Article: 12102 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Marius Watz Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: splitting up Date: 14 Nov 1994 14:10:34 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 7 Message-ID: <3a7nka$6n0@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 13:55:22 +0100 Comments: To: futurec@uafsysb.uark.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..741:14.10.94.13.08.44"@uib.no> a moment of electric silence for those who have split up and not yet found someone to drown their sorrows. we are alone with our madness, wondering whether to shed blood or tears, our bodies shake with violence, our eyes refuse to see. mariusdreamsofsleekunnameabledarkness Article: 12104 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 14 Nov 1994 14:38:53 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 34 Message-ID: <3a7p9d$8gb@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 00:27:19 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411141307.AAA31618@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Marius Watz" at Nov 14, 94 01:55:22 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..446:14.10.94.13.38.26"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1145 I peeled a grape, and found that Marius Watz had written upon it: : : a moment of electric silence for those who have split up : and not yet found someone to drown their sorrows. we are : alone with our madness, wondering whether to shed blood or : tears, our bodies shake with violence, our eyes refuse to : see. I'm more foundering in a sea of conclusionelessness, not understanding why I've been cast adrift, but learning to accept it anyway. Pfah. Life sux. On a lighter note, I've been keeeping myself busy to avoid the slide into depression by bashing together some permeculture HTML stuff. Check it out. Dwaynetypedon'tthinktypedon'tthinktypedon'tthink. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12109 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: aka bookish Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 14 Nov 1994 16:39:55 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 22 Message-ID: <3a80cb$gln@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 10:16:06 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411141307.IAA12256@falcon.bgsu.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..080:14.10.94.15.39.12"@uib.no> ah, hell... i'm always out of step. the republicans are causing the breakdown of romances all over the world and, clumsy me, is stumble into the most amazing thing. and, marius, it is like drowning... On Mon, 14 Nov 1994, Marius Watz wrote: > a moment of electric silence for those who have split up > and not yet found someone to drown their sorrows. we are > alone with our madness, wondering whether to shed blood or > tears, our bodies shake with violence, our eyes refuse to > see. and a moment for all those who are struggling to share their madnesses, always on the edge of everything, of losing everything. > a moment for all of us, perched t/here in this mad place > mariusdreamsofsleekunnameabledarkness shawnwrappedsotightinhisowndarknessbuttryingtoseethelight Article: 12113 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Anthony Hersey Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 03:36:37 +0100 Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. Lines: 24 Message-ID: <3a96rl$a9o@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 13:53:14 EST5EST Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..643:15.10.94.02.36.08"@uib.no> Marius: a moment of electric silence for those who have split up and not yet found someone to drown their sorrows. we are alone with our madness, wondering whether to shed blood or tears, our bodies shake with violence, our eyes refuse to see. mariusdreamsofsleekunnameabledarkness Me: --anthony(loser in love, and generally bad luck with women :( ) ***Anthony's Neato .sig File!*** "It's not Death if you refuse it. It is if you accept it." -J. O' Barr's intro to book V of _The_Crow_ (may be a quote on his part) "One owes respect to the living. To the dead one owes only truth." -Voltaire >>>>>>>herseya@bart.db.erau.edu<<<<<<< Article: 12114 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Alan Sondheim Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 03:59:39 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 15 Message-ID: <3a986r$arc@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 14:41:44 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411141345.AA29690@panix.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..218:15.10.94.02.59.22"@uib.no> I've been depressed, not dating in two+ years, and still dreaming of my ex-girlfriend since nothing has changed. It's hard; I'm 51 and supposed to be over the hill. Well, I try, but the hill seems awfully small and I climb over and am usually on the other side, greeting me as well. My ex- is now 29, an artist in NY, up and coming. It's an odd relationship; I provide a convenient mentor/critic status for her now which has made me increasingly resentful - am withdrawing. Which means also withdrawing from the remnants of intimacy. I hope things will change in the future regards intimacy and relationships in general, but I doubt it. The world topples onward and downward... Alan Article: 12121 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Philippa E Holloway Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 06:18:59 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 49 Message-ID: <3a9gc3$e1j@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 16:42:53 -0500 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411142034.PAA22111@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu> from "Alan Sondheim" at Nov 14, 94 02:41:44 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..309:15.10.94.05.18.43"@uib.no> Tales of trouble with luv/relationships,culminting most recently in this by alan: >I hope things will change in the future regards intimacy and >relationships in general, but I doubt it. The world topples onward and >downward... Not sure if you're talking things in your life changing in the future or if future will change intimacy, but I'll assume #B for the sake of conversation. I'm, basically, perpetually single. Dont know why, though its not really from lack of opportunity. On good days, when Im feeling resillient, independent, and cyborgish I try to convince myself that traditional monagamous couple relationships are a thing of the past and I dont need em. My personal experience with em is that the pain, frustration, loss of autonomy/self etc takes a big bite out of the pleasure one gets from the securtiy in knowing you have a "partner". Seems to me that there's gotta be a way to have warmth and intimacy in one's life without all the junk that comes along with monagamous coupling. Again, on good days I feel like I've got friendships that fill that intense need to be cared for. Though since I moved to this Ohio place recently, I've been pretty cut off from friends (except some wonderfully caring virtual friendships), and I've been pretty lonely, especially as its getting colder and darker this fall. (Somedays I think Id be willing to settle down with the next single person that walks by my house...) So, what do y'all think? Can we envision a future without monagamous relationships? Do we want to? (to paraphrase Hakim Bey: Im willing to be convinced otherwize, if you're extremely young and good-looking. Enclose recent photo.) --Pip [who,stupidly, took her keyboard apart today and lost one of the springs under the space bar, which is making me crazy...] [oh, and just started reading Thomas Mann's _Buddenbrooks_] pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp There are a thousand ways to kneel and kiss the ground -- Rumi Pippa Holloway Pip on LambdaMoo,PMC, Chiba & holloway.28@osu.edu WorldMoo pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp Article: 12124 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Anthony Hersey Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 06:40:31 +0100 Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. Lines: 42 Message-ID: <3a9hkf$ege@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 21:23:15 EST5EST Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..630:15.10.94.05.39.48"@uib.no> >>>WARNING<<< *LONG DISCUSSION OF RELATIONSHIPS, HIT DELETE NOW IF YOU COULDN'T GIVE A FUCK* Pip: So, what do y'all think? Can we envision a future without monagamous relationships? Do we want to? Me: Can i envision a future with them is more like it. i have had quite a time trying to explain this to most people. i simply >CAN NOT< think in monogamous terms... it's like trying to breathe water.. some creatures can, others can't. i am one of the others. i know where alan is coming from, even tho i am less than half of his age. the last relationship just kind of stopped. at some point something happened right before something began. i am still trying to make sense of it, and most likely will be for some time. i guess it is part of my burden; you see, i am an extremely cynical person about most things, but am attracted to severley innocent and naive females. My best friend, who is the same way (one of the main reasons we are best friends), and i have devoted many an hour to this topic. as near as we can figure, we are attracted to this idealistic and unblemished look at the world; at the same time it is >VERY< annoying at times, simply because we are used to dealing with people as cynical as ourselves. my mistake was apparently in forgetting this for all too brief of a second, and short-circuiting an otherwise great relationship. to get back to the monogamy thing, i am always looking for deeper degrees of naive... at the same time it is kind of confusing. sorry for wasting anyone's time. --anthony "One owes respect to the living. To the dead one owes only truth." -Voltaire >>>>>>>herseya@bart.db.erau.edu<<<<<<< btw: HAIL SPODE!!!! ;) Article: 12126 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!nac.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: aka bookish Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 15 Nov 1994 06:47:33 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 36 Message-ID: <3a9i1l$ejs@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 21:39:26 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150229.VAA09161@falcon.bgsu.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..113:15.10.94.05.47.21"@uib.no> Well, Pip has managed to run the cyborg thread and the breakup thread together, which might at least make some of us perpetual losers feel hipper. ;) I guess, though, that a lot of my problems with monogamy have to do with my loss of confidence in certain kinds of "relationships" - whatever those are - particularly marriage. My own political commitments, and my own strange response to issues of "identity", make any sort of one-to-one exclusive commitment very difficult - but mostly because i am not very one-ish. "do i contradict myself? very well then i contradict myself. ia m vast. i contain multitudes." and the whole legal, institutional matrix that surrounds marriage is pretty horrid in my book. so what happens to me? i meet someone - who is attracted to me in part (get this) because i'm interested in this cyborg stuff. and we end up trying to make connections that respect our own feelings of multipleness. what wonderful, scary stuff. we both have lots of other friends, folks we care deeply about. i talk about 'love'. my friend isn't generally so inclined. but i don't think either of us is particularly interested in sharing what we're sharing elsewhere - in part because neither of us have ever felt quite so free to share before. is this monogamy? maybe it's just a TAZ. i can't really even think about that. it's not what's important. how's that for a non-answer, pip? =) (and, hey, am i the only one around here who is constantly falling for voices? some of you folks can type/talk up a real storm on this end of the wires. and the ear/eye with which i read you seems to be no respecter of age, gender or sexual preferences (mine or anyone elses). ah, and on a more or less other note, i heard alan's voice on the phone the other day. and despite the fact he was stressed and tired he sounded... um... just like alan. it was marvelously reassuring. it made me smile in the midst of a rather stressful day.) -shawn Article: 12127 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Alan Sondheim Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 06:55:04 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 27 Message-ID: <3a9ifo$eod@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 22:57:05 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150210.AA19358@panix2.panix.