compatible contradiction

There are no gradients without the gray.

I used blame fanatic Christianity for my fascination with black and white viewpoints but I suspect much of this is connected to my personality as well.

The first 21 years of my life were awash in Righteousness vs. Sinfulness. Everything needed to drop neatly into one of those ballot boxes. The more I learned, the more I needed a place for all the (beautiful) shades of Pantone Gray in between.

The next couple of decades were about learning to gather up the opposites and, if not embrace them, then, live harmoniously with them. For example, learning to equate goodness without Christianity's (or any other belief system's) dictates; learning to accept unanswerable questions (like death) without living in constant anxiety. Maybe it was learning to live happily without the Great and Powerful Wizard of OZ to provide all the answers. I drank, smoked a little weed and discovered whole new facets of my sexuality. All this alongside my very normal-looking life as mother, homeowner, spouse and student. It sounds so easy. So common sensible, doesn't it? But I had to uproot a powerful structure and rebuild it. It was like breaking down one of the rat maze walls and finding freedom. Exhilarating and scary. I questioned everything I'd been taught–gathered up the stuff I wanted to keep and threw the rest away. Even my notions of monogamy.

Ah, something I rarely talk about on this odd little public diary.

Goddammit, wish I'd have thought of this.

It was not initially my idea. After 3 years of marriage and talking about alternative ideas of love and sex, my husband asked me for an open marriage. I was 21 and, at first, it broke my heart. I was pretty sure that this was another way of saying, I want to fuck around but still want to come home to wifey. Well, that may have been true. But I was and am a woman who cannot tolerate theory and action to be too far apart. Intellectually, I agreed. I had married as chaste as anyone I knew. My experience was limited and perhaps there were other issues that I would do well to explore. So I agreed.

I will not share the gory details (your disappointment is palpable...if you know me, you know you can ask me anything in real life) but the whole thing was an exercise in the unexpected. For the most part, I had a field day and he did not. Never expected so many offers. Never expected to enjoy such decadence. It was not, predictably, good for the marriage. But I argue, and strenuously, that the damage done was more about the crumbling foundation than the non-monogamy, which just hastened the inevitable.

So. The experiment with polyamory was not an orgy of evil. It was messy. And fun. And a bit dangerous. And I liked it. It was also pretty clear that living that life for extended periods was exhausting; and had the same potential as any relationship for devolving into the mundane. At the same time, it offered a solution to an age-old problem. When I began my second marriage–a marriage with a strong foundation and a lot more trust–I made it clear that I had seen too many great marriages collapse under monogamy's unnatural tyranny. After 5-10-15 years of connubial contentment, the urge/attraction for someone else was normal. And shouldn't mean you have to lose everything. She agreed. In theory. And then, it turned out, in practice.

This makes folks very uncomfortable. I understand. It's scary and unpredictable. Of course, it was hard at times. Just because you're not cheating (all the cards are on the table) doesn't mean that jealousy and insecurity can't run riot. We talked, we modified, we dabbled. We had tremendous fun and it brought us closer. After the 3-Month Glaze of Stupid passes in each new relationship, you see how great your primary relationship really is.

Can you really be in love with your partner and deeply attracted to someone else without losing that love? Yes, you can. Is acting on it recommended? Most of the time, no...it is as exhausting as it is exhilarating. Regrets? Very few. Moral qualms? None. Is monogamy natural? I don't think so. Is it practical? Yes, it is.

How is that for embracing the contradictions?

wherein i call v.a. an idiot

I'm probably going to regret this but here goes. I'm a fan of Violent Acres as you can see by the link thing over to your left somewhere. I love her bluntness and how she tells her life story without self-pity or sentimentality. From time to time, however, she posts something so fucktarded I can hardly contain myself. But I do. Because like her or not, bitch will be vicious. I'm not usually all that inclined to poke the hornets' nest.

That said, this post was simply too ridiculous to ignore. I will do the point-by-point thing and if you have no interest, you can stop right here. V's blog entry is italicized, my commentary is bolded.

The problem with Atheists is most of them are snobs.

Atheists think they’re being clever with their spaghetti monster analogies and fairy tale rhetoric, but at the end of the day, they come off sound like condescending pricks.

From the Queen of the Condescending Pricks? What a compliment. And that Flying Spaghetti Monster analogy is a bit esoteric, I suppose, I mean making a metaphor about fanatical belief. Shit. Satire is for suckers.

Furthermore, any group of people claiming superior intelligence that willingly engages in the fight of a losing battle automatically loses credibility. However, Atheists are too dumb to realize they’re fighting a losing battle, so they persist with the lecturing and the withering stares. Atheists have singled handedly ruined coffee shops with this crap.

Now this one is going to bring out my snobbery because it is as logical as saying "if you're the only one who believes the way you do, just shut up, loser! You're too dumb to understand that the majority is never going to respect freedom from religion. You're losing the battle to the faithful, stupid atheist, so stop talking about your non-belief right now and get out of my coffee shop."

I, myself, have not been able to claim belief in a higher power for many, many years. However, I can still see the value in Religion. Perhaps growing up without a strong parental figure in my life made me recognize the possible value of a loving Father figure up in the sky watching out for me. And hey, I try my best not forget that sometimes we all need something to believe in.

Well, aren't you the poster child for Mommy was a hateful bitch and all I want is a benevolent male role model [like God!] in my life? So, you don't believe but you're content to have that picket crammed up your ass while you perch on the fence. Hedge your bets. That's a respectable position.

Most Atheists have the tendency to thumb their noses at Jesus, and then log onto World of Warcraft so they can pretend to be an orc for a couple of hours. They sneer at the Bible, but have no problem playing endless hours of vampire role playing games. The message is clear. Fantasies are OK as long as they include gratuitous violence and some sort of porn.

This one is my favorite. Most atheists play WOW, love violence and soft porn? I had no fucking idea. Really? Most of the atheists I've met were, well, blow me, they were seriously philosophical about belief, not hateful. And most came to atheism after years of religious searching.

With what kind of characters are you having atheism discussions? I mean the ones you describe might be creepy if they talked about Sunday School...wait, I know some of those! Let me judge all of Christianity on a few oddballs immersed in WOW, drooling over the gargantuan tits spilling out of cartoon bustiers and getting hard on virtual violence.

According to you, it's clear atheists think that "fantasies are OK as long as they include gratuitous violence and some sort of porn." So accepting Christianity as a fantasy is okay? Self-delusion is fine–just don't shoot any fake people or ogle them cybertits.

Note: any atheist who hates video games and violence [I'm not dissing soft porn here] can forget this particular point but remember, you're still a goddamn snob.

It’s no wonder Religious folks don’t take them too seriously. Even the Quiet Intellectual Atheist comes across as if he’s only denying belief to be aversive. It’s hard not to pity the guy addicted to nonconformity like an addict to a needle.

I know lots of religious folks who are freaked out by atheists. And to claim that people who don't believe are denying belief just to be "aversive" sounds seriously like, "Oh, come on now, honey, you are shouting NO but you really want it, don't you?"

[By the way, I don't think you mean "denying belief to be 'aversive'" as aversive is usually used as an adjective and the noun definition seems a little murky here. Maybe you mean contrary or antagonistic. Damn, there I go being all snobby and shit.]

Oh, the irony. Being "addicted to nonconformity" is something you seem especially good at.

Stop being so simple-minded, V. You are actually too smart for logic this holy...oh, I kill myself. I know, just go to Christian coffee shops! That way you won't have to deal with the phony, snobby, withering non-believers.

So believe whatever you want and so will I. But if you shit on my lack of belief, at least be better informed and talk to some thinking atheists.