As part of the Alternative Lifestyles blog-posts migration over to the new blog The Professor’s Lifestyles Memoirs, this post has been moved there. To read this post please click the link to the blog.
Your patience is appreciated. Thank you!
I am in the process of intently reading three superb books on America’s current anemic social and economic position. By what I have read so far, all three of these books speak directly to my deep concern for our country’s doomed path of progression: exclusivism; unless this path changes. Following are some reviews of these books.
A forceful argument against America’s vicious circle of growing inequality by the Nobel Prize–winning economist.
The top 1 percent of Americans control 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. And, as Joseph E. Stiglitz explains, while those at the top enjoy the best health care, education, and benefits of wealth, they fail to realize that “their fate is bound up with how the other 99 percent live.”
Stiglitz draws on his deep understanding of economics to show that growing inequality is not inevitable: moneyed interests compound their wealth by stifling true, dynamic capitalism. They have made America the most unequal advanced industrial country while crippling growth, trampling on the rule of law, and undermining democracy. The result: a divided society that cannot tackle its most pressing problems. With characteristic insight, Stiglitz examines our current state, then teases out its implications for democracy, for monetary and budgetary policy, and for globalization. He closes with a plan for a more just and prosperous future.
The other two books in which I am engrossed are the Nobel Prize Winner in Economics, Paul Krugman’s End This Depression Now and the book I am foaming at the mouth to finish, It’s Even Worse Than It Looks by co-authors Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein.
The Great Recession is more than four years old—and counting. Yet, as Paul Krugman points out in this powerful volley, “Nations rich in resources, talent, and knowledge—all the ingredients for prosperity and a decent standard of living for all—remain in a state of intense pain.”
How bad have things gotten? How did we get stuck in what now can only be called a depression? And above all, how do we free ourselves? Krugman pursues these questions with his characteristic lucidity and insight. He has a powerful message for anyone who has suffered over these past four years—a quick, strong recovery is just one step away, if our leaders can find the “intellectual clarity and political will” to end this depression now.
And on Mann’s and Ornstein’s book —
Acrimony and hyper-partisanship have seeped into every part of the political process. Congress is deadlocked and its approval ratings are at record lows. America’s two main political parties have given up their traditions of compromise, endangering our very system of constitutional democracy. And one of these parties has taken on the role of insurgent outlier; the Republicans have become ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, and ardently opposed to the established social and economic policy regime.
In It’s Even Worse Than It Looks, congressional scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein identify two overriding problems that have led Congress—and the United States—to the brink of institutional collapse. The first is the serious mismatch between our political parties, which have become as vehemently adversarial as parliamentary parties, and a governing system that, unlike a parliamentary democracy, makes it extremely difficult for majorities to act. Second, while both parties participate in tribal warfare, both sides are not equally culpable. The political system faces what the authors call “asymmetric polarization,” with the Republican Party implacably refusing to allow anything that might help the Democrats politically, no matter the cost.
With dysfunction rooted in long-term political trends, a coarsened political culture and a new partisan media, the authors conclude that there is no “silver bullet” reform that can solve everything. But they offer a panoply of useful ideas and reforms, endorsing some solutions, like greater public participation and institutional restructuring of the House and Senate, while debunking others, like independent or third-party candidates. Above all, they call on the media as well as the public at large to focus on the true causes of dysfunction rather than just throwing the bums out every election cycle. Until voters learn to act strategically to reward problem solving and punish obstruction, American democracy will remain in serious danger.
As I have written about adequately throughout my WordPress blog, exclusivism, elitism, and mob-egotism seriously, seriously threaten modern democracies and ultimately this planet. Apparently Stiglitz, Krugman, Mann, and Ornstein would more less agree, particularly in a socio-economic context. Ah, humbly I need to restate that: I apparently agree with them. Or perhaps the five of us all agree.
But I will not jump too hastily to conclusions. I will completely finish these three fine works and THEN incorporate their problem-identifications, solutions, and ideals into my views and opinions for a better nation and world. Come to think of it, I can probably merge polyamory and the open-swinger lifestyle (grinning and laughing) into my viewpoint as well!
Stay tuned!
Since posting this in April 2011, it has been my most popular blog with over 11,000 views so far. It seems a good idea to reblog it since intersex births and sexual orientations are commonly misunderstood or avoided, or worse… attacked.
In my archaic way of thinking, or perhaps as my conservative culture taught me, I thought that a boy was a boy not only by how similar he acted among me and other boys, but also because of his genitalia. And a girl was a girl not only by how similar she acted among other girls, but because of her genitalia as well. It all seemed pretty obvious and quite simple, so I thought for more than 30 years.