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..637:15.10.94.05.54.56"@uib.no> To Pip and others, I love and want a monogamous relationship; whatever junk comes along usually at least for me hass to do with my own failings, among other things; I learn in these situations. I also love to know someone intimately and vice versa, to feel the real presence of someone else, when everything in and out of cyberspace otherwise feels like ghosts. This isn't a mythical past; relationships are hard, almost impossible. But to know more of the fullness of another can be beautiful beyond belief. And I think living alone in a large city in the United States is simply too much. I'm speaking for myself here. When I wake up in the morning, I'm faced with myself. When I write, I face myself. When I'm on computer, I face myself. There has to be more than this; visiting other people, usually couples or coupled, is in a sense watching a film go by; they've got a nest, I think, which I don't have. I don't believe one can nest alone; I also don't believe in individualism; I don't believe in co- dependency as evil; and I don't believe that one has to "want" a relationship, not "need" one. I think we kid ourselves about all of these things... I too feel I would love almost anyone at this point, or would try to. That's awkward to say, but I haven't even had a "reasonable" (however you want to define it) coffee-date, as I think I said, in over two years. And it's lonely. Alan Article: 12131 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 07:11:12 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 81 Message-ID: <3a9je0$f79@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 16:19:15 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150510.QAA06217@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Anthony Hersey" at Nov 14, 94 09:23:15 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..765:15.10.94.06.10.54"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2739 I peeled a grape, and found that Anthony Hersey had written upon it: : : >>>WARNING<<< : *LONG DISCUSSION OF RELATIONSHIPS, HIT DELETE NOW IF YOU COULDN'T : GIVE A FUCK* At this point, i wonder if the pun was intentional or not. Nahhhhhh.... : Pip: : So, what do y'all think? Can we envision a future without : monagamous relationships? Do we want to? : : Me: : Can i envision a future with them is more like it. i have had quite : a time trying to explain this to most people. i simply >CAN NOT< : think in monogamous terms... it's like trying to breathe water.. : some creatures can, others can't. i am one of the others. I'm not inherently monogamous, but being the incredibly possessive bastard that I am, tend to remain in monogamous relationships because I'd rather my partner was monogamous, and I'll take the partial annoyance of my own monogamy over the complete frustration of my partner's polgamy any day. Been there, done that, yucko. : i know where alan is coming from, even tho i am less than half of : his age. the last relationship just kind of stopped. at some point : something happened right before something began. i am still trying : to make sense of it, and most likely will be for some time. i guess : it is part of my burden; you see, i am an extremely cynical person : about most things, but am attracted to severley innocent and naive : females. Oh-oh. You too, hey? : My best friend, who is the same way (one of the main : reasons we are best friends), and i have devoted many an hour to : this topic. as near as we can figure, we are attracted to this : idealistic and unblemished look at the world; at the same time it is : >VERY< annoying at times, simply because we are used to dealing with : people as cynical as ourselves. Oh, no, I'm basically an innocent at heart, but have my eyes opened enough to the world to become a bitter cynic. : my mistake was apparently in forgetting this for all too brief of a : second, and short-circuiting an otherwise great relationship. to get : back to the monogamy thing, i am always looking for deeper degrees : of naive... at the same time it is kind of confusing. I'll say. "deeper degrees of naive"?? : sorry for wasting anyone's time. You bastard! Death! Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12132 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 15 Nov 1994 07:14:10 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 43 Message-ID: <3a9jji$f9e@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 16:45:35 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150526.QAA01978@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "aka bookish" at Nov 14, 94 09:39:26 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..970:15.10.94.06.14.03"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1527 I peeled a grape, and found that aka bookish had written upon it: : : Well, Pip has managed to run the cyborg thread and the breakup thread : together, which might at least make some of us perpetual losers feel : hipper. ;) : (and, hey, am i the only one around here who is constantly falling for : voices? some of you folks can type/talk up a real storm on this end of the : wires. Oh dear, you have absolutely no idea. To me, typing is 2400 baud, my mouth is about 56k, nad my mind is a T3 line. I find this form of comunication INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATING because I can't type fast enough, and even if I could type at 150 wp, it still wouldn't be fast enough. Shit, by the time I've said something, my mind has moved so far ahead that I either forget what I was going to say next or slur my words, a lot of the time. Telepathy, that's what's needed. : and the ear/eye with which i read you seems to be no respecter of : age, gender or sexual preferences (mine or anyone elses). I don't understand what this means. Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12134 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!nac.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 15 Nov 1994 07:45:35 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 54 Message-ID: <3a9lef$fpq@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 16:48:10 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150533.QAA06176@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Alan Sondheim" at Nov 14, 94 10:57:05 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..744:15.10.94.06.45.19"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2272 I peeled a grape, and found that Alan Sondheim had written upon it: : : I love and want a monogamous relationship; whatever junk comes along : usually at least for me hass to do with my own failings, among other : things; I learn in these situations. I also love to know someone : intimately and vice versa, to feel the real presence of someone else, : when everything in and out of cyberspace otherwise feels like ghosts. : This isn't a mythical past; relationships are hard, almost impossible. : But to know more of the fullness of another can be beautiful beyond belief. To use a nexis-ism: IAWYC : And I think living alone in a large city in the United States is simply : too much. I'm speaking for myself here. When I wake up in the morning, : I'm faced with myself. When I write, I face myself. When I'm on computer, : I face myself. There has to be more than this; visiting other people, : usually couples or coupled, is in a sense watching a film go by; they've : got a nest, I think, which I don't have. I don't believe one can nest : alone; I also don't believe in individualism; I don't believe in co- : dependency as evil; and I don't believe that one has to "want" a : relationship, not "need" one. I think we kid ourselves about all of these : things... Yep, same here. Although I'd rather more than one relationship, I tend to be very intense, and burn people out, I guess. A harem would be nice, but not many people go for that :-/ : I too feel I would love almost anyone at this point, or would try to. : That's awkward to say, but I haven't even had a "reasonable" (however you : want to define it) coffee-date, as I think I said, in over two years. And : it's lonely. Yeah. I've been like that. It's not fun rebuilding a social life, but it's worth it. Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12145 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Paula Davidson Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 15 Nov 1994 10:25:58 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 21 Message-ID: <3a9ur6$l5c@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 03:46:48 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411150559.AAA17421@mercury.interpath.net> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..803:15.10.94.09.25.25"@uib.no> There are some things to be said for monogamy. The time invested by the pair returns a sense of history, a coupling of experience. It is so difficult to maintain any relationship, no? The more people involved, the more complicated it becomes to communicate. It takes so long to build a deep and lasting trust with someone that it seems almost impossible to consider bringing in a new party or trying to build again with others. How can one stretch oneself across multiple spouses (spice? spousi?) and do each justice? How can one reveal all, repeatedly. How would one schedule such a life? paula, just say know ================================================================ Paula Davidson T h e A l t e r n a t i v e R e a d i n g R o o m an unconventional library <> free & open to the public Wednesday - Saturday 11 - 9 40 Wall St. Asheville, NC 28801 USA (704) 252-2501 tarr@mercury.interpath.net ================================================================ Article: 12148 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: PATRICIA Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: monogamy, music, time Date: 15 Nov 1994 17:06:11 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 13 Message-ID: <3aam9j$fp8@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 09:38:04 -0400 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..754:15.10.94.16.05.40"@uib.no> Monogamy -- it's a dream, wishful filament. You can clothe anyone in the dream, though strangers are best (they cast a more surreal light). Who *are* you people (strangers)? Pippa's the only one I can see -- ever vivid. I'm on the digest so each morning I'm overwhelmed by a cacophony of voices -- How do you find time to disentangle the net? Music -- Does anyone love Ali Farka Toure's _Talking Timbuktu_? It's the dark air of summer night coming in the window. And is there really a Foucault list, or was that a joke? (deep naive?) serial dreams. Article: 12159 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Mike Holderness Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: Monogamy Date: 16 Nov 1994 14:07:31 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 22 Message-ID: <3ad06j$28k@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 12:56:07 GMT To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..106:16.10.94.13.06.10"@uib.no> It seems quite likely to me that some of us are here _because_ we aren't thrilled about the monogamy idea. I found when I discovered lists that the multiple-thread discussions came rather naturally. I found that the tendency to have brief, intense conversations, not worrying particularly about the brevity, was little different from my version of real life (TM). In real life I have a friend who I love dearly and meet every couple of weeks on average, holding a conversation which continues from meeting to meeting over the (four or so) years. This has caused problems with attempted relationships; partners (two of the three in that time) getting jealous (with some justification) of the intellectual closeness in that 200-hour marathon (but distributed) conversation, not to speak of its exclusivity (in such an exchange, with the accretion of shorthands and jargon, things can be said so rapidly that no-one else present notices the content). And, yes, the friendship is conditional on my keeping my lust un under wraps. Omigawd -- this is a public place, net access is spreading like wildfire and I'm a public figure in my tiny way. How long before this gets back to me with a smirk from a colleague or a pained look from a participant? Mike Article: 12163 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Marius Watz Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 16 Nov 1994 15:51:15 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 33 Message-ID: <3ad693$9jh@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 15:44:51 +0100 Comments: To: futurec@uafsysb.uark.