Conference turris::womannotes-v1

    Interesting question,  and my answer to it has changed in the last
    5 or so years.

    About 9 years ago I started a long term (4 year) relationship with
    a  woman. Relatively early on we both knew that it wasn't going to
    last forever, but we moved in together anyway because we respected
    and  loved  each other. We lived together relatively happily for 3
    years,  but  were  clearly  growing  in  different ways. We parted
    friends and still keep in touch with each other (which isn't easy,
    since she lives in Japan now.)

    About 2  years  ago (at age 29) I changed my attitude. I would now
    try  to  stop  any  relationship  which  obviously  couldn't  last
    "permanently". Some of the reasons are: 
1.  I want  to have kids. Since most of my girlfriends have been older
    than  I  am,  I have to either change that pattern or have kids in
    the  next  5  or  so  years. There's an almost 1 year lead time on
    children,  and  my  mother  wants legitimate grand children, so it
    would be simpler if I get married in the next few years.
2.  I also want to "settle down" a little. I need some stability in my
    life (and a lot of change as well) and so I'm thinking of buying a
    house, as well as looking for long term relationships.
3.  AIDS.


>    
>    Why do many, many people need to say "This is forever" when in practice
>    many of them will enact some variation of the latter scenario a number
>    of times throughout their lives?  
>    
>    Do you consider the relationships that end failures?   

    I don't consider relationships that end to be failures and I don't
    go into every date saying "This is forever." What I do say is that
    if  we're  not married or engaged in 3 years I should break it off
    unless  there's  obviously  a reason not to. What I'm hoping to do
    (and did for my last relationship) is to enter a serious committed
    relationship  saying  "Let's see how it goes (but it should either
    end or turn permanent.)"  

    I've seen  several  women go through their thirties "playing it by
    ear"  and  seeing  what  happened  who are now 40 and very unhappy
    because it is now unlikely that they'll have kids. Part of growing
    up  is  becoming  aware of our mortality, and coming to terms with
    it.  For  many  people (including me) that leads to wanting to get
    married  and  have children while we still can. I'm not finding it
    easy.  It  was  rather  painful  (but necessary) for me to leave a
    relationship  after 3 months because it was clear that it couldn't
    develop  into  anything  permanent even though we had a lot of fun
    together.

    Am I doing the right thing with this new attitude? For me, Yes. Is
    it  a  change I think everyone should make? No. It's risky to give
    up  a  enjoyable  relationship hoping for a better one, but I feel
    it's necessary, even at times (like this one) when I'm not "seeing
    someone".

--David

    >Why do many, many people need to say "This is forever" when in practice
    >many of them will enact some variation of the latter scenario a number
    >of times throughout their lives?  
    
	I not only said "this is forever" but also had it carved inside my 
	wife's wedding band.  Why?  While we were dating she kept saying
	this will never last.  Well it has lasted for 23 years - not all 
        happy - nor will I still say "This is forever."  It seamed like a 
	good idea at the time.  The past years have not been easy and have
	required a desire on both our parts to remain together and spend a
	great deal of work on our relationship.

  
   >Do you consider the relationships that end failures?   
    
	Only if it ends without facing one's own responsibilities for its
	ending.

    >Do some people need to deny that they may be on their own again at 
    >some point?  
    
	Some people will deny anything that they are afraid to face or
	do not feel capable of resolving.  I tend to remain in nonproductive
	situations/relationships rather than face the fear of change - the
	unknown.

    >Can people enter into serious committed relationships using the 
    >"Let's see how it goes" model?
    
	In my opinion - YES.  However it requires a significant level of 
	self confidence on both parts and a willingness not to get into
	blame or guilt if it doesn't work out.


    >Does the intention to have children really make a difference (thinking
    >of the numerous single parents who are around)?     
     
	It did to me when we got married.  That was a long time ago.  Today,
	if I were to do it over again - maybe I would not want to be a
	parent.  I don't feel like I was raised by my family of origin to
	be a good father.  

    >Since there are a number of Lesbian and gay readers of this file,
    >are there any differences in that community?
    
	Probably not.  I am interested to hear what they are if any.
    
    >Do you think that the age of the participants makes a difference?
    
	I think emotional age/life experience and not chronological age make 
	a significant difference - both in expectations and ability to
	tolerate differences in others.

One man's opinion
Marty                                                                

RE: 635.0 Why do people need to say 'forever'?

Because people want to be able to *****count***** on that person in the worst
way.  People want to plan and dream about what they and the person they love
will be doing five and ten years down the road.

