Less than 18 months ago, Sasha Lessin and Janet Kira Lessin gathered before their friends near their home in Maui, and proclaimed their love for one another. Nothing unusual about that—Sasha, 68, and Janet, 55—were legally married in 2000. Rather, this public commitment ceremony was designed to also bind them to Shivaya, their new 60-something "husband." Says Sasha: “I want to walk down the street hand in hand in hand in hand and live together openly and proclaim our relationship. But also to have all those survivor and visitation rights and tax breaks and everything like that.”Before folks attack this post as "out there" or polyamory as "fringe," don't forget my earlier post, "From Gay Marriage to Polygamy."
Maine this week became the fifth state, and the fourth in New England, to legalize gay marriage, provoking yet another national debate about same-sex unions. The Lessins' advocacy group, the Maui-based World Polyamory Association, is pushing for the next frontier of less-traditional codified relationships. This community has even come up with a name for what the rest of the world generally would call a committed threesome: the "triad."
Unlike open marriages and the swinger days of the 1960s and 1970s, these unions are not about sex with multiple outside partners. Nor are they relationships where one person is involved with two others, who are not involved with each other, a la actress Tilda Swinton. That's closer to bigamy. Instead, triads—"triangular triads," to use precise polyamorous jargon—demand that all three parties have full relationships, including sexual, with each other. In the Lessins case, that can be varying pairs but, as Sasha, a psychologist, puts it, "Janet loves it when she gets a double decker." In a triad, there would be no doubt in Elizabeth Edwards’ mind whether her husband fathered a baby out of wedlock; she likely would have participated in it.
**********
UPDATE: Check out also, Fausta's Blog, "Polyamory: What are you, nuts??"
5 comments:
It's not too soon to say I told you so is it?
The sad part is that in the rush to feel good about themselves Leftist never extrapolate their feel good isms to their ultimate conclusion.
Show me a groundswell of public opinion first. One case? Please.
Jason: Told us what exactly? About man/dog, man/boy, man/man/man marriage?
If that is the sum of your argument, you will find your opinions, along with Donald's, in the trash heap of history. But good luck with that.
Dennis: I think you just summed up the Bush administration. Just replace "Leftist" with "the Bush syndicate."
The problem is that pointing out what will happen if same-sex marriage is an "eventuality", the proponents think that we are insulting the idea of same-sex relationships. I think that it is a good thing if two people of the same-sex want to be committed to each other. But, I do not think redefining marrige to get there is the way to go. The reality is there is NO groundswell for same-sex marriage. But, because the media is driving this bus, one would think that this is a forgone conclusion.
Righty: You go on believing that. In April of 2008 I told my friends there was a groundswell for Obama. Some people shouted me down.
I was right then.
I am right now.
(A simple look at statistics from say 20 years ago to now would show that.)
The gay marriage issue needs new marketing. I will give you guys that. The Perez Hiltons bring it down. Unquestionably.
Post a Comment