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <"alfie.uib..309:15.10.94.05.18.43"@uib.no> (message from Philippa E Holloway on Mon, 14 Nov 1994 16:42:53 -0500) Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..719:16.10.94.14.50.02"@uib.no> Pip wrote: > not really from lack of opportunity. On good days, when Im > feeling resillient, independent, and cyborgish I try to Good one, Pip... (I know that feeling) > So, what do y'all think? Can we envision a future without > monagamous relationships? Do we want to? Without monogamous relationships? Perhaps. Without relationships at all? Hardly. I'd rather go with the polyamory people and love more than one person than end up lonely as a successful but suicidal cyborg. I sometimes feel that I'm hardwired to go crazy if I'm not allowed to touch the required quota of skin every month. On the subject of multiple loves, let me just state that it's not for the weak of heart nor for the weak of will. So many people fall apart at the prospect of loving just one person that expecting them to love more than one could cause contradictory behavious patterns that'd make their heads go pop... Oh, and I steadfastly hang on to my intuition that I could never take part in a net.sex session without laughing more than coming. So that's not really an option for me. > --Pip sweetyoungthingmariusbangbangbang (hope I will be forgiven for what feels like a recent flurry of posts here - tell me I'm boring and I'll shut up - for exactly 36 hours) Article: 12166 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: PATRICIA BLACK Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: monogamy, and time Date: 16 Nov 1994 16:57:32 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 13 Message-ID: <3ada5c$dbp@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 10:53:26 -0400 Comments: To: futurec@uafsysb.uark.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..973:16.10.94.15.56.59"@uib.no> Back to Pippa's question. Can we risk, *withstand*, the increased pain that comes when we don't play it safe? For me, every wild, surreal encounter comes with too high a price tag. Maybe. If it glows, if it has that *charge*, it's going to be hell when the time comes to see that person with someone else. Even if I'm with someone else. What _is_ this sex thing? patricia p.s. Thanks to Alan. The digest way is just not working. And what a nice long sinuous sentence ("... until our midnight hours ...") Makes me wish I had one of these things at home. Then I wouldn't get so steamed when one of my co-workers wants me to do something work-related. :) Article: 12167 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Anthony Hersey Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 16 Nov 1994 19:08:51 +0100 Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. Lines: 30 Message-ID: <3adhrj$jgm@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 12:54:27 EST5EST Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..177:16.10.94.18.08.27"@uib.no> Marius: On the subject of multiple loves, let me just state that it's not for the weak of heart nor for the weak of will. So many people fall apart at the prospect of loving just one person that expecting them to love more than one could cause contradictory behavious patterns that'd make their heads go pop... Me: not to mention their wallets.... girlfriends are very expensive, not to offend pip of fran, but they are :) Marius: Oh, and I steadfastly hang on to my intuition that I could never take part in a net.sex session without laughing more than coming. So that's not really an option for me. Me: haha! my greatest thoughts on the subject voiced. isn't it kinda sad to touch a keyboard and pretend it is a person.... i'd feel like more of a loser than if i was all alone w/o anyone to talk to --anthony "One owes respect to the living. To the dead one owes only truth." -Voltaire >>>>>>>herseya@bart.db.erau.edu<<<<<<< btw: HAIL SPODE!!!! ;) Article: 12168 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Marius Watz Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 16 Nov 1994 19:37:47 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 11 Message-ID: <3adjhr$ksu@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 19:22:05 +0100 Comments: To: futurec@uafsysb.uark.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <"alfie.uib..177:16.10.94.18.08.27"@uib.no> (message from Anthony Hersey on Wed, 16 Nov 1994 12:54:27 EST5EST) Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..419:16.10.94.18.37.31"@uib.no> Anthony wrote: > not to mention their wallets.... girlfriends are very expensive, not > to offend pip of fran, but they are :) Bollocks. File it under "collateral expenses", along with "collateral damage" - you get the drift. God knows my last ex had to support me for several months. That wasn't why we broke up, tho. > --anthony mariuswheretimebecomesalooptimebecomesalooptimebecomesaloop Article: 12170 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Fran Sendbuehler Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 16 Nov 1994 21:59:59 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 52 Message-ID: <3adrsf$r0d@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 14:52:17 -0500 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..844:16.10.94.20.59.45"@uib.no> aka bookish wrote: >I guess, though, that a lot of my problems with monogamy have to do with >my loss of confidence in certain kinds of "relationships" - whatever those >are - particularly marriage. My own political commitments, and my own >strange response to issues of "identity", make any sort of one-to-one >exclusive commitment very difficult - but mostly because i am not very >one-ish. "do i contradict myself? very well then i contradict myself. ia m >vast. i contain multitudes." and the whole legal, institutional matrix >that surrounds marriage is pretty horrid in my book. Ah, interesting contradictions. But you don't have to have marriage to have a monogamous relationship, nor to have monogamous tendendies (thank god). Identity -- the idea of containing multitudes, if I understand you correctly -- doesn't necessarily have to mean that you cannot be monogamous, but perhaps makes it more difficult for such a person to find the one with whom a successful relationship might be possible. It's hard, under the best of circumstances, to find anyone to be with, much less finding the _right_ person. I, too, have had this "problem" with "identity"...a problem in the sense of having more than somewhat non-traditional ideas about relationships (no marriage, no children, no servitude) -- some (elderly female family members, particularly) say, "why bother, then"? Well, in order to find the right soul with whom to spend your life. Not wanting marriage or children doesn't mean that I necessarily want to be alone. Nor does it mean that poly-whatever is the thing for me... Far from it. A year ago, after I'd been alone for about 4 years (outside of a long-term relationship, that is), I could have sworn that there was no one out there who thought even remotely like me and with whom I could commune rather than struggle to communicate my thoughts, feelings, ideas. What a relief that there _is_ such a person, and that he's just as much in love with me as I am with him. And just as romantic, just as intense, just as...everything. Hell...we can even wear each other's clothes. I think that we're equally thrilled that the other exists. One thing that we (he?) said near the beginning of our relationship was "I've been waiting for you for...ever." Oh, yes. Under these circumstances, I cannot imagine other than a monogamous relationship. It could not be otherwise and there still be such an intimate connection between us. >(and, hey, am i the only one around here who is constantly falling for >voices? some of you folks can type/talk up a real storm on this end of the >wires. and the ear/eye with which i read you seems to be no respecter of >age, gender or sexual preferences (mine or anyone elses). Eloquence is wonderful, isn't it? I miss seeing more of your posts, bookish. I guess, then, that I wish you had more time to write. I love you all, but long for more than an electronic touch... fran Article: 12172 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Fran Sendbuehler Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: splitting up/being together Date: 17 Nov 1994 00:16:15 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 28 Message-ID: <3ae3rv$1e1@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 16:52:57 -0500 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..840:16.10.94.23.15.49"@uib.no> Anthony: >not to mention their wallets.... girlfriends are very expensive, not >to offend pip of fran, but they are :) well, you certainly don't offend me, though I'd kind of like to point out that it's really _any_ involvement in a relationship that's expensive and has little to do with whether you date women or men or both or many of each (multiply expense for multiple relationships, I guess, for you non-monogamists out there -- both monetary and emotional. What's the gain, though? _That_ I haven't figgered out...not for a many-partnered relationship.). It's just more expensive being involved than not being involved, but I'd rather spend money than not be involved! It, for example, costs me money to phone spud and to visit with him, and the other way 'round, too... very enjoyably spent, and I'm glad that I have it _to_ spend. The other benefits, though, make all of that unimportant. The sky, right now, has this incredible grey-wash look...very uniform, but with a touch of smoggy orangishness bleeding out from the grey down to the horizon. That anomaly of architecture, the olympic stadium, has an odd shiney whiteness to it that's touched with a tinge of green. Bare branches give me a twiggy lacey-ness with which to frame the whole view. Those branches remind me that I wait for winter to continue to chill my body...my lover, far away, will have to warm my heart with only his words for a while yet. fran Article: 12173 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: aka bookish Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 00:19:29 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 56 Message-ID: <3ae421$1g6@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 17:14:18 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411162205.RAA13446@falcon.bgsu.