When you think about the possibility of losing someone that you really love, it
can incapacitate you, so much to the point that you are no longer capable of
acting loving, and just that worry can tear your relationship apart. 

"Do you consider the relationships that end failures?"

It depends on how they are resolved.  If they end with both people involved
realizing and understanding why the relationship cannot be the ultimate, but the
people can still be friends, there if the other needs them, then I do not feel
it was a failure.  More basically, if it is 'all right' with both people
that the relationship end.  When a relationship ends in pain and fear, that,
to me, is a failure.

"Do some people need to deny that they may be on their own again at some point?
"

Yes...
     
"Can people enter into serious committed relationships using the "Let's see how
it goes" model?"

It's possible, but it's hard...  It's easy to *think* you are doing that, but
you can fool yourself. 
    
"Does the intention to have children really make a difference (thinking of the
numerous single parents who are around)?"

*yes*, I won't go into the many reasons at this point...
    
"Since there are a number of Lesbian and gay readers of this file, are there any
differences in that community?"

None that I could think of, but I don't think I'm qualified to answer... 
    
"Do you think that the age of the participants makes a difference?"

Not compared to most of the other factors.  But young/high school people tend to
be able to make and break a lot easier.

RE: 635.4

Why do you feel that you/people can't have be monogamous only for the short
term? :-|

RE: .635.6

"Monogamy also has its roots in patriarchy."

I've hear this a lot... and I've asked how you square this with the fact
that there are a lot more men out there who care less about whether their
SO is monogamous then there are women ...?

Jim.

        I see no point in doing things twice, if they can be done right
    the first time.    Monagamy --  I certainly hope I can do
    it right the first time, I'm still utterly unmarried.
    
    	I am strictly into a long term approach.   When I am serious
    about a woman, I let her know.   Since I make decisions easily
    and quickly, I usually know what I want in a given relationship
    long before the woman knows.    However, in my experience, most 
    women *don't* want a man to be in love with them, unless they 
    also already feel certain.
    
	I think love is not just an emotion.  It is also a decision.
    If you decide that "forever" is not necessary, then that is one
    more decision.   If you decide to sustain a love then "forever"
    seems to be a way of expressing the unswerving intent of the
    decision to love and go on loving.   I suppose people need to
    be able to change their minds, but if you need to change your
    mind you weren't really certain anyway.    I will wait until
    I'm certain, then I won't be afraid to say "forever".

    	Alan.

    I personally feel that trying too hard, too soon, to make a
    relationship "permanent" imposes an unhealthy strain on things. Of
    course that's easy for *me* to say. Janice and I had known each other
    for a year before we moved in together. We lived together for a few
    years before merging our finances, a few more years before buying a car
    together, a few more years before we bought a house, and a few more
    years after that before getting married.
    
    I can't define the point at which the relationship "became" permanent.
    It certainly wasn't when we first moved in together, and it certainly
    is now. Getting married didn't make it permanent, it just advertized
    something that we had already decided. Our relationship keeps getting
    more and more permanent as time goes on.
    
    However, we don't assume that our relationship is a static thing,
    it's never "done". We still have problems, still talk about them.
    That's expected and, in fact, if I ever had a month where we didn't
    talk about something that was bothering one of us I'd be seriously
    worried. (Right now we're arguing about interior decorating. Whether
    a house should have a "feel" to it, and if so what ours should be.
    Last week it was about being the "navigator" in the car. Why is
    it that women are so lousy at giving directions? :-) Why is it that
    men are so terrible at letting people know what they want? :-) Fun
    and games.) This all sounds so trite, but it constantly astonishes
    me how many people take all this for granted, BUT DON'T DO IT.
    
    I don't think of "entering" a serious relationship, I think of a
    relationship "becoming" serious. (How can you tell when casual stops
    and serious begins? The process is continuous and gradual.)
    
       "Well, I love you and value you and respect you a great deal. I
       intend to support you and listen to you and challenge you. But
       people and circumstances change, and if they do, I want us to agree
       to look at the relationship, evaluate it, and go our separate ways
       if necessary."
    
    I think that's a *wonderful* way of starting a relationship! Don't
    kid yourself, go into it with both eyes open. Relationships DO "fail",
    for lots of reasons. The only think missing from the statement above
    is a reassurance that this isn't something done lightly, or
    unilaterally.
    
