the christian imagination
I imagine some men may well prefer a harem or polygamy, or perhaps unlimited sexual access with no commitment or responsibilities. Than we have the women who prefer no relationship at all, who would rather go it alone with some assistance from the state. From there on out we branch into multiple other kinds of relationships people find logical and desirable, SSM, three way partnerships, communal marriages, swingers, open relationships and so forth. (Insanitybytes)
Christians imagine all sorts of things. They imagine that without the intervention and rules of their imaginary god God, humans would plunge into a dark abyss of destructive, selfish behaviour, seeking momentary pleasure above all else.
My personal opinion is that Christians, in spite of their rules, behave in this way with the same frequency as anyone living without gods, and all for the same reason: placing short-term highs above long-term contentment and well-being. The difference is that when an atheist chooses to live a certain way, they can feel free to do so for reasons they personally choose, rather than feeling bound to rambling rules written thousands of years ago by men from a completely alien culture.
I think it’s fair to say that most people (women and men) like the idea of unlimited sexual access to anyone of their choice with no responsibilities. Men have used religion to develop misogynistic cultures to this end, using women as breeding chattel to be picked up on a whim. In most modern day cultures seeking equality for all people, this kind of attitude is now frowned upon. The more acceptable option is polyamory, where we can all have happy and open relationships, but not to the detriment specifically of either women or men. Equality in all things.
While I don’t rule out that humans could find a more generally sensible way to live at some point in the future, I have my doubts about polyamory. The human biological make-up plus our cultural heritage currently makes it easier to live, where possible, in romantic relationships comprised of two people, forming family units with offspring where available or desired. Many other animals live in this structure, and it seems to suit our deepest emotional and psychological needs most closely. In general, most people want the stability and continuity that long-term relationships bring. And if they have children, there is ample evidence that life is usually easier for all concerned if the unit can be maintained.
Life, however, isn’t simply about what we want either in the moment or long-term. Events happen, people change and the best laid plans with the best intentions just don’t work out. There are no rules. People need to work out what is best for them and those around them.
The basic structures of nature don’t fall apart when the chosen deity of a culture is not discovered behind the curtain. We go on, experimenting, discussing and evolving. Perhaps one day humans will find a way to have euphoric unlimited sexual access without the emotional fall-out of jealousy and insecurity, without diseases being spread, and without unplanned pregnancies occurring. But, for now, my chemicals tell me my long term contentment is best served in one natural pairing that suits the sexual preferences of my body. Christians may want to tell me that’s a God-designed heterosexual marriage, but nature tells us she’s been hijacked.
People like Inanity are simply ignorant (deliberately ignorant) of the world around them. Many, many species pair up for life because, well, there’s obviously some benefit to that type of relationship. The Middle Eastern god, Yhwh, didn’t tell albatrosses to mate for life. Natural selection, genetic drift, gene flow, and mutation all guided species into doing what was evolutionary more beneficial given the conditions. For Inanity, for instance, to believe as she does she has to ignore the reality around here… the natural world, because what goes on in that world simply doesn’t fit into her pantomime world. It doesn’t fit, so to her, it doesn’t exist.
LikeLiked by 5 people
She doesn’t seem that interested in facts, I agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would like to see Emma chat with her 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
“There are no rules. People need to work out what is best for them and those around them.” – I agree with this, and believe that if people had less pressure on them to conform to that which society and religion (in some cases) tells them to, they might be considerably happier in relationships that contain more than two people. It would like as not be less Sodom and Gomorrah (as many seem to view such relationships), and more of a way to share their hearts mind you.
In the words of Pauline Calf – “If you like it do it; if you don’t like it, do it, you might like it” – hahahahaha.
– esme putting her two penneth in from upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 3 people
Wow, that’s the first time I’ve ever seen Pauline Calf quoted! I had to google to check the image matched what I was imagining. 🙂
I can’t imagine many people have the kind of sense of deep security and faith in other people, lacking any sense of possessiveness, that would be required to successfully live polyamorously. I don’t understand how it would interact with our bonding chemicals either. I’m fairly certain I couldn’t do it, and I don’t know any long-term success stories. Do you?
LikeLiked by 2 people
And that’s the first time anyone has known who I meant! Ha!
We don’t know how people would feel about being secure in poly-amorous relationships because we have not been brought up to consider them anything BUT unstable and guaranteed to be boiling with jealousy. It simply hasn’t been tried. I reckon younger people would find it tricky, whereas older people, who may have learnt a thing or two about jealousy and it’s destructive nature, would be happier to give it a try. It is quite possible to love two people at the same time, probably more. If they love you back, and your worlds don’t revolve around sex and who’s the boss, I can’t see why it wouldn’t work just fine for some. Any examples I’ve seen on the box have been religious-based set-ups, with one guy and lots of women. And they all look mad a box of frogs. I’m talking about opening up the mind, that’s all. No Gods involved. Things are often only as difficult as we expect them to be.