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..039:16.10.94.23.19.24"@uib.no> Fran wrote all sorts of lovely, wise, romantic things - talk about your wonderful contradictions - to which i feel compelled to respond: of course, my quarrel with monogamy is not with caring for only one person. i, too, am looking, i think, for some single person to share larger, different, more important aspects of my life. but my understanding of the ways in which "individuals" might articulate themselves in a "relationship" at a time when the conventional models - like matrimony and identity - seem more than a bit worse for wear. who is the special person, and what, in the absence of matrimonial legalisms, is the quality that sets them apart. can it be "sex"? i'm a little weary and wary of that move. it looks to me like a stop-gap fix for the marriage thing. or i'm fine with it, but then i don't know what "Sex" is anymore. miming a reproductive act? something else? something to do with "intimacy" perhaps? ("are we making love yet?" it's not a silly question.) the cyborg in me (which is also the whitmanesque figure that loafs and invites its soul, that contains multitudes, that wonders "is this a touch?") wants something other than identity, other than a sexuality that only *produces* pleasure as if it was another commodity, beyond a "relationship" that exists as some sort of co-ownership. on the other hand, i am an intense, and intensely jealous, lover. (i'm just talking to a few hundred of my closest friends here, right? i shouldn't be worried that i've never met any of you, swapped snail mail with one of you, only talked to two of you on the phone? what a crazy space we have out t/here.) which may just be an acknowledgement that the few really fulfilling contacts that i have had have been extraordinarily precious - the sort of thing that i might, and do, feel pretty fierce about protecting (though so often, of course, the greatest dangers come from my own self.) ...is this "bookish" talking? so what does this mean, finally(?), about/for monogamy and me? i guess, to the extent that the notions that underpin monogamy still retain at least some force - Derrida's notion of ghostly discourses and debts might play here - i still see myself as monogamous, as desiring exclusivity. but my relationship to all of those underpinnings is somewhere between faith and willing suspension of disbelief. you know, folks, that there have been some gorgeous moments in this discussion so far, mostly because there are some gorgeous folks in this neighborhood. particular thanks right at this moment to marius, pip, alan, fran and spud for being who they are... ...and to rez and honoria, lurking at the moment, who i'll see "in real life" in a few days. beautiful voices... love you all, -shawn Article: 12174 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Neil Kennedy Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: desperate attempt to braid two threads Date: 17 Nov 1994 00:31:12 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 29 Message-ID: <3ae4o0$1oc@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Neil Kennedy NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 18:04:18 -0400 Comments: NB*net - New Brunswick's Regional Network 1-800-561-4459 To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..511:16.10.94.23.30.50"@uib.no> neil's top ten depressed-because-i'm-single-again tunes: 1] who's gonna ride your wild horses - u2 (i mean, come on, we're talking self pity here - just add schmaltz) 2] blood of eden - pete gabriel 3] tear in your hand - tori 4] everywhere i go i see you - king's x (for the obsessive only) 5] something i can never have - nin (for when you start to get a little pissed) 6] ice ice baby - vanilla ice (to remind you that your life could be worse - you could be this guy) 7] some nirvana (see #6 - also, a lot of it is really good) 8] black - pearl jam 9] possession - sarah maclachlan (the piano version at the end of the record) 10] the downward spiral(album, not song) - nin (for when you start to get really pissed) place ingredients into pre-heated stereo, mixing occasionally as required, until desired state of apathy and/or calm is reached. n neil kennedy - kennedyn@nbnet.nb.ca if you could see the you that i see, when i see you seeing me, you'd see yourself so differently... believe me Article: 12175 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: dave meesters Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy, music, time Date: 17 Nov 1994 01:10:37 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 14 Message-ID: <3ae71t$2u0@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 19:08:35 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <9411151733.AA54374@email.unc.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..648:17.10.94.00.10.22"@uib.no> On Tue, 15 Nov 1994, PATRICIA wrote: > Music -- Does anyone love Ali Farka Toure's _Talking Timbuktu_? It's the > dark air of summer night coming in the window. Oh god yes. Ali Farka Toure is a real treasure. He strikes chords I didn't know I could appreciate.... relaxed but deeply engaging... Pure honey... ahhh... I'll take anything as an excuse to play "Dofana" on my shift at the radio station where I work. And I love the thought of hearing him in Greensboro. dave Article: 12179 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: CYNTHIA SLATER Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy... (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 02:30:23 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 42 Message-ID: <3aebnf$5ed@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 20:23:55 -0400 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..581:17.10.94.01.29.51"@uib.no> hmmm, a lurker emerges from the woods... (like a frightened doe?) Anthony: ...not to mention their wallets... girlfriends are very expensive,... Me: oh, I thought they paid their way by now. I did, and do, 50-50, although my partner has more income than I. Guess I'll inject a radically different POV, being in the midst of a more than workable marriage that is hard work, but tries to ignore the lingering bestialities of American/British common law... Hey, make up your own rules! Two people, each full of their own supposed multitudes, demand new rules?!! I never saw an ideal marriage either, Troy, probably 'cause there aren't any ideal people. Lots of recent posts to this thread show people trying for ideals and equality, but humans are naturally selfish, I think, and starry-eyed... but I never expect to be happy all the time, or have _one_ person fill all my needs!! (There are friends, dogs, children, e-mail, work, books, art, imagination, memory,...) I wonder if the guys who long for harems are gonna grant equal rights to their broods. Remember how expensive girlfriends can be!! (-: A couple of people mention being about ready to love "almost anyone". Maybe it tends to work that way. Without the idealizations and projections, love gets pulled out of us unexpectedly. Something like that happened to me once,... twice, well... and it wasn't sex. Pippa speaks of "the pain, frustration and loss of autonomy/self" but love isn't s'posed to be that way, wouldn't that be desire- infatuation? And I find it fascinating that Alan, going into his sixth decade, is one of the most hopeful. Even attempting to mentor his former love, that would be so hard. Cynicism seems more suited to the young, ironically. Enough rambling... Am really enjoying trying to thread through all the anarchy- politico-perma-energy-costof-hotwired-derrida-hyper-cyborg-harem- scarem-virtual-question-posts! Thanks. Cynthia. (slaterc@iris.uncg.edu)******************************* Article: 12180 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Storm King Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:28:52 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 10 Message-ID: <3afia4$pr2@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 21:29:25 -0800 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411170451.UAA03563@netcom16.netcom.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..756:17.10.94.12.28.37"@uib.no> On Wed, 16 Nov 1994, Alan Sondheim wrote: > It's not marriage, I think, and not sex that makes things work. It's > willing to extend oneself, to grow in a relationship, to bring things, > people, places, ideas, everything, into it, to be completely honest. This > isn't romanticism - the relationships, marriages or not, that I've seen > work, have all had this openness. And my final feeling is, that if you > don't have this in your relationship, abandon it. You have only one life > on earth and shouldn't waste a minute of it. Right on, highly neat stuff. Sieze the day. Article: 12181 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:41:21 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 26 Message-ID: <3afj1h$qr3@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 13:46:39 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411170057.LAA01910@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Fran Sendbuehler" at Nov 16, 94 02:52:17 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..094:17.10.94.12.40.28"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 688 I peeled a grape, and found that Fran Sendbuehler had written upon it: : : Hell...we can even wear each other's clothes. I've done this with every girl I've ever been out with. Maybe I'm weird. Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12183 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:43:16 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 35 Message-ID: <3afj54$r17@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 13:50:46 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411170225.NAA32358@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "aka bookish" at Nov 16, 94 05:14:18 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..099:17.10.94.12.40.35"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1255 I peeled a grape, and found that aka bookish had written upon it: : : the cyborg in me (which is also the whitmanesque figure that loafs and : invites its soul, that contains multitudes, that wonders "is this a : touch?") wants something other than identity, other than a sexuality : that only *produces* pleasure as if it was another commodity Pardon me, but I see pleasure as an end in and of itself, not as a commodity. : on the other hand, i am an intense, and intensely jealous, lover. (i'm : just talking to a few hundred of my closest friends here, right? i : shouldn't be worried that i've never met any of you, swapped snail mail : with one of you, only talked to two of you on the phone? what a crazy : space we have out t/here.) Great, isn't it? :-) Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12184 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Caryatid Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: monogamousbody Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:43:30 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3afj5i$r22@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 19:23:36 -0800 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..176:17.10.94.12.43.12"@uib.no> I look up from the pages that hold the latest in a series of theories that claim to explain to me the relationship between my body and your text and my text andthetextofthatguyoverthere. I think of a dream that I have now and again. I am tied to a chair, one of those old ones with a high regal back and arms with roaring lions at the ends, and I am watching with a fair amount of interest as someone uses an old-fashioned straight razor to slice open my wrists. The skin splits under the steel kiss, the crimson overflow runs down the sides of my forearms, sticky new varnish for the chair of my opening. They tell me that I should Examine My Life when I have this dream, that I should Think About the Issues that I Obviously Have with Loss of Control. I tell them that I don't particularly feel like it. I like my dream. The scarlet opening, inside becoming outside, makes me think of the shadowy twining interplay of text scrolling across the screens of my eyes. How can I claim simple closure with myself when the words that explode into and out of my head have desires of their own? I open the veins of my ghostbody, smear my asciiblood across the keys, laughing at the always-failing meat puppet that tries to controlcontainrestrain it and me. Damage to flesh performed by textual delirium, I'm splitting (up with) myself. Article: 12187 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:45:40 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 32 Message-ID: <3afj9k$r5j@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 15:07:43 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411160629.RAA12793@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Anthony Hersey" at Nov 15, 94 11:13:13 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..297:17.10.94.12.45.16"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 911 I peeled a grape, and found that Anthony Hersey had written upon it: : : Dwayne: : Shit, by the time I've said something, my mind has moved so far : ahead that I either forget what I was going to say next or slur my : words, a lot of the time. Telepathy, that's what's needed. : : me: : know whayt you mean... if i ever end up in australia, w'll have : to discuss harems in the new nexus-gaia thing.. :) errrr, what? Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12188 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: CtG Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 17 Nov 1994 13:46:52 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 17 Message-ID: <3afjbs$r82@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 22:43:32 -0500 To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411162339.AA15846@csn.org> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..376:17.10.94.12.46.31"@uib.no> Regarding: Re: splitting up > > not to mention their wallets.... girlfriends are very expensive, not > > to offend pip of fran, but they are :) > Bollocks. File it under "collateral expenses", along with "collateral > damage" - you get the drift. God knows my last ex had to support me > for several months. That wasn't why we broke up, tho. I've never had the wallet problem either. But, ex.others suck. Especially when you really want them to be ex.ex, and you would love to ask, but don't want to ask too soon, and will never know if you don't, and they are so damn nice to you that wonder "what if..." and yeah. I did just get back from sharing a burger with her. damn it all, and then to read about my problems. --- Chris Article: 12194 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Siegfried Steurer Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 15:50:44 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 6 Message-ID: <3afqk4$5ss@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 11:21:00 MEZ To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 16 Nov 1994 22:50:24 -0500 from Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..834:17.10.94.14.47.53"@uib.no> Alan, I wanted to take the time to thank you for your wonderful stuff. Its a pleasure to read your posts, and I wished I had the time to resubscribe Cybermind and FOP (what I will do as soon as i finished my f***ing diss.). Siegfried, a6301gcx@vm.univie.ac.at Article: 12199 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: PATRICIA BLACK Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 17:14:12 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 6 Message-ID: <3afvgk$bql@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 10:02:02 -0400 Comments: To: FUTUREC@uafsysb.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..674:17.10.94.16.13.35"@uib.no> The sky here has turned gray and the wind is blowing cold. Last night the wind was exciting, now it's turned mean. Today's the anniversary of my divorce (Nov.17, 1986). And Nov.17, 1956 is the second date on my father's tombstone. I went out there to check. I thought Article: 12200 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: splitting up Date: 17 Nov 1994 17:53:46 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 72 Message-ID: <3ag1qq$fjj@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 14:23:45 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411161622.DAA23228@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Marius Watz" at Nov 16, 94 03:44:51 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..306:17.10.94.16.53.28"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2394 I peeled a grape, and found that Marius Watz had written upon it: : : Without monogamous relationships? Perhaps. Without relationships : at all? Hardly. I'd rather go with the polyamory people and love : more than one person than end up lonely as a successful but : suicidal cyborg. I sometimes feel that I'm hardwired to go crazy : if I'm not allowed to touch the required quota of skin every : month. Cripes, I don't last that long. But, yes, I agree. Loneliness sucks. Friends are great, IMNSHO. Don't know much about polyamory, other than a friend's woeful and failed attempt at it recently. Booo. ugly ugly ugly. : On the subject of multiple loves, let me just state that it's : not for the weak of heart nor for the weak of will. So many : people fall apart at the prospect of loving just one person : that expecting them to love more than one could cause contradictory : behavious patterns that'd make their heads go pop... I've seen _scanners_. Don't try this at home, folks, these are special stunt heads, trained for the occasion. : Oh, and I steadfastly hang on to my intuition that I could : never take part in a net.sex session without laughing more than : coming. So that's not really an option for me. Oh yeah, I think it is mind-numbingly dorky. Neutopia is big on it, but then, she'd have to be I guess. It strikes me as all kind of pathetic, and any attempt to dress it up as some sort of nouveau-techno thing with coolness-cred just drowns dismally in the scorn reserved for it by those of us who know the REAL reason: they're all smelly geeks with funny facial growths who can't get laid. Points to the sky. "I have _spoken_!" :-) : sweetyoungthingmariusbangbangbang :-) Quote of the week. : (hope I will be forgiven for what feels like a recent flurry : of posts here - tell me I'm boring and I'll shut up - for : exactly 36 hours) Naaah, FC is getting fun lately. Dwayne. -|-+-|- r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e -|-+-|- internet: hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au -|-+-|- OurAimIsWakefulnessOurEnemyIsDreamlessSleep -|-+-|- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12202 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Alan Sondheim Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 17:55:45 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 46 Message-ID: <3ag1uh$fof@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 22:50:24 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411170225.AA21105@panix3.panix.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..370:17.10.94.16.55.32"@uib.no> Shawn asks is it sex that sets a partner apart? Or where, if I remember, does marriage fit in? I've been married four times. The first one, I was sure it would last forever. The second time, I was sure of the same. The third was different - we had a child and I thought I could finally settle down. And the fourth was in part to keep my girlfriend in the United States (Allison from Tasmania). In each case, I thought the signifier of marriage would make a difference. It didn't. It can't possibly. It does make for legal entanglement and acceptance on a whole lot of levels from family and society in general. It does affect your income taxes. It affects everything in a sense, but not commitment. Sex is something else, and more complex. Sex almost always falls away after the first year and a half or two years. This is a known fact. To have a relationship based on sexuality can be catastrophic; it gets worse in a sense if the sex remains the same - but how many people really want to explore what are already considered perversions? The couple often ends up frozen in time, hanging on, dreaming of affairs, or having them. There has to be another basis for a relationship. Clearly, sex is sex because there's an edge to it, mutual annihilation, devouring, conquest, compassion, empathy. When the edge begins to disappear it becomes mutual servicing. But to keep the edge, couples have to open up more than they do - they're afraid if they open up the slightest, the world will cave in. It doesn't. If the edge doesn't get you, consider that the most-read Usenet group is alt.sex.bondage - because people dream, extend themselves in this space, when in reality they're scared to try anything different, or involved with lovers who are indifferent. It's not marriage, I think, and not sex that makes things work. It's willing to extend oneself, to grow in a relationship, to bring things, people, places, ideas, everything, into it, to be completely honest. This isn't romanticism - the relationships, marriages or not, that I've seen work, have all had this openness. And my final feeling is, that if you don't have this in your relationship, abandon it. You have only one life on earth and shouldn't waste a minute of it. (Of course I haven't had a date in years, mind you, so I may not know what I'm talking about.) Alan Article: 12203 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Philippa E Holloway Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 17:56:31 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 83 Message-ID: <3ag1vv$fq1@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 1994 23:59:20 -0500 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@PSUVM.PSU.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411162333.SAA01019@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu> from "aka bookish" at Nov 16, 94 05:14:18 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..400:17.10.94.16.56.07"@uib.no> Wow, this thread has brought us to a neat place. Thanks, all of you.... I think Im gonna try to respond to a bunch of posts in this one. Sorry if you hate this style, but it seems a bit silly to separate them. marius wrote: >Without monogamous relationships? Perhaps. Without relationships >at all? Hardly. I'd rather go with the polyamory people and love Ok, we're setting up 2 possibilities here: monagamy and polygamy/ polyamory. At the risk of sounding a bit silly, are these our only 2 options? Hakim Bey again: "what is your true desire?" Is it either one of these? If we're cyborgs, shouldnt we have more choices than appear in cheap romance novels? (ok, Im not sure what these options are. Help me out here, folks) >Oh, and I steadfastly hang on to my intuition that I could >never take part in a net.sex session without laughing more than >coming. So that's not really an option for me Well, I must admit the opposite. Though I have laughed a few times, the ratio of laughs to orgasms is pretty satisfactory. And both are fun, anyway. It's taking a hell of a toll on my keyboard tho. marius once more >Good one, Pip... (I know that feeling) I am much honored by your compliment, marius. on to shawn/bookish: >my loss of confidence in certain kinds of "relationships" - whatever those >are - particularly marriage. My own political commitments, and my own >strange response to issues of "identity", make any sort of one-to-one >exclusive commitment very difficult - but mostly because i am not very >one-ish. "do i contradict myself? very well then i contradict myself. I think that part of this is about "me" as much as the other person. How to explain... say I find someone who is accepting of my multi multiplicities. I still need to learn to be in a relationship and feel these multiplicities. I think when Im involved in a relationship with someone, I fall into this "Pip the monagamous, committed, caring, considerate, egalitarian lesbian" mood and stop feeling things that contradict that; stop feeling at various times unresponsbible, polyamorous, bi/hetero/whatever-sexual, inegalitarian (dominant, submissive), immature, etc. more shawn: >the marriage thing. or i'm fine with it, but then i don't know what "Sex" >is anymore. miming a reproductive act? something else? something to do >with "intimacy" perhaps? ("are we making