    I don't think that because I've decided that I don't want to be
    closer to someone that the relationship has "failed". I don't even
    think that because I've found that I have irreconcilable differences
    with someone means that our relationship has "ended". I have a lot
    of friends that I don't want to be any closer to, I have a number
    that I'd like to be closer to that don't seem to want to be closer
    to me. No judgments needed on any of us, "fail" sounds so nasty.
    I guess what I'm trying to say, is that after a certain point *ALL*
    of my friendships are "forever". These are the people I claim to
    "love", and these people can depend on me to "be there". Likewise,
    I feel that no matter how inconvenient, if I really need one of
    them, they'll "be there" for me too. But commitments like that
    can't be demanded, they can only be given. Furthermore, if you have
    to ask...
    
       Can people enter into serious committed relationships using the
       "Let's see how it goes" model?
    
    It's working for us. :-) It's been twelve years now...
    
    Kids are a huge commitment from both people. I'm still worried about
    that one.
    
    I believe (and Janice does too, we've talked about it) that the lack of
    pressure in our relationship is one of the major reasons it's worked so
    well. Because we both knew that either one of us could leave, we knew
    that when we stayed, it was not because of some promise or committment,
    but because we really did prefer to be with each other. We stayed
    together to work on things because anytime one of us said to
    themselves, "I don't have to put up with this sh*t." a small voice
    would say "That's right, you don't, so leave." and you'd think about
    what that meant, and honestly consider what you were getting out of the
    relationship versus what you had to put in. It's always worked out that
    we both were getting out lots more than we put in. I know that this
    isn't true for everyone, but I see so many people who've made a
    "permanent" commitment, resenting it, and not putting energy into
    solving the problems. For us, knowing that we could freely choose to
    work on things or walk away, meant that we worked on the real problems
    more often. It also meant that we were willing to compromise on things
    more.
    
    One critical thing we learned early though, was that it was possible
    to be furious with someone you loved deeply. It's hard to say "I
    love you, I need a hug." to someone you've been yelling at, but
    it sure is important.
    
    	-- Charles

RE: 635.9

"The fact remains, that no matter who a woman sleeps with, she knows who her
children are."

Not if she has sex with more then one man within a few days of the appropriate
time.

"It is certainly to his advantage to only have "his woman" sleep with him."

Why?  So that he knows that her children are his children?  Why?  What is the
difference?  Why should Joe Caveman support any children, his or someone else's?
What is the difference? 

"For a woman to have several children by different fathers is the best way of
assuring the survival of some of her offspring."

Why isn't this just as true for whoever male is providing for the mother?

I feel that monogamy is definitely an advantage for the woman.  By being sure
that all her children are her mate''s children, and only she has her mate's
children, she has a better chance of keeping her mate, and having Joe Caveman
stick around to keep them in dino ribs...  If Joe would do it for anybody... 

"As a rhetorical question, Jim, what would your reaction be if you were to find
out that one or both of your children were not actually yours?"

Well, I'd probably try to get out from under the ridiculous child support that
I'm paying, but that is another story...   I'm quite attached to them in either
case.  I don't see how it is in *my* benifit to be sure that I am their
father... 

Jim.

(Obligatory ps:  Dual sex notes suck!)

    I'm sure that a lot of the need to say/think that a relationship is
    forever is upbringing.  Divorce has only become a oft taken option in
    recent years, I suppose that our children's children may not have
    nuture affecting the forever feeling as much.  Another need to think of
    it as forever is that most people want companionship in their life. 
    When you find someone that you feel can provide you with companionship,
    you would like to think that you would not have to embark on that long
    and difficult search again.
    
    I don't consider relationships that end to be failures.  You usually
    end up learning quite a bit about yourself, the other person and people
    in general.  Relationships that don't last can help in finding a
    relationship that can last, and in learning what you need to make one
    last.
    
    I try not to take the "Let's see how it goes" approach to
    relationships.  I like to think that it has the potential of lasting
    forever.  Taking the "Let's see how it goes" approach makes it too easy
    for one to leave the relationship when some difficulty arises, rather
    than attempting to understand the problem and come to some solution to
    it.
    
    Rich

RE: 635.11 RAVAN

"Nit - "she knows who *her* children are""

Argh! you're right, that's what it says... and that doesn't change whether it's
monogamy or not, so what difference does it make? :-|  I don't see the
difference.

On the other hand, without monogamy, women never know whether other children are
her mate's or not. 

My point is that I don't see how monogamy benifits men.  From a single minded
line of thought: 

Men take care of themselves
Men might take care of a woman if she is 'worth it'
Men might take care of their children is the mother is 'worth it'
Men probably won't take care of someone elses children

If no one knows whose father is whose, then fathers can disclaim any
responsibility. 

Why not just dump the children on the mother and split?