A few years ago my mother informed me of the death of a dear family friend and halfway-house mother to my sister of addiction and innumerable relapses. She had been there for my mom and other women countless times as my sister fought her disease on the losing end. This woman had been a pillar of hope and therapy in the community for battered, abused women, and many typically in chemical addiction. I was unaware that she had been what is often termed as an “intersexed baby”; a prenatal condition I knew absolutely nothing about. Subsequently, this not-so-rare occurrence completely overhauled my views on sexual orientation, “same-sex” marriage, and gender identity.
Exact numbers of intersexed births are difficult to determine due to the lack of a humane dignifying definition of what physically should be considered normal or abnormal. The ignorance and social stigma the condition carries with it is as much a part of the difficulty as the collective understanding by medical science. Despite the ongoing studies one thing is quite clear. Sexual orientation, same-sex marriage, and gender identity IS NOT a social-religious debate, period.
Here is some perspective. It is commonly accepted in the medical community that on a global scale there are likely as many intersexed births as there are Jews. It is more common than multiple-sclerosis. More specifically, according to the Intersex Society of North America, about one in 100 births are intersexed or do not fall under “standard” male or female identity. One in 1,666 births has no clear XX or XY chromosome structure. For a more expansive report of all types of intersex conditions visit the ISNA (http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency) website. With chromosome structures outside of the traditional gender dichotomy, how can sexual or gender identity ever be separated from a genetic hard-wiring? Intersexed people could not have made the presumed adolescent or adult choice in “un-Godly perversion” if their condition formed in the womb. As such, social political shaming of these people can never be justified by any ideology. In fact, under such an archaic model one could argue that the molecular, biological, hormonal embryonic designing of intersex babies is from God’s workshop. Think about those implications.
The available prenatal and neonatal hormonal development studies are showing that aside from physical conditions, the development of testosterone and estrogen levels, or the under-developed levels, can sometimes vary widely. Pediatric and adolescent psychology has shown that intersex patient’s social behavior are indeed influenced by the relative levels of these and other gender hormones not necessarily specific to their external natal anatomy. A wonderful comprehensive article on the intricacies of intersexed births by Joy A. Bilharz can be found in her scholarly report (Click here). I highly recommend reading it two or three times. With this medical knowledge, it is not a stretch by any means to theorize, if not conclude, that there are smaller variations hormonally and neurologically in the general “natural” population that despite their social catch-all external anatomy, internally their gender development is different starting at conception.
For me, this is obvious: The rigid binary sexual-gender identification models many Americans have must be trashed for a more biologically, chromosome-informed model for not only political-legal reasons, but more importantly for humane reasons. However, the LGBT and intersex communities must avoid pendulum-mania. Elitism would certainly hamper hard fought gains. As Joy Bilharz notes,
The transgender movement…is attempting to breakdown the boxes into which people are pigeonholed on the basis of actual or presumed characteristics. Unfortunately, however, it has shown itself to be as exclusive and intolerant in many respects as the society whose values it rejects. This may represent the radical beginning typical of most social movements and it certainly doesn’t represent all of those who see themselves as transgendered. On the other hand, an attempt to bring all sex and gender and sexual minorities under a single umbrella of “queerness” can also be seen as having a homogenizing effect that creates discord within the category as different groups jockey for leadership positions or stake out their exclusive turf.
From a legal-political standpoint, I encourage the intersex/LGBT community to show first and foremost that they have something very unique to offer society without segregating it. A tall order in some cases, yes. But remember, men like myself, however fortunate to have grown up in a Humanist home, who are heterosexual and unaware that there are truly MORE flavor’s of ice cream than simply vanilla or chocolate. Since the condition did not directly affect my family, I was a product of our society’s concealment-approach to intersex and sexual orientation.
In defense of those like me, it is mindful to remember the “democracy” the United States of America was founded and later built upon: primarily European theological and social doctrines, which traditionally ostracized non-Catholics, or non-Protestants, or non-Christians who challenged or questioned them. Do not despair. Our nation’s brief history is laden with violent civil-rights movements that took many decades and generations to change legally. Fortunately, they did happen. One day, hopefully soon, ignorance will once again be overcome.