love yet?" it's not a silly >question.) You know I used to be quite sure of my identity. But it's slipping further out of grasp daily. I was pretty sure what sex was, tho. Shawn! You're making that slippery too! Mike Holderness: >It seems quite likely to me that some of us are here _because_ we aren't >thrilled about the monogamy idea. I found when I discovered lists that >the multiple-thread discussions came rather naturally. I found that the Thanks. This is neat to tie this "relationship" disussion into broader one's we've had about knowledge and discourse . Finally, Fran's post which was indeed "gorgeous." I gotta admit it describes the kind of relationship I would love to find. Maybe what Im asking is what to do until then? How to gather up for myself as much of that wonderousness in my life, until she/he comes along.... --Pipwithastickyspacebarmakingmeechomarius pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp There are a thousand ways to kneel and kiss the ground -- Rumi Pippa Holloway Pip on LambdaMoo,PMC, Chiba & holloway.28@osu.edu WorldMoo pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp Article: 12204 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: PATRICIA BLACK Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 18:11:08 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 30 Message-ID: <3ag2rc$h1j@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 10:52:12 -0400 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..051:17.10.94.17.10.17"@uib.no> The skies here are grey and the wind is cold. Last night the wind was exciting, but now it's turned mean. Talk of monogamy and splitting up -- maybe we shouldn't speak of these things in November ... It seemed to me that as soon as Pippa mentioned it, a lot of people plunged -- and yes, she _has_ brought us to a neat place. Today is the anniversary of my divorce (1986), and the anniversary of my father's death (1956), a strange coincidence. I didn't know then that it was the same day but later I went to the graveyard and saw it -- I thought maybe it was when I looked back on the day and remembered my mother was crying _before_ I got there and told her the divorce had come through. So, is there a message here? Freedom is what I felt -- as soon as I left the marriage -- freedom flashing so strong I could barely hold it -- and I wasn't going to anyone else, and I wasn't leaving a bad man. And of course I was flying away from unbearable sadness. I know there's a con- nection -- Is it what Pippa said? We try so hard to be "good" when we commit, and we leave ourselves behind ("I looked for you in my closet tonight."). And when we're set free (out of the blue!) oh it's _way_ beyond mother-and-child-reunion! But does monogramy have to be a straitjacket (the straight life), do we have to be Little Hitlers? Alan says there's hope, so does Fran and Cindy. Maybe. patricia (monogramy?) tomorrow's topic P.S. Alan, I thought this _was_ a date -- Article: 12214 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Anthony Hersey Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 17 Nov 1994 23:56:07 +0100 Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. Lines: 24 Message-ID: <3agn27$s9h@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 15:29:47 EST5EST Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..636:17.10.94.22.56.01"@uib.no> Dwayne: I peeled a grape, and found that Fran Sendbuehler had written upon it: : : Hell...we can even wear each other's clothes. I've done this with every girl I've ever been out with. Maybe I'm weird. Dwayne. me: i've never had this experience, mainly because every female i've been involved with tends to be very petite, and sometimes, nearly a foot shorter than me. "One owes respect to the living. To the dead one owes only truth." -Voltaire >>>>>>>herseya@bart.db.erau.edu<<<<<<< btw: HAIL SPODE!!!! ;) Article: 12219 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Fran Sendbuehler Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 18 Nov 1994 02:06:26 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 138 Message-ID: <3agumi$2q1@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 17:18:15 -0500 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..361:18.10.94.01.06.06"@uib.no> >Fran wrote all sorts of lovely, wise, romantic things - talk about your >wonderful contradictions - to which i feel compelled to respond: Shawn, as did you; thanks to Alan, too, whose words are very touching. I hope that the length of my response is inspiring rather than daunting... (and thank you...) >of course, my quarrel with monogamy is not with caring for only one >person. i, too, am looking, i think, for some single person to share >larger, different, more important aspects of my life. but my understanding >of the ways in which "individuals" might articulate themselves in a >"relationship" at a time when the conventional models - like matrimony and >identity - seem more than a bit worse for wear. Seems to me that part of what you're saying is that we have to make our own, newer, shiner, models -- if it is, indeed, a model that we're looking for. (or are we trying to break the model?) Things have changed so much even since our parents' time -- I think that they don't, for the most part, even have any idea what we're looking for, even when we try to explain it as best we can. Perhaps that indicates that we have to find new words for it, too. I think that my Mum kind of understands what it is that I have and want from that having, but her understanding is more on an intuitive level than one of verbal communication of that idea. And she's told me more than once that, "I'll be damned if I could explain that to your father". Why, even, is parental understanding important? Perhaps only in that they understand our differences and that it's not quite the same society that we inhabit. What is important to "us" (me, my partner, my brother, his wife, others whom this idea "fits") is very different to what was important to them. >who is the special person, and what, in the absence of matrimonial >legalisms, is the quality that sets them apart. can it be "sex"? i'm a >little weary and wary of that move. it looks to me like a stop-gap fix for >the marriage thing. or i'm fine with it, but then i don't know what "Sex" >is anymore. miming a reproductive act? something else? something to do >with "intimacy" perhaps? ("are we making love yet?" it's not a silly >question.) (again) But what _is_ sex and how important is that in the establishment of a relationship? Not at all, really. Wouldn't you rather find someone of like mind first, then find out that love (in all permutations including the physical) is great, too. Doesn't great sex depend on intimacy of all possible kinds? I would maintain that it does...you can athletically fuck just about anyone or anything, but is it worth it? I think that like-mindedness is the most important step to the establishment of intimacy, even though that is not what the "sexual revolution" sought to teach us. Having already gone about it the wrong (to me) way and had long-term relationships that were initially based on mostly sexual attraction, I must assert that the best sort of intimacy comes from like-mindedness. And I mean that in the sense of not being identical to one another, but having a certain sameness that allows total communication. True partnership. Is it not better to begin _by_ making love than to have to wonder if you are yet? >the cyborg in me (which is also the whitmanesque figure that loafs and >invites its soul, that contains multitudes, that wonders "is this a >touch?") wants something other than identity, other than a sexuality >that only *produces* pleasure as if it was another commodity, beyond a >"relationship" that exists as some sort of co-ownership. Isn't that pleasure more intense when there are minds and emotions that go with that electricity produced by two bodies? What good is a touch if there's nothing behind it, if it is only a touch and not a _touch_. (Here, I mean the difference between sexual touches.) A sexuality that only produces pleasure as a commodity (and therefore depends on that commodity for the sexuality to exist) is but a shell...or the result of two shells rubbing together. Could it be just as empty as masturbation? Nearly...and sometimes moreso. What's the point of having a relationship wherein once there is no more pleasure in the other's body there is nothing but emptiness and grief in the relationship? As someone pointed out...sex (can? does?) fade(s). Once that's gone, there's nothing. But if you share minds and emotions, does sex fade? Does it matter if sex fades? You can still make love and not have sex, seems to me. >on the other hand, i am an intense, and intensely jealous, lover. (i'm >just talking to a few hundred of my closest friends here, right? i >shouldn't be worried that i've never met any of you, swapped snail mail >with one of you, only talked to two of you on the phone? what a crazy >space we have out t/here.) which may just be an acknowledgement that the >few really fulfilling contacts that i have had have been extraordinarily >precious - the sort of thing that i might, and do, feel pretty fierce >about protecting (though so often, of course, the greatest dangers come >from my own self.) (I'm sure that the 250 some odd of you don't mind these admissions...and listen eagerly for more!) I know what you're talking about here...for me, that kind of jealousy comes from learned behaviour in other relationships and has nothing whatsoever to do with the relationship that I'm in, despite the fact that it has, on occasion, surfaced -- but really only as a reminder that we are not like the people that the other had been with before. In terms of how we behave with/towards one another, and in the sense that it has no place in our relationship, we recognise it as something from past relationships (those that began with sexual attraction and depended on the maintenance of that attraction for emotional attraction). In both of my past relationships I'm thinking about, if my (ex) partner mentioned a past girlfriend or another attractive woman, it was in the sense that "she might be better to be with (read: to sleep with) than you". _That's_ what I couldn't stand about those relationships, more than anything -- it was a lack of trust that made me feel jealous in the first place. >so what does this mean, finally(?), about/for monogamy and me? i guess, to >the extent that the notions that underpin monogamy still retain at least >some force - Derrida's notion of ghostly discourses and debts might play >here - i still see myself as monogamous, as desiring exclusivity. but my >relationship to all of those underpinnings is somewhere between faith and >willing suspension of disbelief. as I sort of think it must be, until you meet it face to face. Kind of like romanticism..."it's nice and a lovely thought and all, but "will it happen to me?"" is often how people (me, too) think of it, until they reinvent within the context of a relationship. Perhaps monogamy is the same in some respects... >you know, folks, that there have been some gorgeous moments in this >discussion so far, mostly because there are some gorgeous folks in this >neighborhood. particular thanks right at this moment to marius, pip, alan, >fran and spud for being who they are... (blush) now we know whose voices are seducing you... Thank _you_, bookish, for your beautiful voice on this subject. this place really does feel very good lateely, doesn't it? >...and to rez and honoria, lurking at the moment, who i'll see "in real >life" in a few days. :waves to rez and honoria! >beautiful voices... > >love you all, > >-shawn Oh yes...many times over. Fran Article: 12233 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Alan Sondheim Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 18 Nov 1994 09:13:26 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3ahnn6$c3v@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 01:11:11 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411180324.AA08124@panix.