(no flames, please, I know it sounds pretty sick)

Finally, it's not an either or choice between monogamy and not knowing those
father children are.  There is also polygamy, one man multiple wives, which
would be provide * for the men, and knowing who their children are.  This
might seem like the best of both worlds.

The only benifit I can see from monogamy is that it ties the man to the mother
(supposedly singular) of his children. 

Enough rambling...

Jim.

    there is another alternative Jim, polyandry...one woman with
    several husbands...
    
    mmm...now that might not be such a bad idea  ;-)  ;-)  :-)

    Bonnie

    um...really?...now let me think...who would I like to ask
    
    nah...they are all too conservative..
    
    sigh
    
    B

re: Note 636.0         Defining relationships:  Responses from men        14 replies


>    me every 3 years with shining eyes, "This is the real thing! I just
>    know we can make it work." 
    
    Hmm. Sounds like me alright. "Coke" is also supposed to be the real
    thing, but when the can is empty; there is no more till the next
    time. ;^) [ hmm sounds ok, but does it fit right ? ].
    
>   Many of my friends and acquaintances could not enter into a serious
    |
    |        
>    people and circumstances change, and if they do, I want us to agree
>    to look at the relationship, evaluate it, and go our separate ways
>    if necessary."
    
    Well, I did have an experience with this once. In order for it to
    "work", the "basic premise" must be repeated often and over and over,
    or else the "assumption" MAY be made that it has in fact, become
    permament, and a subsequent separation will be "just as messy" as
    if it had started out as being "permanent".
    
        
>    Why do many, many people need to say "This is forever" when in practice
>    many of them will enact some variation of the latter scenario a number
>    of times throughout their lives?  

    Feelings, being what they are, "tradionally" replace rational
    thought when we are considering a "mate" (whatever they may be called).
    
>    Do you consider the relationships that end failures?   

    Failure ? I've learned nothing ? Yes, I've had LEARNING experiences
    that left me puzzled, wondering, hurt, and the normal gamut of self
    doubt. Is "failure" the inability to continue with that person,
    or is "failure" failing to recognize the stupidity of staying ?
    ;^ ) 
        
>    Do some people need to deny that they may be on their own again at 
>    some point?  

    There's an old biblical phrase that has some merit in the context
    of modern psychology. If recognized and used, it can be very helpful
    to anyones situation. That phrase is "As one thinks, so do they
    become". If people tend to think failure, then they tend to get
    failures. People who think success, tend to find it.
        
>    Can people enter into serious committed relationships using the 
>    "Let's see how it goes" model?
    
    Two thoughts come to mind.
    Take a packet of tomatoe seeds and throw them onto a stone walk,
    and "see how it goes" for a garden.
    
    Take a second packet of seeds, and plant them into a field thats
    been cultivated, fertilized, and care for it "as if you expect to
    have tomatoes", and you chances of success are bountifully better!
    
    
>    Does the intention to have children really make a difference (thinking
>    of the numerous single parents who are around)?     
               
    If people want/don't want to have children, it would be best to
    make those thoughts known far into the forefront of the relationship,
    so the "other" party will understand what may go  on later.
                                
>    Since there are a number of Lesbian and gay readers of this file,
>    are there any differences in that community?

    Well, considering that the only "real" differnce between gays and
    heterosexuals IS their sexual orientation (all other human emotions
    being the same), I would expect that their feelings would run about
    the same, n'est pas ?
        
>    Do you think that the age of the participants makes a difference?
    
    Age, in calender years ? No, no difference. Age as a prodcut of
    maturity ? I think so. Several times I have noticed that their are
    some "very young" but very mature people (noters) in these files,
    based on the common senseness of their comments.
    

                                                                         

    re: .16
    
    Please do let us know when someone does enter an "honest" 
    answer.  It appears that only you can tell us when we're not
    practicing self-deceipt.
    
    Steve
    

    re: .16
    
    Set Flame on.  I WAS HONEST IN MY REPLY.  TRY IT SOMETIME.  YOU
    MAY SURPRISE YOURSELF.
    
    Marty

RE: 635.last_few

Simmer Down...

RE: 635.13

"I would think the main benefit of monogamy would be that you know you're more
special to the person than everybody else."

So how does that make monogamy be for the *man*'s benefit?

It is nice to know that you are someone's #1 priority, but some people seem to
think that you have to be their *only* priority...

Jim. 

    by the way, do you know what the punishment is for bigamy ?
    
    answer follows...
    
    two mother's in law!
    

    I'll take prison, thank you.   :-)