[Later addition] Our wonderful close family friend had told my Mom that for her entire life she felt her doctor and parents made the wrong gender choice for her at birth. She never felt as if she was female. Her social assimilation growing up was often unbearable at times eventually leading to prescription drug addiction, alcoholism, and illegal drug addiction. Thankfully, by her late thirties she turned her life around with large support by chemical dependency programs but most of all the support by other intersex support groups. As a result, she became the Director of no less than four women’s halfway-houses! Listening to my mother speak so fondly about her, I cannot help but wonder what mental and emotional state my Mom might otherwise be in, much less my sister. Thank all goodness in this Universe that someone so special and unique as her was THERE for us….us “standard” humans who too often treat people like her politically and socially as sub-human.
If this blog has piqued your interest, let me know and begin your own study of the subject. Start perhaps with Wikipedia’s basic overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_differentiation#Hormonal_differentiation. I think you will find how much you DIDN’T know.
This work by Professor Taboo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://professortaboo.wordpress.com.
The Greek philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus
paragraph formating
For those who are awake, the cosmos is One.
— Heraclitus c. 475-455 BCE
paragraph formatting
We are all connected. The last four words of the previous article in this series (from Connectivity — Back to Physics Class). “We are all connected.” What do you think that really means? Let us explore this question by first asking some other questions.
Why is the telegraph and Morse code not in use anymore? At the time of its discovery, communication was taking place slowly. Over long distances it sometimes took weeks or months to reach its intended eyes or ears. With the advent of the telegraph that all changed, for the better. Why is the Geocentric model of our solar system no longer in use? At the time of its formulation, every day and night the sun, stars, moon, and visible planets appeared to revolve around the Earth, so it followed that the Earth was the center of everything. Navigating the vast seas could be done precisely with this model and seafaring trade captains and sailors soon realized they actually would not fall off the edge of a flat Earth or limited seas.
The telegraph and Geocentrism both served mankind well and seemingly true, so why abandon them? These old paradigms were no longer useful because humanity, more specifically human ingenuity, research, successful experimentation and modified hypothesi were able to flourish and discover they simply were untrue. A closer look at these two historical events, however, reveals that one was widely embraced in a short period while the other took 1,200 years. Imagine where this world would be had the Authorities of Truth and Death lost their mass appeal when Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler first presented the right Universe?
Heraclitus is often considered one of the founders of Metaphysics and perhaps to an extent Quantum physics. Going against the mainstream of his contemporaries, he said “You cannot step into the same river twice, for fresh waters are ever flowing in upon you.” For the time, his claims were radical and challenged the establishment. Another fascinating philosophy of Heraclitus was that of observer upon the nature of opposites. It was his belief in the “unity of opposites”. One cannot exist without the other, especially from the standpoint of the observer. This type of debate, speculation, and reformation was welcomed right up into the early 4th century C.E. when everything changed.
From about 2000 BCE to 400 C.E. commonly known as the Classical Era, there were two fundamental belief systems competing for the hearts and minds of mankind. These opposing groups have been described in religious and historical texts in different forms. One group taught doctrines of unity and wholeness of the world and cosmos. The other taught doctrines of separation, classes or a caste system, and depravity. The former embraces a multiverse where existence is simultaneous in parallel coexisting dimensions. The latter embraces a universe, or monoverse if you will, where existence is dependent on another “force” and we control or have little influence upon it. One is a participator/activator, the other is merely an observer/receptor. Care to guess which group won out? A few other fundamental sub-groups spawned from this system as well, amplifying the divisions and destruction upon humanity.
Exclusivity, or elitism, has been one of humanity’s worst undercover killers. This lethal or potentially lethal mentality stems from a belief-framework of separation — separation from each other, or separation from creation/creator. This mentality is sometimes subtle in where or how it exists, so allow me to elaborate.
Intolerance of differing beliefs or lifestyles is always accompanied by harmful action. How many various examples of intolerance do we witness today? How many various examples can we recall throughout recent or ancient history (Sept. 11th, 2001 and The Trail of Tears of the Cherokee nation to name just two)? Don’t be fooled. Merely considering followers of other religions to hold invalid beliefs, considering them “lost” or deluded, or assessing their behavior as immoral or heretical is nothing more than exclusivism.
If you are in the least hyper-sensitive about your personal communal religious beliefs, then you may consider stopping here and read no further. I am going to point out specific passages in the Christian New Testament that clearly promote exclusivism, and potential-probable intolerance. Keep in mind that anyone can find these underlying teachings in many of the world’s major religions; the Christian New Testament is one example and not being singled out. But for most of Western Civilization — the birthplace of modern Quantum Mechanics — it must be pointed out as no longer useful.