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..438:18.10.94.08.13.02"@uib.no> In relation to what Fran writes, I agree. And the wonderful thing about monogamy is that, if it involves real intimacy, it's not, at least for me, the question of like minds, so much as respect for one another and helping/moving with one another. That is the beauty of it, this togetherness. I know alone I can make a complete idiot of myself; I'm awkward in company, drink almost not at all, can't hold a glass well, don't know how to behave. But with someone, I feel less wounded, or I can write my wounds, read hers. This must sound self-serving, but it's really no more than not feeling like a freak, feeling accepted. And being accepted is incredibly difficult. I'm some sort of maverick semi-nomadic intellectual - hard for people to take. Alone, there are times I want to cauterize myself, simply forget _thinking_ for a while. With a lover, at times, I can feel that it's all right to be this way. I'm not sure this is making much sense; it's not a thing of two people "completing" one another, but of accepting, from which anyone's incompletion stands a chance... Alan, still dateless after two plus years, sigh... Article: 12247 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Marius Watz Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 18 Nov 1994 19:37:02 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 81 Message-ID: <3ais8e$j52@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 17:27:18 +0100 Comments: To: futurec@uafsysb.uark.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <"alfie.uib..361:18.10.94.01.06.06"@uib.no> (message from Fran Sendbuehler on Thu, 17 Nov 1994 17:18:15 -0500) Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..824:18.10.94.18.36.44"@uib.no> [we are travelling far and wide here. this is beautiful. this is dangerous. this is trust, and we should value it beyond (the) words. I would like to extend an invitation to the lurkers to join in, even if the topic and the prospect of self-exposal is intimidating. Believe me, it is worth it.] One thing I've learned from my own life as well as watching the people on alt.polyamory for a while is that there is no such thing as a general definiton of love, or even sex. Nor is any model of love applicable to all persons or all situations. In my last relationship, the issue of sex was a touchy one because we had such a great sexual relationship at the beginning, but after a point it became very complex and caught up in all the other details of the relationship. As safety and comfort dwindled, so did sex but more importantly any physical contact. I knew we'd lost when we no longer touched each other. At one point, there was a large tension between my ex (M) and her best friend (S) - the initials are not fictitious. In some ways, S understood me better than M because she could relate to a lot of the darker sides of me. This tension culminated in several near-sexual encounters between S and me. All the while, M and I had an arrangement that said that if unfaithfulness is "necessary" for some reason but breaking up is not, the unfaithful party had no obligation to tell of the incident and should in fact deal with it hirself. This was based on the realization that the policy of truth is not always the best one (I think in fact that it is a bad one, seeing as being moral is more important than being truthful). M and I finally broke up after a long period where both of us knew (painfully) that it was over. I knew that when M finally broke the ice and wanted to let it go she had most likely found a replacement. It turns out I was right. Was I furious about it? No. Did I feel hurt? Well, yes, but only because the whole affair saddened me beyond telling. I hated myself for not being "better" than I was (and am), as well as blamed both of us for not letting it die before it got so achingly painful. I think polyamory (i.e. having multiple loves) is a very problematic thing to implement. The alt.polyamory people tend to emphasize the importance of informal "rules" withing relationships. I think this is the only way to solve problems in the long run, and it is a way that should be followed also in monogamous couplings. The rule between M and I was not that we had an "open" affair (which is usually a great way to split your veins open) but that each of us had the responsibility for our actions. To tell a partner of your unfaithfulness is not necessarily taking responsibility. It is just as often a way of taking it into the common sphere and make everyone suffer. Even if I find monogamy to be preferable most of the time, I think one should always be open to the fact that emotions are fluid and continually changing. One cannot find everything one needs in a partner, so one finds friends or - if necessary - lovers. Note that when I say "necessary" I don't mean it in a quantifiable way, it's a classic case of being in the eyes of the beholder. It is often more a matter of action than intent. I've never planned to be unfaithful. I know that given the right context and the right people I could be polyamorous. Some of my most exciting memories of sexual or near-sexual encounters deal with multiple people: Me and a steady couple doing 3-way frenchkissing in a hallway, me and M and S lying in a bed together just holding each other close. I'm not a jealous person unless I feel that people have malign intentions, in which case I cut things short (probably with a vengeance - one of my worst traits is my eloquency in the language of psychological violence). But right now, I'd give just about anything to be allowed to touch the skin of someone I love, to hold that person and to cry with that person (I'm still not able to cry while on my own), to talk about silly things with that persons and to be totally silent with that person. I miss that so much I'm going insane. mariuswashedaway Article: 12248 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: aka bookish Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: splitting [my-self] up (was Re: monogamy in your future?) Date: 19 Nov 1994 12:42:31 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 69 Message-ID: <3akob7$5dd@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 09:58:35 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411180002.TAA14752@falcon.bgsu.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..912:19.10.94.11.42.01"@uib.no> What deep woods these are... When i entered the fray over 'monogamy' i was already lost in them perhaps - led astray (though mostly pleasantly) by Pip's invocation of the cyborg, left chartless by my own situation in a "relationship" which, for a variety of messy reasons, must remain somewhat ill-defined, clandestine, sometimes even among ourselves. a meeting of the minds - precisely in the territory of the cyborg, as you may recall - which has quickly grown into something else, something that perhaps i thought i would not find. my question: how to talk about the relationship between such improper lovers, such shaken selves, and under such circumstances... It sounds more scandalous than it is - except that it seems that everything that might occupy the space of "intimacy" or, dare i say it, "love" is a bit scandalous, a bit improper. ... *this* space is scandalous, improper, excessive. this is not safe, or wise. but perhaps i'm not the only one who trusts to the power of voices never heard. if we weave them well enough, who would dare to break the spell..? i love you all. posters and lurkers alike. i write as much for the silent majority - a cry, a call, a seduction (which always seduces the seducer) - as i do for the wise, warm voices (or the wry, difficult ones, for that matter.) what were we talking about..? monogamy: as opposed to some other sort of exclusivity. can you be "monogamous" without marriage? i suppose the term stretches to fit new conditions. but what are those conditions? and how do they relate to the whole discourse of "mating" (the proper realm of monogamy)? i think, fran and others, that it is indeed something new in the way of models or discourses that we need. i suspect - suspicious sort that i am - that we would at the very least need to do some careful, conscious work on the old ones. then it occurs to me that "to marry" means also to join together ropes, "to combine or blend agreeably." and there is something there that a youngold cyborg like me might be able to use. but i hesitate, again and again. i fear i/we have been trained too well to escape the proper-ty relation in our relationships. too often, i have felt the exotic object - rather, perhaps, than the frayed, unraveled, too-short rope with which another such might be inclined to join. i stumble again over "a meeting of the minds" - too sensitive by far to a youth as a "brain" and then as an athlete, parts still unreconciled. perhaps this sounds like a personal (mind-body) problem... ..and, no doubt, this is the too-careful deferral of an anarchist poststructuralista, the queasy pleasure in leaky boundaries of a wannabe(comfortableagain) cyborg. perhaps it is too self-reflexive, too self-indulgent, or -centered, too redolent of masturbation for some. i will be so bold as to suggest that those folks will have misunderstood... and if the goal is to "make love" - in the broadest sense - then isn't that worth some careful consideration? what else could deserve more of our attention. there is no easy recipe, nor a set of blueprints we could follow. (or was there something on the WWWeb i messed? ;) for all sorts of reasons, i am glad that we have opened up this space of discourse and emotion. and i hope this clarifies my thoughts some, 'cause i've been getting in trouble on the local front... -shawn Article: 12256 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: dave meesters Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 19 Nov 1994 13:34:45 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 76 Message-ID: <3akrd5$6nj@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 14:12:39 -0500 Comments: To: FutureCulture List To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <9411180918.AA101575@email.unc.edu> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..466:19.10.94.12.34.23"@uib.no> I've really enjoyed this thread. It's one that I've been meaning to start for a while, wondering what relationships might look like, smell like, act like in the future. I feel like something is happening in me, in my personal relationships and my limited social sphere, something worth talking about. It's something that the conversation here has, I think, failed to capture, because in talk about monogamy and polygamy/polyamory, we're still dealing with the concept of the long-term romantic "love"-relationship (whether one or more), and what I'm witnessing in my life is something more like a breakdown of the distinction between friends and lovers. This rings true to me even though I'm not clear on what exactly constituted the difference between friends and lovers to begin with. Is it a certain kind, or level, of intimacy? Certainly *something* must be said for sex and other kinds of physicality. It's been said that sex is not the factor, that relationships aren't about sex, but sexual infidelity is almost unanimously the greatest transgression one can make against a relationship. If you would be upset if your partner had sex with another, if this is a threat to your relationship, then maybe sex means more than you think it does. Oh but I've gotten off track. ... I wanted to bring up something that Shawn said, about multiplicity and identity. I feel, in my subjective experience of myself and my life, so little like a single unified person that I don't have much trouble keeping my interactions in context. What I mean is that my inter/actions are specific to particular situations, moments, an intimacy with the present that overrides past and future. What does my relationship with Nancy have to do with my relationships with Judy or Paul, except that they intersect on the same body? That body is the