I was just thinking about the way some people who I once considered my friends have fallen out of my life. Obviously there are several who have not (let's call them the "real" friends), but thinking about them reminded me of some down and dirty reality my favorite fiction professor gave me. I was telling him about a misunderstanding between me and the no-longer present, and he responded:

It's okay. You'll find new friends.

In response to: AlterNet - Is Monogamy Natural?

This article made me think about how a lot of the time we try to make the world into absolutes.

I read the article as suggesting three possibilities for why the idea of monogamy exists and perpetuates: the biological (gene passing) need and subsequent nurturing of young; the social institution pressuring people into it; and the pair-bonding as an emotionally satisfying thing.

The part I didn't see in the article was: how about all of the above? Certainly one of those elements might be dominant in many people's decisions, but it seems like they're inseparable to me. Marriage the institution and the social pressures that go along with it; pair-bonding being the tremendously emotionally satisfying thing it is (yes, curling up with someone you care about is just about second to none), and the sheer blunt biological need that floats beneath the surface most of the time to hump -- and have kiddies -- all seem part of the perceived need to settle down with someone.

The urge some people get to break out of monogamy is natural too, but the article doesn't mention at all the people who are married for 25+ years and still happy. Maybe they don't have "honeymoon bliss" anymore but their relationship is still going strong and they are definitely happy with each other. Those people exist, albeit in seemingly small quantities, so what's the difference between them and the ones who get the 3-year or 7-year itch?

I guess the one thing that gives me real, concrete confidence in monogamy is the largest example I have in my life -- my parents. They've been together 27 years now and still are goofy about each other. They both were married once before (I call them starter marriages) and had pretty much given up on meeting someone they wanted to settle down with. Then, humoring mutual friends, they went on a blind date...

I think people would be much, much happier if the taboo of divorce wasn't so strong -- if you're not happy anymore and don't have other obligations (e.g. young kids?), and have given up hope of things getting better -- it's time to move on for both people's sake. Time to find someone new who makes you happy. I don't think it's an argument against monogamy -- it's probably for it, now that I think about it -- but the ending of a relationship just has such a strong negative associated with it that there's a push to see the whole idea of monogamy as unhealthy or even just plain ol' "wrong."

The philosophy that makes the most sense to me is that all relationships are practice for the one that really does work. They help you understand what you need to be happy, what to look for that will make you unhappy, and all the little things that come with experience. Without that experience you can either get very lucky (see: people who are happy 50 years after getting married to their high school sweetheart) or go through a series of relationships (2? 5? 10?) that teach you both what you need from a partner and what you need to provide to keep them happy.

I think the latter makes for a more whole, sophisticated person. I'll admit that might be from a bias that's trying to protect me from getting hurt, but it still seems that the more of life you experience the better.

Oh, it's going to be a fun one this year...

From "Loire Estuary 2007" – an outdoor contemporary art exhibition along 40 miles of the Loire river.
( More Details/Another Pic... )

Clearly not from this country. Our commercials pretty much suck.