The Apostle Peter, one of Christendom’s major icons, preaches exclusivism unequivocally:
“Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole… Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.”— Acts 4:10-12
There are perhaps three ways to interpret this passage. One, conservative Christian ministers and apologists accept this passage for face value. All non-Christians will after death be unsaved from the expected/accepted eternal damnation of a place called Hell. These verses have inspired missionaries, through hope and fear, to go into pagan non-Christian corners of the world to win converts. The passage implies not only eternal punishment for non-Christian believers, but more profoundly an intolerant God of any other belief systems.
Apostles Peter and Paul – the two most revered contributors to the Christian New Testament
Second, many religious liberals might reject such a literal interpretation of the passage. They could argue that a baby born in India or Arabia has a very likely chance of becoming a non-Christian adult — in other words, a Hindu, Muslim, or Sikh. In modern Israel the chances of a baby becoming Jewish are around 99% not Christian. According to the Apostle Peter and the Christian New Testament, trusting Jesus as Lord and Savior as the only route to eternal bliss, then a very large majority of the earth’s population will remain unsaved. After their death, they will be tortured in Hell for all eternity without hope of mercy, for the simple reason that they followed the religion of their parents and community. Many Christian liberals consider such a destiny to be incompatible with the concept of a loving and just God.
Thirdly, the Roman Catholic Church today takes a more moderate position on the matter: even though followers of non-Christian faiths do not accept Jesus Christ as their Savior, it is possible for them to receive salvation by following their own religion. However, this “new” mercy (presumably handed down from God to the Pope and his holiest bishops) does not extend to individuals who have been raised as agnostics or atheists, or have converted to unGodly beliefs such as agnosticism or atheism. To say it another way, those who do not conform at a minimum to a monotheistic tradition such as Judaism, Christianity, or Islam will suffer eternal damnation.
The Apostle Paul teaches just as much exclusivity as Peter. Paul wrote that Gentiles worshipped devils. Today, those would be called Satanists, Black or White witches, occultists, or wiccans.
“But I say, that the things which Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.”— I Corinthians 10: 20-21
Paul makes it clear that the Gods and Goddesses of other religions are actually demons. Christians are to completely isolate themselves from non-Christians, not even dine at the same dinner tables. “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness?” (II Corinthians 6: 14). Paul requires his followers to separate from “unbelievers“. He teaches his weak-willed followers to avoid close relationships with non-Christians. He implies that non-Christians are automatically unrighteous. He associates Christianity with “light” and all other religions with “darkness“. Paul teaches that duality cannot coexist. The Apostle Paul would be laughed at among modern quantum physicists.
“…ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.”— I Thessalonians 2: 14-16
Paul apparently has a tendency for anti-Semitism. He clearly blames the Jews for murdering Jesus. Christian theologians today and Roman historians alike, feel that Jews had little to do with Jesus’ execution. Jesus’ aggravated assaults in the Jerusalem temple, and verbal abuse toward the Jewish priests would have been considered an act of insurrection by Roman authorities, and made him eligible for Roman crucifixion. This falls in line, according to modern Roman scholars, with the Apostle Paul being previously well acquainted in Roman society, even a Roman citizen with all its amenities, prior to meeting Jesus on the road to Damascus.
There are several other clear indications that the Christian New Testament supports exclusivity.
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” — John 14: 6
“As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” — Galatians 1: 9
“While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed [i.e. the Jewish Christians] were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” — Acts 10: 44-45
“And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.” — Acts 11: 1-3
The first passage above (John 14: 6), it has been one of the main biblical passages of all Christendom used to devalue non-Christian religions or belief systems. Its meaning and implications cannot be misunderstood in the least: the only way to eternal bliss both here in this life or the next is through belief in Jesus and his teachings from the canonical Christian New Testament. In the second passage (Galatians 1: 9), Paul simply curses any teachings that deviate from his own. What many amateur Christians are unaware is that during the first two centuries C.E. (or in Catholic terms A.D.) there were three main Christian movements. This should be no surprise at all to modern inquisitors of faith-choices. Try to count all the various types of Catholic or Protestant churches available today, and you will spend the better part of a year or more researching their differences! In 1st and 2nd century Jerusalem though, there were the Pauline Christians, who were pitted against the Gnostic Christians, and Jewish Christians, and any others. More often than not, a city in that part of the Roman empire would have three or more Christian groups, each teaching very different doctrines. Paul obviously proclaims not only HIS version of Jesus, but just as much his Graeco-Roman background.
