|
zumala -> RE: Dr. Phil on 'poly-fidelity (5/23/2006 9:39:58 PM)
|
First off, I'll address the original thread (or at least come close). Personally, I used to watch Dr. Phil and I thought that a lot of what he said made good sense. And he did help some folks out who obviously needed it.
In addition, I do have his books on The Ultimate Weight-Loss Solution. What's in that book? A whole lot of good sense laid out in a no-nonsense fashion that people can use. His website has forums for folks to share their successes and struggles, and those folks have a wonderful support group going among themselves.
I think that's commendable.
Next issue...
quote:
ORIGINAL: cloudboy
quote:
A marriage that is monogamous can't *suddenly* become poly but it can become poly.
The deck is so stacked in favor of romantic ideals, "shoulds," and cheating that Poly barely ever seems to have a fighting chance. It makes me think of Stef's "lonely old man."
http://www.collarchat.com/m_264916/mpage_1/key_van/tm.htm#265012
Of course there's nothing like good old 60s propaganda either:
> Parents, teachers, and concerned adults all counsel against premature marriage. But they rarely speak the truth about marriage as it really is in modern middle class America. The truth as I see it is that contemporary marriage is a wretched institution. It spells the end of voluntary affection, of love freely given and joyously received. Beautiful romances are transmuted into dull marriages, and eventually the relationship becomes constricting, corrosive, grinding, and destructive. The beautiful love affair becomes a bitter contract.
The basic reason for this sad state of affairs is that marriage was not designed to bear the burdens now being asked of it by the urban American middle class. It is an institution that evolved over centuries to meet some very specific functional needs of a non industrial society. Romantic love was viewed as tragic, or merely irrelevant. Today it is the titillating prelude to domestic tragedy, or, perhaps more frequently, to domestic grotesqueries that are only pathetic.
Marriage was not designed as a mechanism for providing friendship, erotic experience, romantic love, personal fulfillment, continuous lay psychotherapy, or recreation. The Western European family was not designed to carry a lifelong load of highly emotional romantic freight. Given its present structure, it simply has to fail when asked to do so. The very idea of an irrevocable contract obligating the parties concerned to a lifetime of romantic effort is utterly absurd. <
Mervyn Cadwallader
Writing in THE ATLANTIC, 1966
Pardon me, but... what the HELL is that? That has got to be one of the largest loads of BS I've ever seen on here so far. Marriage works very well if the two people involved in it actually give half a damn about each other. The marriages that fail do fail because of selfishness on the part of the people involved. Good grief.
My husband is my best friend. He encourages me when I'm down. We share a lot of common interests and spend time together pursuing them. We get into pillow fights, tickle wars, and any number of silly games. We work together to make sure that our finances run smoothly. When I goof up, he forgives me. When he goofs up, I forgive him. We laugh a lot. We talk a lot. We make love. We fuck like wild animals. No one has a perfect relationship, married or otherwise. But I'm not about to let a slam like that go by. It isn't true.
zuma
|
|
|
|