only thing that lends real continuity to my experience, and yes, it is uncomfortable when a lover discovers on my body marks recently left by another. There is not much in the way of an overarching life-story where I can put all of my various relationships together in interaction with one another. The fabric is too thin and ephemeral, it tears too easily. Where others may have a quilt, I have a box of rags. Q: Are you a vegetarian? A: It depends on what I'm eating. What does all this mean in real life? I don't know--I'm working on it. But I know that I cherish moments of intimacy and my greatest love is finding them (and creating them) in the most diverse, surprising, stimulating, intense situations possible. Consistency can be a plus, especially in times when you're needing stability, but I refuse to buy into the game of jealousy, expectations, demands, control, ownership, guilt, and so on straight into the ground. Thankfully, I am historically not a jealous person. Argh. I've ended up rambling about a lot of what I didn't plan to write about when I started this post, but if you made sense of any of this, then maybe you'll have gotten the gist of what more I might have said about the blurring of distinctions between friends and lovers (If so, you're ahead of me). Haha. I also wanted to talk about more sex (I love to talk about sex), but to hell with that for now. I have to confess that I hate being analytical at times like this, but I've come to believe that it's my curse to tease apart and drain the blood from everything mysterious, beautiful, and organic. Is there any hope for me? --dave Article: 12258 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Robert Smith Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 19 Nov 1994 13:52:31 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 15 Message-ID: <3aksef$73c@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 14:03:35 -0800 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <9411182058.AA25027@goalkeeper.d2.com> from "Marius Watz" at Nov 18, 94 05:27:18 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..522:19.10.94.12.52.17"@uib.no> You are a wonderful writer. I often find myself without words to describe what I feel/think. I envy you in that. By coincidence, your words sometimes reflect my thoughts. Whoa. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o R. Y. Smith, Jr. Digital Domain tel:310/314.2920 300 Rose Ave fax:310/314.2866 Venice, CA 90291 fixer@d2.com 310/314.2800 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Article: 12278 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Dwayne Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: monogamy in your future? (was Re: splitting up) Date: 19 Nov 1994 14:50:42 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 62 Message-ID: <3akvri$8u3@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Sat, 19 Nov 1994 14:23:13 +1100 Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411182057.HAA20215@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> from "Marius Watz" at Nov 18, 94 05:27:18 pm Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..404:19.10.94.13.50.06"@uib.no> X-Suggested action: lie down on the floor and keep calm. X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2339 I peeled a grape, and found that Marius Watz had written upon it: : : The rule between M and I was not that : we had an "open" affair (which is usually a great way to split : your veins open) but that each of us had the responsibility : for our actions. To tell a partner of your unfaithfulness is : not necessarily taking responsibility. It is just as often a : way of taking it into the common sphere and make everyone : suffer. Wow. I'm going to have to think about this. I don't know how I would deal with this sort of thing, seeing as how I'm such a *completely* possessive bastard, but hey, I know I am, and whoever I'm seeing gets fair warning. :-) : Even if I find monogamy to be preferable most of the time, I : think one should always be open to the fact that emotions are : fluid and continually changing. One cannot find everything one : needs in a partner, so one finds friends or - if necessary - : lovers. Yes, I have extremely intimate friendships with several of my friends, and that seems to satisfy any need I have for intimacy outside of a relationship. But I tend to differentiate between sex and intimacy/friendship. : I'm not a jealous person unless I feel that people have : malign intentions, in which case I cut things short (probably : with a vengeance - one of my worst traits is my eloquency : in the language of psychological violence). Yersss. [nods head sagely] Yup. It's a trust thing with me, I tend to be quite savage when my trust has been broken, but until then I will do just about anything for my friends (as I have just found out. Ask me about my last house sometie. yucko] : But right now, I'd give just about anything to be allowed to : touch the skin of someone I love, to hold that person and to : cry with that person (I'm still not able to cry while on my own), : to talk about silly things with that persons and to be totally : silent with that person. I miss that so much I'm going insane. Hmmmm. [nods head sagely] [worries] Dwayne. -------> hiscdcj@lux.latrobe.edu.au <-------- looking for * permaculture * resources on the net. Mail me with URLs * http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/Permaculture/permaculture.html * NEXUS:.settling.the.electronic.frontier.. mail listserv@netcom.com http://www.latrobe.edu.au/nexus/ "subscribe nexus-gaia" Article: 12306 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: PATRICIA BLACK Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Lovely, dark, and deep (... monogamy) Date: 20 Nov 1994 19:38:06 +0100 Organization: University of NC at Greensboro Lines: 19 Message-ID: <3ao52e$2oh@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Sun, 20 Nov 1994 13:37:13 -0400 Comments: To: FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..014:20.10.94.18.37.49"@uib.no> A good day on FutureC -- Dwayne's "Are you famous?" *Bingo* [for a guy who's depressed, you're doing okay!] Dave's "... my curse to tease apart and drain the blood from every- thing mysterious, beautiful, and organic" ["Cerebrate, cerebrate, dance to the music!"] and bookish's "deep woods" with those subtextual promises to keep -- ah, there's the rub... and _Alan_! Stop with this no _dates_ stuff! We're right here in front of you -- all dolled up and virtually yours, oh awkward one! [We love that about you :)] "With a lover, at times, I can feel that it's all right to be this way." With _us_ you can feel that it's all right to be this way. So c'mon, enough whining! :) with the glimpse into ambush bug's mental terrain leaving me in des- pair, thank-you to everyone else. patricia -- [that's me with my eyes closed, Alan ...] :) (who _is_ this little tramp?) Article: 12313 of fa.future-culture Path: nntp.uio.no!ifi.uio.no!internet-mailinglist From: Alan Sondheim Newsgroups: fa.future-culture Subject: Re: Lovely, dark, and deep (... monogamy) Date: 20 Nov 1994 21:17:50 +0100 Organization: Internet mailing list Lines: 41 Message-ID: <3aoate$4s9@ifi.uio.no> Reply-To: Future Culture NNTP-Posting-Host: ifi.uio.no Return-Path: Original-Date: Sun, 20 Nov 1994 14:36:42 -0500 Comments: To: Future Culture Comments: cc: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC In-Reply-To: <199411201837.AA09723@panix.com> Original-Message-ID: <"alfie.uib..109:20.10.94.20.17.41"@uib.no> I've been writing the erstwhile Doctress Neutopia on and off her alt.society.neutopia. I'm fascinated by a lot of things here - first, her bravery in posting about herself, and her both gracious and confrontational attitudes. I don't buy into her theories at all for a lot of fairly obvious reasons, but she writes, beneath the surface, delicately of love and cyberflirts, and the ultimate failures of at least one and possibly both. (Take your pick.) What's also interesting is the dynamic of alt.society.neutopia as a whole - so much of the frontal attacks are by men, who, even in their humor, reproduce a problematic of power. There are women who participate as well, including one Jenny who tried to be supportive with the Doctress, but to no avail. It's a complicated field of interactions. The Utopianism interests me. Utopias will never work, if for no other reason, precisely because of the problematic of power. If I am going to organize a Utopian state, at least some of the people in the neighborhood are going to have to be coerced, and in any case, there will be a radical break with traditions and territorialization that literally amounts to culture rape, no matter what the intentions. On the other hand, we're culture raping and murdering most of the species on the planet at the moment (they're dying off at the rate of 3-4 per hour - _species,_ not individual organisms), and even our own species, in a period of reproductive bloom, is _in extremis._ So a teleology or ideal has to be somewhere in the works in order for activism of any sort of have an impetus. And coercion _is_ necessary, say, to stop poaching in Africa, to keep our own national park system alive. There's supposed to be an article in Newsweek tomorrow in which the Doctress is mentioned - I'm going to look out for it. Finally, in an odd way, it's people like her on one hand, and some of the more vicious characters on the Net, who define the limits of the medium. In a sense, she puts her life on the line, and that's interesting. Michael Current did it as well, I try, there are others. But it's an odd envelope, odd space in that sense. It's not as if this post is reaching a conclusion, just that these states of being, so to speak, are there, complicated and fascinating, and deserve our attention. Alan deeply emotionally in love with all of you :) From owner-futurec@UAFSYSB.UARK.EDU Tue Nov 22 06:22:31 1994 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 16:26:16 EST5EST Reply-To: Future Culture <@lilje.uib.no:FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.bitnet> Sender: Future Culture <@lilje.uib.no:FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.bitnet> From: Anthony Hersey Organization: Embry-Riddle Aeronautical Univ. Subject: Relationships- My 2 cents Comments: To: FUTUREC%UAFSYSB.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FUTUREC <@lilje.uib.no:FUTUREC@UAFSYSB.bitnet> Well, i suppose i should put something into this field, being one of the main topics of ongoing conversation between my best friend and myself. **I admit, i am young, so anything i say is said with very little experience thus far. The type of femme i am attracted to: charming, naive, yet still very intelligent... somehow not yet cynical enough to view the world as i do The type i usually end up in "official" relationships with: stupid, pretty, and "comfortable" it has not been unusual for me to describe myself as an inspirational vampire... i suck people dry in a short while... all for very selfish reasons, and start over again. the type i am attracted to, when we are actually on good terms, influences some of the most prolific times of my writing; twisted-gut wrenching works mostly... the real problem is that i DO love them, to the point where they consume my waking thoughts; the dilemna is that i know how i am, and try to keep them from falling in love with me, because i don't want them to be hurt when i leave... it's not a question of "if i do" for me.. i just know i will :( this is reflected somewhat in what i write (which i might post here, if i thought anyone was interested).. i try to make the pain less for them, and take it all upon myself... i can say that i still love all the femmes i have ever loved... they are still there, not forgotten, no matter how much i try... i see them in my dreams... i lament relationships i never had... i hear their words in my writing... it's their tears i cry myself to sleep with... "One owes respect to the living. To the dead one owes only truth." -Voltaire >>>>>>>cureboy@anon.penet.fi<<<<<<<