such demands should be ignored. But society does the opposite for romantic/sexual relationships, for no good reason. We by default grant one person power that nobody should have, and imagine that it is not only acceptable, but even necessary or virtuous.
There are reasons monogamy is so popular. It is because the *&$@?* christian churches controlled Europe while Europe colonized and controlled most of the world. The church wanted to make sure that the only way people could relate romantically or sexually was with one man owning one woman in a structure *controlled by the church*, and its influence on powerful states covered the world in a wretched pall, removing freedom and flexibility in pursuit of misogynistic ownership of humans.
That isn't a good reason.
Pushing back against this is fraught with issues. There are all kinds of people I like who are monogamous, and I risk alienating them when I rant against their lifestyle choices.
But that worry is losing out to the worry that I might be wasting my opportunity to do the right thing. I might be placating the monster when I ought to be taking up arms against it. I have 45 years left in me, roughly speaking, and I don't want to get to the end of that and look back thinking that I didn't speak the truth.
I don't usually like the plans the anarchists come up with. I do like their principles though, and placidly plodding along, accepting the status quo as inevitable though not ideal does not fit with those principles.
There are people out there who are going to be smacking their foreheads, thinking "Geez, he is going to get even more confrontational and nonconformist?"
Yes. Yes I am.
No comments:
Post a Comment