Monday, March 13, 2006
This Poly Thing, So What's It Do For Me?
Is there a perfect state of polyamory? Yes, I would think there is, probably among a group of like-minded people. My perfect scenario would be a handful of compatible people, along the lines of six men and maybe three women. For some reason, I like the group to be topheavy in the male department. Maybe because I visualize the men getting along better, therefore we'll add a few more of them. Women do not get along so well, in my experience, so I tend to want fewer of them. But the other two in the group besides me will be really "cherce," as Spencer Tracy remarked once about Katie Hepburn.
Of more importance though I feel is having a common group goal, or interest going on, that everyone in the group pursues, in some form or another. I think this makes for more harmony. My "ideal" polyamorous situation would probably look like the Bloomsburys did. This was a group of English literary and artistic figures, who coalesced at the turn of the last century. They practiced their art together, and their sex lives too. Some were bisexual, others appeared more gay. A few were even hetero. They may not have actually lived under one roof all the time, but they did hang out together a lot, and everybody's dirty laundry got washed in the general washing that went on a lot in their circle. No secrets among friends, as they say.
Having a common goal is a really important thing when we talk about planning perfect polyamorous situations. People need to be focused on something outside of themselves. The Bloomsburys probably achieved more fame as a group with their social activities than they did as artists individually. But art can offer such a coalescing situation. Sport would be another. I enjoyed my days competing in swimming and cycling, because the teams hung together and it made life more interesting. Not that we pursued further sexual agendas, but we could have. The seeds were there.
The Living Group, as I am want to call it now, would also have a variety of ages. I foresee older and younger people being together, as well as male and female. Children? Well, that might work, although I think they complicate life, and in my ideal state I would prefer the kids to be elsewhere.
So what sets this apart from any other commune of the late 60s or early 70s? Is this like a commune? Having gone through that era myself, I found communes to be vastly overrated and susceptible to many problems. Most communes seemed over-whelmingly hetero, and whatever promise they may have shown early on probably got trounced just by economic realities. A lot of communes try to pay their way by working the land, but it takes a great deal of time and energy to make a living from farming. The leader of the Sivananda Yoga Farm, which was located near Grass Valley in the 70s, told me that. They tried to grow crops and raise goats. Goats are cute, I think, but they are a pain in the ass. Just ask the farm's neighbors, who spent a lot of time chasing the critters away from eating their grass, and crops, when they got the chance.
San Francisco today is revealing a city trying out new living arrangements. "TICs" are the new wave. Tenancy-in-Common, they are called. Where people buy space in a communal type of loft arrangement. This is not intended to further polyamory, since each "unit" is separate unto himself or herself. But again, the seeds are there if the occupants care to pursue them.
I had a group of interesting friends in the early 70s, so these thoughts came up often for me. We talked about it among ourselves, but as far as actual steps....well, those we never took. Our life arrangements were already pretty well etched out.
Like the Bloomsburys, we hung out a lot together, but in terms of our living space, we pretty much kept our separate existences.
- - - - - -
Of more importance though I feel is having a common group goal, or interest going on, that everyone in the group pursues, in some form or another. I think this makes for more harmony. My "ideal" polyamorous situation would probably look like the Bloomsburys did. This was a group of English literary and artistic figures, who coalesced at the turn of the last century. They practiced their art together, and their sex lives too. Some were bisexual, others appeared more gay. A few were even hetero. They may not have actually lived under one roof all the time, but they did hang out together a lot, and everybody's dirty laundry got washed in the general washing that went on a lot in their circle. No secrets among friends, as they say.
Having a common goal is a really important thing when we talk about planning perfect polyamorous situations. People need to be focused on something outside of themselves. The Bloomsburys probably achieved more fame as a group with their social activities than they did as artists individually. But art can offer such a coalescing situation. Sport would be another. I enjoyed my days competing in swimming and cycling, because the teams hung together and it made life more interesting. Not that we pursued further sexual agendas, but we could have. The seeds were there.
The Living Group, as I am want to call it now, would also have a variety of ages. I foresee older and younger people being together, as well as male and female. Children? Well, that might work, although I think they complicate life, and in my ideal state I would prefer the kids to be elsewhere.
So what sets this apart from any other commune of the late 60s or early 70s? Is this like a commune? Having gone through that era myself, I found communes to be vastly overrated and susceptible to many problems. Most communes seemed over-whelmingly hetero, and whatever promise they may have shown early on probably got trounced just by economic realities. A lot of communes try to pay their way by working the land, but it takes a great deal of time and energy to make a living from farming. The leader of the Sivananda Yoga Farm, which was located near Grass Valley in the 70s, told me that. They tried to grow crops and raise goats. Goats are cute, I think, but they are a pain in the ass. Just ask the farm's neighbors, who spent a lot of time chasing the critters away from eating their grass, and crops, when they got the chance.
San Francisco today is revealing a city trying out new living arrangements. "TICs" are the new wave. Tenancy-in-Common, they are called. Where people buy space in a communal type of loft arrangement. This is not intended to further polyamory, since each "unit" is separate unto himself or herself. But again, the seeds are there if the occupants care to pursue them.
I had a group of interesting friends in the early 70s, so these thoughts came up often for me. We talked about it among ourselves, but as far as actual steps....well, those we never took. Our life arrangements were already pretty well etched out.
Like the Bloomsburys, we hung out a lot together, but in terms of our living space, we pretty much kept our separate existences.
- - - - - -
