Love & Loyalty(PART 1)
(love900.jpg)
(lost200.jpg)
(valent121.jpg)
(lost201.gif)
(foolw.gif)
Is monogamy really
the best answer?
(lost204.jpg)
From: denman@infoseek.jp
To: diane705@yahoo.ca
cc: barclay1720@aol.com
Date: Tues., Mar 25, 2014 5:18PM
Pacific Daylight Saving Time
Hi Diane,
How are you doing?
So, Diane, you enjoyed the new Helen Lawrence production as well as the Floyd Collins musical, didn't you?
In any case, I've just written an article about "Mari's Bagels."
Please click the following link:
(eater007.jpg)
■"Mari's Bagels"
I hope you'll enjoy the above article!
By the way, I read an interesting article of "24 hours" community newspaper the other day.
It is about "Modern Love."
Is monogamy really the best answer?
It reads like this:
Sue Johnson is a psychological professor at the University of Ottawa and after decades of neuroscience research into human emotion, claims that just like the bond parents have with their offspring, monogamous love makes sense as a survival code.
According to Johnson, humans are not wired to face the world alone.
Our brains are designed to use the people we love as physiological and emotional safety cues to make the world a safer place.
To quote Johnson, "Secure attachment---having one other person you can count on as an adult---is related to almost every index of good functioning, happiness and health."
Johnson says that social isolation can be detrimental to our health, citing increased risk of anxiety, strokes and heart attacks as side effects to loneliness.
Johnson claims that because we no longer live in small, close knit communities, "People now often depend on romantic love as their main source of social support."
(breakup0.gif)
She explains that the trouble with polyamorous relationships is they don't fulfil our physiological bonding need to have "one person that we depend on, that we come first with."
hum, hum, hum ... sounds naturally reasonable, doesn't it?
But ...
So, Diane, what do you think about it?
Your smiling Bohemian, Kato
with a lot of love
(kato3.gif)
(2004fs.gif)
Subj:I need the presence of
another loving person.
(nanpa02.png)
From: diane@vancouver.ca
To: barclay1720@aol.com
Date: Tues., Mar 25, 2014 7:03PM
Pacific Daylight Saving Time
Hi my smiling Bohemian, Kato,
Thanks so much for the above article.
... sure hope you make a good friend of Mari when she moves to Vancouver.
(vanc700.jpg)
(vanc701.jpg)
Interestingly enough, I did read that article by Sue Johnson and do believe she's on to something.
Actually, I've always believed that we are stronger together in this world with another to call our partner.
Having said that, though, some folks seem to do just fine.
I have a girlfriend who has been single for years & years and seems to be as happy as punch.
She has many and varied interests, a few friends, lots of peace & quiet and wants nothing further.
So, for her, it's a good life indeed.
(lost202.gif)
For me, I too like my alone time, but also seem to need the presence of another loving person.
So for me having a boyfriend, but not actually living with him, even though he dearly wishes it, seems to be the answer of the moment.
How about for you?
Are you having some thoughts about your new friend and what that might mean to your life?
Hope so, actually ... might just be what the doctor ordered, as they say here in Canada.
Thanks again,
(dianelin3.jpg)
Love, Diane
So, Diane, you too like your alone time, but also need the presence of another loving person, eh?
Most definitely. How about you, Kato?
Well ... in Japanese, "human being" is written as "among people (人間)." So it is obvious that you can't live alone. In this sense, anyone needs the presence of another loving person, I suppose. But some people need the presence of more than one loving person.
Polyamorous relationships, huh?
That's right. By the way, Diane, the article you read contains the following passage:
Although life is easier when you have someone rooting for you, I'm hesitant to agree that monogamy is the only answer.
Johnson's theories discount the fact that humans can receive emotional support from other people besides their partner.
。。。
As for Johnson's assertion that couples in monogamous relationships have more satisfying sex lives, I'm sure many polyamorous people would argue that their sex lives are just as fulfilling, meaningful and scorching hot as those of monogomous couples.
(harem2b.gif)
。。。
Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha present scientific and anthropological evidence that humans evolved from small-scale, egaritarian societies where partners were often interchanged---therefore, pointing to the fact that monogamy maybe isn't as "natural" as we have been led to believe.
However, I like to think that one of the byproducts of our evolution is personal choice.
Instead of trying to set ourselves into a set of binary categories, we should choose the relationship style that feels best to us at any given point in our lives whether that's monogamy, polyamory or something in between.
(comic picture from Denman Library)
SOURCE: "Modern Love"
Thuesday, March 20, 2014
http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/shesaid/
Quite interesting, isn't it? I like the idea that we should choose the relationship style that feels best to us at any given point in our lives whether that's monogamy, polyamory or something in between.
Yes, yes, yes, ... I agree with you, Diane. But some people are really moved to know that a certain couple are amazingly loyal to each other.
Oh ... ? Are you sure about that?
Yes, of course. The other day, I viewed the following movie.
(lib40331.gif)
■"Actual Library Catalogue"
(To be followed)
