Family of the Future - Part 2

 

Irrelevant Side-Issue Taking Center Stage

I've posted a blog about ideas how a Family of the Future might look, which might provide a better way of dealing with big problems around illness, elder-care, and such. Here's that post.

There's one question, that I am asked immediately when I mention these ideas in a conversation: what is included in the “shared activities”? What they always really are asking about is physical intimacy. Who is allowed to sleep with whom?

My answer are two questions: 

Why is physical intimacy so different than any other activity? 

Only answer that I can come up with is the life-long brainwashing we received from early childhood on, to get us to think physical intimacy means so much other than what it really means.

Take all the “emotions and believes” away for the moment (and, leave the biological necessity of this activity to ensure the survival of the species aside, too): physical intimacy is a way how you can show and share your love of somebody by providing to this person the most beautiful physical experience there is for us in this world.

Obviously, this is not sex - even though the activity is the same. But, just because the activity is abused and misused by some in their quest to calm their hormones while trying to figure out their role in this world, it doesn’t make the activity itself a problem! Like everything else: it is a good thing, as long as it’s done for the right reasons and with the right goals. 

I like to differentiate this way: “Sex” is about me getting my needs met (it’s all about “me”). Whereas, “making love” is showing my love by making the other feel good (It’s all about “the other”). That my needs are met, too, is the side-effect rather than the purpose.

To me, that is all that “making love” means: I love you, and I’m showing it to you. Nothing more, nothing less, and nothing else! And, frankly, that is already plenty by itself anyhow!!!

Everything else is additional, foreign weight, artificially added-on meaning that is destroying our ability to love freely.

Second question to me is: 

If that aspect is shared with only one person, it, too, will not be met once the other person is no longer able to engage in this activity, or if there is no other person. Is it fair when in a family of five four are experiencing love on a physical level and one is left out? Does that make sense?

In addition, if a person doesn’t feel the desire to engage in this activity, it should be no problem when s/he chooses not to. If, however, there is a strict coupling, this is no longer a decision about her/him-self alone, but also about her/his partner. Life has many demands and restrictions as it is, why artificially add more, by defining and demanding such an illogical construct?

But, overall and logically, physical intimacy is the least important and least problematic aspect of this new social construct! We just choose to blow it out of proportion and make it a big deal. There are so many other aspects around such a multi-member family, most of which are much more important, more impactful, or hold more potential for problems!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Loneliness - Connection - Closeness

 Paolo Coelho, in his book Adultery, has the main character pondering that people, deep inside, have a loneliness that each of us is trying to deal with in the best way possible. I can not relate to much at all about this character, but this one aspect really triggered my thoughts. I am used to describe my "condition" as "wanting to experience always another deeper connection". But, looked at it from a different perspective, it is nothing but an existential loneliness, which is there, even when I am among loved ones, or among many people. No matter where I go, what I do, there is always this longing for linking up with another person, turning another stranger into a familiar person, getting to know somebody else, connecting to another soul.  I am convinced that all the spiritual ideas floating around the world have resulted from an experience of discomfort, followed by pondering, maybe even actions whose consequences are evaluated.  My choice of belief around "
Read more

Family of the Future

History Originally, humans organized in tribes, where members took care of each other. They hunted together, gathered together, and looked out for each other.   Later, the tribe “shrunk” to a group. Up until and through the dark ages, for example, farms in Europe where autarkic - that means, they produced everything they needed, and they existed mostly independently from outside.   Towards the beginning of the 20th century, it was the extended family, who was living together and looking out for each other. Then, that social construct was replaced with the nuclear family. Instead of great-grandparents, grandparents and siblings, parents, uncles and aunts, siblings and cousins, it now was only the parents and their children, who formed the basic social unit. In the second half of the 20th century, as divorce rates started to rise, very often it was just the mother (sometimes the father) with the children. the other parent had left the unit as well. Today, there are more sing
Read more

Absolute tolerance and absolute firmness at the same time

 This, I think, is the most important lesson I learned from my parents!  My dad hates the catholic church - they have caused so much pain and suffering all through history, and misled people with their doctrines, he just despises them. My mom is a member of the catholic church. She doesn't focus on the failings, but on the good they have done. How can the two of them be in a loving, mutually supportive and respectful relationship? They somehow figured out how to be able to let the other person believe and do what they want to believe and do, and not allow the other to prevent them from doing what they want to do. They are (at least trying as good as they can) absolutely tolerant towards the other. Each allows the other to make their own choices, to have their own believes, to choose for themselves what to do and what not.  And, at the same time, they are totally firm about making their own choices. Absolute tolerance and absolute firmness at the same time! I'm trying to impleme
Read more