It will be observed that I proselytise the principle of free love. Indeed, one commenter actually went so far as to allege I would FORCE it on people.
Actually, that's not quite correct.
I would say everyone should have the right to choose the lifestyle they desire.
HOWEVER. I do not think the state, or society should officially recognise any sort of unions, if people want to contract religious ceremonies bonding them all well and good, but I think the marital institution should not have any legal sanction.
Nor would I disrespect anyone's free choice to live in a monogamous committed relationship. Any more than I disrespect the right of any individual to CHOOSE to live chained in a box as a gimp, brought out only when the dominatrix says.
However, I believe that in a society where free love is permitted and is socially acceptable, the individual should be actively discouraged from seeking the monogamous lifestyle.
Why?
Well, it actually all comes back down to politics and power.
There seems to be little point in going out of ones way to design systems that prevent individuals establishing power over others, only then to have individuals masochistically decide to allow individuals power over them.
It goes back to the principle of separation of power. If all government is in the hands of one person, you have tyranny. Hence the principle of separation of power. You ensure that different parts of government are handled by different people. A system of checks and balances.
What the insitution of monogamy does, is recreate that in miniature. It allows individuals to establish a tyranny over another individual. True, it may only be over one individual, but it is still one person having full control over another. And that cannot be a healthy situation.
The point about free love and SPREADING the love, is actually more than first meets the eye. It removes the bondage of one person to another. At best this system is two people exercising power of mutual tyranny over eachother, but as in practice one party is often stronger willed than the other, one party is usually subject to the other. It doesn't always work out like that, and often the reality is one is stronger in some field, the other in others, but the point is in the field each party is weaker at, they find due to the bonds of monogamy, they become reliant on the other party.
Monogamy has ended up meaning, putting a lot of your eggs in one basket.
It's not ACTUALLY a wise way for a human being to live.
A human being is better off relying for his basic needs on as large a group of people as possible. Separating the provision of the needs s/he has from people. This, of course, means giving to more people too.
But for one man to rely on all the needs a woman provides, is in principle no different to a nation looking to a King to provide absolute government. And the same, of course, goes for a woman.
We see Monogamy is traditional. Humanity has done it since time began. Well, until fairly recently we'd been ruled by absolute monarchs since time began. Slavery is something we've only recently stopped doing too.
And Monogamy, in principle is the same sort of thing, it just looks more benign on the surface. But of course totalitarian states have pushed the virtues of family life. A citizen conditioned to accept the virtues of monogamy, is a citizen well on the way to being conditioned to love Big Brother.
A citizen who has rejected the right of another member of society to control her/him on an individual level is CERTAINLY not going to accept an all powerful state doing it.
The insitution of Monogamy is a blow at your individual liberty as a human being on a fundamental level. You, the individual are giving up the right to determine your own individual personal connections, be they platonic, intellectual or sexual. And it asks you to do that of your own free will.
And once it's done that, kidded you that accepting a form of slavery was by your consent- though it goes against every instinct you pretend you don't have, because you want to feel like a 'virtuous soul', it convinces you that the rest of the edifice is government by YOUR consent also.
Now let me ask you this. If you grew up in a culture where monogamy DIDN'T exist, where it was a totally unknown concept, do you really think that, without having grown up being encouraged to see nuclear families as the archetype, you'd ever actually meet someone and ever have the idea of making an exclusive commitment to them?
If you really think you would come up with that idea all on your own, stop reading now. You obviously really believe it, in which case, they've got to you. They don't need to take you to Room 101- you LOVE Big Brother.
But if you're reading this and admitting that yes, you do strive for monogamous relationships, it's what makes you happy, but actually it probably is because you've been conditioned that way, then...
Hold that thought.
And if you know damn well that they're something you often feel forced into, but in your heart of hearts, you hate being in them, it's just you find it hard to find someone to whom you can be honest to and admit you really just want an open relationship, STAND UP AND BE COUNTED.
Because you're not the bad person at all, not at all.
You're the one who really gets it.
You're the one who needs to start putting it across, showing people, showing people that free love isn't a dirty concept, it isn't about one big orgy, it isn't amoral, it's about being FREE through loving freely, through refusing to accept constraints on the relationships you build with others.
So respecting the right of someone to do it, of course, if you really want to do it of your own free will.
But would I actively discourage someone from making such a commitment, yes, I would.
I believe people are better off having sex with as many people as possible and simply fulfilling their sexual needs wherever there is a mutual sexual attraction. That way people would be more freer to keep their emotional connections natural, as in based on genuine platonic sentiments. Not tied by some unbreakable bond.
And the rest of love, the intimacy, the affection, the companionship?
Again, I believe this doesn't need to be limited to one person. People should spread these amongst as many people as they personally are comfortable with. And people should always be free to drift in and out of these things without any rules, just like any other friendships. The same rules should apply, no more, no less.
Monogamy is only a few letters away from Monarchy.
Perhaps Free Love is a bad word. Polygamy of course, is another concept entirely, worse in fact than Monogamy. Perhaps Demogamy is the word we should use?
The point is, really desiring freedom and equality, for men and women, does mean refusing to commit. Refusing on a personal level, ever to allow your mind, your body and your soul to be given to another, even if that choice is 'free'.
Yes, it's a hard choice, in some ways, because as things stand, there's a danger of ending up alone on your death bed. But if we're ever going to establish a society where people grow up feeling freedom in their blood and whose very instincts are against any attempts to encroach on their personal freedom, we must slay Monogamy.
So it's time to stand up and pledge now to NEVER COMMITTING.
To standing up candidly and say 'I will never partake in an exclusive monogamous commitment. Because I am a free human being, and I will not give up the freedom I was born with in such a way'.
And do not expect a commitment of exclusivity from anyone either- it makes you no better than a slavemaster/slavemistress. An abuser of the human spirit, seeking to make up for your lack of control in the world at large, by having someone under your control. Fight to be free, don't fight to enslave others. Refuse to accept the slavery of another, even if they offer it of their own free will.
And this is the test of how much you really care about your freedom. When you find someone you want to call your soulmate, have the guts to stand up and tell them, 'I love you and I want you in my life forever, I want it to be you I go to sleep with as many nights as is possible, I want you there with me when I die, but do not ask me to commit exclusively to you, either sexually, emotionally, platonically, or spiritually. I still have love, affection and sex for others too. You can be in life, but it will never all of it be yours'.
Because only then can you ever truly be free as an individual, and if you remain free as a person, you have some chance of being able to strive for true freedom for yourself and all mankind.
The only man who is truly free, is one who glories in being called a player.
And the only woman who is truly free is the one who glories in what is now considered a term of abuse, but is a word the next wave of feminism should embrace, raise high and champion as a badge of honour for the liberated woman, the free woman is an unashamed slut.
The concepts of monogamy and chastity are at the hearts of the conditioning that makes tyranny possible.
So, go forth and spread the love.
With pride.
No comments:
Post a Comment