– esme nodding upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 3 people
Esme, your wonderful take on polyamory is quite meaningful and respectful. (tips hat to you)
My experienced two-pints? (wink)… People are only just recently wrapping their hearts & minds around “Compersion” — it is truly a most life-enhancing experience between two or more people who understand the deeper profoundness of giving.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why thank you Professor. ‘Compersion’ – this is a new word for esme, the definition of which is also new, and interesting as a concept. ‘Life enchancing’ connected giving. Yes, I can see how that would work. *nods*. Thank you for the info Prof. *smiles*.
– Esme upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Grace, Love, and Lawlessness | See, there's this thing called biology...
“I think it’s fair to say that most people (women and men) like the idea of unlimited sexual access to anyone of their choice with no responsibilities.” Well, I for one would prefer limited access with some responsibilities. A sexual act with another human being is never completely absent some moral obligation to that person. Since turning forty, I stopped looking at young (under thirty) women in “that way.” It feels simply perverse to me, and I can’t stand to see other fifty-year-old men doing it. Creepy old men!
LikeLike
I meant abstractly, without any reference to the obvious difficulties in terms of emotional attachment that would inevitably arise.
“Since turning forty, I stopped looking at young (under thirty) women in “that way.””
I feel the same about guys in their 20s – creepy old woman that I am. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hahahaha. I’m lucky, I like creepy old men.
– esme falling about upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 1 person
Esme,
May I introduce myself my dear, sweet young thing? My name is Nelson, Fellatio Nelson, a retired sea captain now running a commune, somewhat along the lines you appear to warm to, here in the West Country of England. If ever you are passing this way, do feel free to drape your most exquisite little Cloud over my yurt won’t you? Why not bring along this Polly Amory and Pauline Calf too? You can all work your passages here, and I’ll take care of your every quim.
Yours faithfully,
Fellatio.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hahahahahaha. Outrageous. Put the kettle on, I’ll come over yours in ten minutes.
– Esme tucking the tone under the Cloud then bolting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You nailed it, Esme. It’s one thing to lightheartedly speculate; quite another to have one’s contentions put to the test. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hariod, I should welcome you to my blog, but I was so repulsed by your comment I thought it best to leave it to Esme’s scorn. Clearly I don’t know Esme very well (she seems lovely, but not the scornful type). Em, yuck. But thanks for popping over anyway. If you want to visit again please feel free to engage in any discussion around the post but I’d be really grateful if you could avoid smarmy flirtation with other blog guests.
LikeLike
Sorry you are unable to appreciate my (very occasional) bawdy English humour Violet. The same is a tradition that goes back to Elizabethan times (16th.c.) in this country. Esme understands it perfectly well, rest assured, and it most certainly was not flirtation. Irony can sometimes mimic smarminess, but should never be conflated with it, with due respect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps one shouldn’t conflate an apology with patronising condescension either. Y’know, with due respect. 😉
LikeLike
Violetwisp,
Lighten UP. Seriously.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Why?
LikeLike
Thankyou Carmen. ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
There seems to be a magnificent and ongoing failure in communication here Violet, which I fear I shall be unable to bridge with further words on the matter. These things happen. Sayonara.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ah, I’m afraid this is not as it may seem Violet, for Hariod and I have been good friends for some time now, and both share a very British sense of humour that does sometimes stray into the realms of the ‘Carry On’ film category. I appreciate not everyone will enjoy such banter, and though we have had no complaints up to now, I shall take on board your unhappiness Hariod would not have written the comment in reply to anyone else at all, he was aiming to make me laugh. And he did, so there was no scorn from this quarter. I thank you for your initial impression of me, and like to think I am indeed known as being lovely whenever I speak from the Cloud. I would also add that Hariod is one of the kindest, smartest and honestly fine people I have ever met,who also has a very bawdy sense of humour. As do I. Once again, I’m sorry to have upset you, a person’s blog is their land in a way, their country, and so heed should be given if ones conduct there is not appreciated.
– Esme upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 2 people
No apology necessary. I allowed a serial flirter to flirt unimpeded for a long time on my blog (I rarely interfere with exchanges). Thought I’d nip this one in the bud. But in-jokes among strangers who appear to be strangers to each other are difficult to interpret …
LikeLike
They can be yes.
– Esme upon the Cloud
LikeLiked by 1 person
Esme, I like the way you think. .. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Why thank you carmen. – *shakes her hand smiling*.
– Esme upon the Cloud
LikeLike
“The more you love, the more you can love, and the more intensely you love. Nor is there any limit on how many you can love. If a person had time enough, (s)he could love all of that majority who are decent and just.”
– Robert Heinlein “Intermission: Excerpts from the notebooks of Lazarus Long” in Time Enough For Love. New York: Penguin, 1987.
LikeLiked by 2 people
An excellent quote Hariod. Most appropriate here. Bravo Sir!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I appreciate the acknowledgement Prof., though of course can take no credit.
LikeLiked by 2 people
But you pulled it in from an apropos author at a most apropos time. Well done.
LikeLiked by 3 people