In the third passage above (Acts 10: 44-45), Peter is publicly speaking to a mixed group of Jewish Christians and intrigued Gentiles. A number of the Gentiles were “filled with the Holy Spirit.” Jewish Christians were bothered by this because they felt the message was strictly for them. They viewed Jesus’ teachings were merely a reform movement within Judaism, and not pertinent for non-Jews. With the last passage (Acts 11: 1-3), some Jewish Christians argued with Peter for associating with non-Jews and eating with them, which was common during the time. Before the Graeco-Roman teachings of Paul became mainstream in 325 C.E., Jewish Christians viewed Jesus’ reformations as teachings for them only. Peter persuades many of them that it is the will of the Holy Spirit to also reform the Gentiles. Nonetheless, the seven New Testament passages I have shared here are only a small portion of the many, many passages throughout the entire Bible — Old and New Testaments — that promotes separation among mankind, or elitism, or exclusion from creation/Creator.
2008 World Literacy Map
Fortunately, with the help of modern quantum physics and unified field theory, the old paradigms are seeing their last decades. This is more evident as the world’s cultures and nations gradually become more literate and can grasp, at least in basic terms or better, what these collective physicists and scientists are proving. Examine the world literacy map (left). It shows that much of the population is educated. As this rate continues to rise over time, barring the militant illiterate regions exterminating much of humanity’s rise to mental and spiritual brilliance, the outcome will be that mankind requires a completely new framework of unity, of oneness, not separation. Let me be more precise; not religious separation.
A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge. — Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot (1994)
You may think that Carl Sagan’s revelation is far-fetched. Yet, already many renown scholars of mathematics and quantum physicists are in agreement: the existence of a web of energy connecting our physical world and our bodies to everything in the universe/multiverse suggests an entire overhaul of life as we have perceived it the last sixteen centuries. John A. Wheeler, a theoretical physicist at Princeton University and colleague of Albert Einstein, is credited for mentoring some of America’s most accomplished scientists of quantum mechanics today. Einstein believed that mankind had little influence on our environment, on our universe as a whole and that we were simply spectators. However, the late John Wheeler and his protegés today offer a radical departure from Einstein’s commonly held system. “We are participators…” Wheeler explains, “in bringing into being not only the near and here but the far away and long ago. We are in this sense, participators in bringing about something of the universe in the distant past and if we have one explanation for what’s happening in the distant past why should we need more?” Light (or the energy of light) travels to our eyes and skin by billions of interacting particles between us and our Sun, or light bulbs, or fires, whatever the source. If Wheeler is correct, then we are each creators of our reality and as we understand our world, the 7 billion inhabitants on this planet collectively manifest life itself! Quantum physics is supporting Wheeler’s idea too.
Are things able to travel faster than the speed of light, and can they be in two places at once? And if things have this ability, what about us?
(line break)
In addition to proving a unified field, an energy web connecting everything, quantum research is showing that the connections exist BECAUSE of us! We are not some creation out of an invisible force’s boredom or loneliness. Indeed, the fact that the quantum discoveries show we can use our connectedness consciously hands us the key to open the door to the same power that drives the whole universe/multiverse. Let that sink in for a moment. Put another way, because of our direct connection to inner and outer space, our oneness living inside you, me, and every single being on this planet, we have a direct line…no, we are a vital part of the same force that creates everything from atoms to the DNA of existence itself. Therefore, in ways that we are only now realizing, we find that not only are we inseparable with all life and human beings, and what we see, but also with everything that has ever been, as well as things which are yet to happen! Do you need a moment to fathom that? Do you understand that what we are experiencing now is the result of events that have already occurred in a realm of the multiverse we cannot even see? Yes indeed, these are the discoveries over the last 2-3 years in quantum physics.
The ramifications of these discoveries are huge, and undermine so many centuries of tradition, myth, and legend. As the evidence mounts and the quantum discoveries continue, all of mankind will finally be forced to toss out the Medieval Dark Age paradigms once and for all. The telegraph and Geocentric model will no longer serve, if you will, any purpose for our modern needs. Hence, the defunct orthodoxy of the nature of existence: who we are, what we are, what we need for the “beyond” will finally, and long over due, be matched with reality and how the multiverse/universe and creation truly function. What an awe-inspiring exciting future that holds for ALL OF US….not just a “special” few.
Like it or not, you, me, and every single soul on this earth are intimately connected; not all separate, exclusive, or élite. I dare say the only difference is our freedom of creativity, ingenuity, and altruistic philanthropy to “spread the wealth” of true existence. We are very much connected. What a wonderful breath of fresh air this is!
This work by Professor Taboo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://professortaboo.wordpress.com.
In April 2011 I wrote about how exclusiveness kills healthy friendships in the name of monogamy: The Curious Perplexity of Attachment. Curious how history repeats itself. This past weekend a very dear female college friend and I talked on the phone, updating each other on the past year since we spoke last. Allow me to give some background.
Both of us make each other laugh a lot, always have. During our rough times — each going through very difficult divorces — we were there for each other speaking brutally honest about anything, often saying things that the listener didn’t want to hear. Over the past five to seven years of our close friendship, we had always confessed “what if”…how greater the closeness could be if we were dating. Fun natural flirting came easy between us. But the 400+ miles and each of our separate families and kids kept us apart. The last time I had spoken with her she was madly in love with a new man. Fast forward to this weekend. Now that man was way out, even psychotic in her words, and now she has a new “keeper”.
What is so important or different about all this you ask? It is this: when I spoke honestly with her and flirted like we have always done over our 29-year friendship, strangely she did not respond. In fact, it seemed awkwardly BLAND. I thought to myself something is weird, out of balance, or something. When is she going to explain this?
If you have read my April 2011 blog The Curious Perplexity of Attachment, then you will know that the women to whom I was referring are past girlfriends, i.e. intimate relationships over multiple consecutive months. This good college friend of 29 years has always been a platonic friendship; never any sexual moments, not even any temptations except over the phone, long distance when her divorce had been filed by her husband. She was in a lot of disillusioned pain, struggling with 17 years of a dying marriage which sadly involved their four children. Her soon-to-be ex-husband was intentionally pitting the children against her. Innocent bystanders of a man’s anger.
There are several significant factors involved in the demise of her marriage but suffice to say for this article, infidelity was the root cause of the divorce. However, getting engrossed in the ugly mismanaged details of their marriage and divorce is not the purpose of my article today. Honestly, what happened between my dear friend and her husband or its complexities is ultimately none of my business or anyone else’s business. What is my business is how her “new” relationship with Mr. Keeper has now affected our 29-year friendship.
After our phone conversation my dear friend explained why she was not being her old, or usual self with me and our fun flirting. “As much as I love you” she explained, “…I feel loyal to [Mr. Keeper]. I never want to EVER cross the line again. You were playing like we always do (which made me smile), but I want to honor him and not flirt with anyone.” I must be honest, I was bothered by this explanation.
She and I have always, always been ourselves with each other. We have always been very comfortable in sharing all of our unedited, undiluted thoughts and feelings with each other. We could do so because we passed no judgement whatsoever on each other. Our 29-year close friendship is genuinely a wonderful healthy friendship. Why on earth should that ever change? An easy question to answer, right? No, it seems I am incorrect…again. Why?
When are good principles bad? What do monogamous boundaries really protect? When does a 2-month dating relationship have any more value than a 29-year platonic friendship? I am honestly not a wild-cannon that fires off randomly around new spouses or boyfriends with no impulse control. On the contrary, I am quite respectful of other’s relationships or marriages. I really struggle with this ‘pinch-off’ decision from my female friends when a new lover comes around for them! I hope one of my good female married and polyamorous friends (O.M. Grey) comments on this topic. From a woman’s perspective, she is a wealth of wisdom and experience on this subject.
I would very much like to hear anyone’s thoughts and comments about this because it happens way too often. Please tell me what your thoughts are.
This work by Professor Taboo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://professortaboo.wordpress.com.
Divergent Thoughts on Life, Love and Death
life and other weird stuff
Seeking Dialogue to Inform, Enlighten, and/or Amuse You and Me
Storytelling, short stories, fable, folk tales,...
Writing writing and more writing
Analysis & Discussion For Political Uncertainty
I have zero expectation that anything I ever say will end someone’s belief in their God. Not my goal or purpose. That alone belongs to the individual. ~ Zoe
A photo journal of my interests from one extreme to the other.
Cogito Ergo Sum
by Wendy Waters
Understanding the psychology that drives our politics
Ponder(verb) to weigh in the mind; to view with deliberation; to examine carefully; to consider attentively
'Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it' - Terry Pratchett
writing on human security
Living and Learning
Some prefer the comfort of Faith. I prefer the cold, hard Truth.
By Keith Goode aka Ken Thackerey
I don’t want to start a class war; it started a long time ago and, unfortunately, we lost.
Searching for truth while leaving tradition behind.
Questioning the conventional wisdom
The Professor's Convatorium 